Dear Editor,
When Forbes Burnham signed the Geneva Agreement on the 17th of February 1966, Guyana was not yet an independent nation and Burnham was a paid agent of the American Central Intelligence Agency; the agreement was signed at the height of the ‘Cold War’ when American fears of a communist takeover of Guyana via the PPP were very real. At a joint press conference with (then) President Bharrat Jagdeo at State House, on 19th February 2004, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez laid much of the blame for the historic tensions between Caracas and Georgetown on the United States: He (Chavez) said the US fomented strife between Guyana and Venezuela so as to divide them and push them into an armed conflict. That was the imperialist plan which created great business because since then Venezuela has been in debt because of its heavy expenditure on military equipment, much of which was obsolete, obtained from North America.
He went on to recall that the possibility in the 60s of Guyana becoming another Cuba was used to whip up antagonism in the Venezuelan military. (Stabroek News 21.02.2004). This raises the question of whose interests Burnham was representing when he signed the Geneva Agreement and, the validity of the agreement if it can be shown that Burnham was acting under the direction of his American CIA paymasters. Cheddi Jagan, who had been Prime Minister of British Guiana during the 1961-1964 period had opposed the Agreement, and wrote that with the Agreement: “Recognition was thus given to the spurious Venezuelan territorial claim, and what was a closed case since 1899 was re-opened” (The West on Trial, 1966). Burnham was not acting with consent or consultation with other Guyanese leaders.
It is noteworthy that the Venezuelan claim surfaced in 1962, and, was based on a flimsy claim that the 1899 Award was fraudulent because there was a ‘political deal’, no evidence of ‘corruption’ was ever presented; on the other hand, I can offer indisputable evidence that Forbes Burnham was on the CIA payroll. A CIA memorandum to the 303 Committee on 23rd May 1969 (now declassified) reveals the extent of Forbes Burnham’s duplicity, for while Burnham was talking patriotic, he was dancing to the tune of USD5000 monthly. Not every document of the Cold War era has been declassified but Chavez’s statement leads me to believe he may have been privy to US-Venezuela communication that led to his characterization of the claim as an “imperialist plan” and it may also have helped shape Chavez’s speech at the UN in 2006 when he said “Yesterday the devil came here. Right here, and it smells of sulfur still today. Yesterday…, the President of the United States, the gentleman to whom I refer as the devil, came here, talking as if he owned the world. Truly. As the owner of the world.”
Guyanese have been engaged in internal blame games over who said or did what concerning the Guyana-Venezuela Border issue, research shows the ‘Jagdeo’ sea lane was offered by Barton Scotland, acting as Guyana’s Good Officer (Venezuela’s memorandum to the ICJ, pg 88). What is interesting is that Scotland (Speaker of National Assembly 2015-20) never owned up to making the offer in the preceding eight years. I do not expect there will be an outpouring of apologies to Jagdeo by those who labeled that offer as Jagdeo’s and/or ‘unpatriotic’, I quite expect the ‘sea lane’ will now be coloured as acceptable negotiations; such is our reality. Editor, I believe that I have presented solid evidence here that goes to invalidating the Geneva Agreement and would sincerely hope that our Government take my suggestion that the Geneva Agreement is a fruit from the poisoned imperialist garden and undertake further research, including requesting any document from the CIA archives (classified or other) that could assist us with legally discrediting the Geneva Agreement. Then maybe we can work on rebuilding relations with our neighbour, Venezuela in the spirit of Simon Bolivar and Hugo Chavez, ushering in an era of peace and prosperity for both nations.
Sincerely,
Robin Singh