Dear Editor,
We are all thinking, as Guyanese right now, whether there is any possibility that our neighbouring Venezuelans to the west will do anything rash about their claim of Essequibo. We all have opinions on this matter, and I have heard various opinions expressed by the government of Guyana, the opposition of Guyana, fortunately acting together at this time, and the Independent Working People Alliance with some very interesting and helpful recommendations in public. The University of Guyana played its role dutifully in convening a symposium about developing relations with Venezuela over the issue of our territorial integrity.
I want to raise whether we think that Venezuela is in a state of mind to do anything rash in relation to the claim of Essequibo territory. I want to suggest whether or not Venezuela does anything rash, as she did in the case of Ankoko in 1966 after its government signed the Geneva Agreement; I think that circumstance relies largely on the international situation, and here I want to make the unfortunate point that the international situation, especially with the United Nations as the centre, is in disarray and creates a very unfavourable atmosphere for stability.
I need to say no more, but if things continue this way, not only Venezuela but other countries with short-term ambitions can exploit the situation and break out into their own kind of riot because the international situation is too unstable to do anything. Already, a new factor may have arisen on account of the result of the democratic elections in Argentina.
Before the Second World War outbreak, a new nation was in the League of Nations, the Soviet Union. They had a revolution in 1917, proposing a new ethic, a new mode of existence for humanity, or that part of humanity that would listen to them. Both were positive, including violence, unfortunately. There was a Soviet representative at the UN, Maxim Litvinov, who almost single-handedly preached the doctrine of collective security to try to stop the advances of the fascist powers that were just rising, Hitler Germany and Mussolini Italy. He did not prevail. Collective security failed, and the whole of humanity was involved in the bloodiest conflict that ever hit the world. We could be in a similar situation like that.
The voices of collective security are strong internationally but weak within the administrative and executive framework of the UN. Unfortunately, the country that has the profile to date in the Gaza situation is heavily financed by one of the five great powers possessing the veto, namely the USA. And this great power has found itself, as we say in Guyana, patting the head of the tiger in what it considers its own interest. These are opinions thrown out for discussion. Hopefully, certain aspects of the situation are not missed by the younger generation.
Sincerely,
Eusi Kwayana
