Dear Editor,
On Sunday, December 3, 2023, the Venezuelan people approved a referendum with five questions calling for the creation of a new state named “Guayana Esequiba”. In effect this means the annexation of Guyana’s Essequibo County comprising two thirds of the nation’s land territory. In wake of the referendum, President Maduro of Venezuela is now moving swiftly to implement the planned annexation. On Tuesday evening, he announced a seven-point action plan towards this goal. The plan includes the creation of a High Commission for Defense of “Guayana Esequiba” and the appointment of Major Alexis Rodriguez Cabello as the sole authority of the new state. Furthermore, foreign companies operating in the disputed Guyanese Essequibo region were ordered to withdraw within three months. Hence, the threat to Guyana’s sovereignty over Essequibo, looming over the nation since independence in 1966, is no longer hypothetical. It is real and urgent level-headed action is needed. A three-pronged approach will be outlined here to effectively counteract Venezuela’s ambitions over Essequibo.
The key question is how could Guyana effectively deter Venezuela from seizing Guyanese territory? Given the public responses of the President and the Government of Guyana, it appears that there is no integrated plan on the table and our leaders are relying far too much on the US and Brazil to bail the nation out, if Venezuela were to invade. Presently, the chances of a Venezuelan invasion might appear slim, but one never knows what happens down the road. Retention of power is the prime motivation of Maduro and his entourage for escalating the controversy over Essequibo with Guyana. His public assurances that an invasion will not happen, therefore, has to be taken with utter caution and skepticism.
In Europe, most key opinion leaders thought that President Putin of Russia would be out of his mind to invade Ukraine, a nation of 44 million people. Nevertheless, he still did it, despite the fact that dozens of Western leaders had travelled to Moscow in vain trying to change is his mind. Venezuela’s referendum was non-binding, but it lays the foundation for President Maduro to change the constitution and incorporate Essequibo as an integral part of Venezuela. Once this is done, anything is possible. In fact, the hardliners in Caracas will view any inaction of President Maduro on this issue as a weakness. Why call for a referendum, if you do not act on the will of the people? Given this imperative, President Maduro is in fact obliged to act sooner or later, if he wants or not.
Presently, the most likely scenario is that Venezuela will try to occupy areas in the northwest Essequibo. This area is scarcely populated and could be taken without too much risk of getting involved in a larger military conflict with Guyana’s defense forces (GDF). Once this is accomplished, President Maduro could then claim to have liberated parts of “Guayana Esequiba” and he could start issuing Venezuelan passports to the native population in that area in line with the provisions of the recently approved referendum. How would the US, Brazil, and the CARICOM nations react to such an escalation? It is likely that they will condemn the Venezuelan occupation, call for a swift withdrawal of Venezuelan forces, and they will (re)impose economic sanctions on Venezuela. However, this will have little impact on Venezuela as Maduro and his generals have learnt to survive years of US sanctions in the past. Hence, a partial occupation of Essequibo could be achieved with limited military action and it would establish President Maduro as the national hero, who brought “Guayana Esequiba” under Venezuelan control. His place in national history would be secured forever.
The important question is whether the US and Brazil would be willing to use military force to drive the Venezuelans out of the occupied Guyanese territories? The answer has to be a resounding NO! Why would the US and Brazilian presidents risk the lives of their soldiers to liberate a few hundred square kilometers of Guyanese jungle from Venezuelan occupation? After the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the US public has repeatedly expressed little appetite for US boots on the ground in the Ukraine or elsewhere. Furthermore, the Brazilian army has not fought a war since the Acre war in 1903. Guyana can also not expect anything more than moral support (if any) from CARICOM member states.
One just has to keep in mind that Guyana has an unresolved border dispute with Suriname (New River Triangle, Corentyne River) and many CARICOM members do not want to alienate Venezuela. They are hoping to get access to cheap oil again once Venezuela is rehabilitated on the world stage. The muted responses to the outcome of Venezuela’s referendum by Mia Mottley and Ralph Gonsalves, the prime ministers of Barbados and St. Vincent & the Grenadines, respectively, are a testimony to the hesitance of Caribbean nations to condemn Venezuela for its actions against Guyana’s sovereignty.
The bottom line of the analysis here is that Guyana’s political and military leaders have unrealistic expectations, if they think that others will bail them out, if a Venezuelan attack were to occur. Furthermore, any occupation of Guyanese territory by Venezuela would halt all planned offshore oil field developments due to the uncontrollable risks this will pose to any investor. In addition, the impact on ongoing oil production is foreseeable. Hence, it is absolutely paramount that Guyana develop a defense strategy that is based on deterring Venezuela from even fantasising about occupying parts of Essequibo. A three-pronged approach is proposed here:
1. Strengthen Guyana’s case on Essequibo using all diplomatic means
• Send President Ali and Vice President Jagdeo to inform and educate key nations, such as USA, Brazil, France, UK, India, China as well as the EU about the border controversy with Venezuela and ask for support
• Table a resolution in the UN Security Council demanding that Venezuela refrain from altering its constitution enshrining the new state of “Guayana Esequiba” and issuing passports to people living in Guyana’s Essequibo county
• Lobby the Organization of American States (OAS) to condemn any unilateral changes of international borders by Venezuela
• Clarify whether CARICOM nations and Commonwealth members would provide military assistance, if needed
• Explore the possibility of signing defense treaties with the US, the UK and/or France
• Consider inviting the US to establish a military, naval or air base on Guyanese territory
Each of the proposed measures will come with costs and geopolitical implications, which have to be carefully considered. The Government of Guyana has already taken some important steps on the diplomatic front to support its case. On Guyana’s request, the International Court of Justice issued last week a ruling that no changes of the status quo regarding the border controversy between Guyana and Venezuela should be taken by the two parties involved. Furthermore, the Government of Guyana had announced earlier this week that they will take the case of Venezuela’s claim to Essequibo to the UN Security Council. These are all welcomed moves. Fortunately, Guyana will occupy a seat on the UN Security Council for the next two years starting in 2024. In doing so, Guyana will also be able to see if the permanent members of the UN Security Council, who have veto rights, particularly Russia and China, will side with us or not. Furthermore, Guyana should seek the support of Switzerland, a fellow non-permanent member of the UN Security Council, which has lots of experience in mediating international disputes. The recent accreditation of a new non-resident Swiss ambassador to Guyana based in Caracas would have been a good opportunity to start such a dialogue.
2. Guyana has to join the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance (IATRA)
The ongoing Russo-Ukraine War has held one key lesson for small nations in Europe. It is the realization that only a defense organization, such as NATO with its doctrine of “an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all” provides sufficient security against an aggressive neighbour like Russia. As a consequence, previously neutral Sweden and Finland have applied to join NATO and are in the process of being admitted as new members. Furthermore, Moldova and Ukraine itself are being considered for NATO membership.
In the Americas, a similar military treaty to NATO, which provides security on the principle of collective defence, was signed in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1947. The treaty is known as the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance (IATRA) or Rio Treaty. Currently eighteen states, including the CARICOM members Haiti, The Bahamas, and Trinidad & Tobago are part of the Rio Treaty. Surprisingly, Guyana is not a member of this treaty, which is probably due to the block-free policies followed by both PNC and PPP-led governments in Guyana since independence. Given Venezuela’s threats to Guyana’s sovereignty, Guyana needs to act swiftly by:
• Submitting an application to join IATRA
• Lobbying key IATRA members, such as the US, Brazil, Dominican Republic, Haiti, The Bahamas, and Trinidad & Tobago to back Guyana’s membership application
• Demanding suspension of Venezuela’s IATRA membership on the basis of Venezuela’s territorial claims towards its neighbor to the east, which are inconsistent with IATRA membership
3. Guyana needs to strengthen its military capabilities
Guyana has traditionally not seen the need for a strong military force. The lack of an acute military threat and cash-strapped state coffers have in the past hampered the establishment a well-equipped defense force. Times have however changed and Guyana can no longer afford having a blind eye with regard to its own national security. Concretely, there has to be a thorough analysis of the possible scenarios that Venezuela might entertain to seize Guyanese territories. The possibilities range from a limited land incursion in the northwest to occupy some territory of the Essequibo over a navy-led attack aimed at controlling the entire maritime area comprising Guyana’s exclusive economic zone west of the mouth of the Essequibo River to a full-scale attack on Guyana including the bombing of Guyana’s international airports and the main harbour of Georgetown followed by a navy-led occupation of Bartica and the Pomeroon region.
Given the huge population imbalance between Guyana and Venezuela, it appears at first delusional to expect Guyana to resist any Venezuelan attack. However, all the scenarios mentioned above can be counteracted by establishing credible military deterrents, which must not cost an arm and a leg, if done in a smart manner. Guyana needs to learn from Ukraine, who was in a worse situation less than two years ago. It is therefore imperative that Guyana invests part of its rapidly growing oil revenues into a small but effective military force by taking the following steps:
• Creation of an elite infantry unit trained to conduct complex jungle operations. These troops could be trained by the US or France, who have experience in jungle warfare. This unit would be rapidly airlifted with military helicopters to support the small contingent of GDF troops currently protecting the Northwest from any Venezuelan incursion.
• Leasing of fighter jets to patrol the Guyanese airspace. Five to ten fighter jets could act as an effective deterrent against any violation of Guyana’s land territory, maritime areas, and air space. For example, French-built Rafael fighter jets could serve this purpose. France has a military presence close by in French Guiana. It is therefore likely that Guyana could rapidly lease these planes from France at favourable conditions. Initially, Guyana could even ask France to provide air patrol services until sufficient Guyanese pilots have completed the training. Maintenance for the fighter jets could be provided out of French Guiana. Alternatively, the US could supply F5 fighter jets or newer models. A small fleet of fighter jets needs to be backed up by helicopters and fixed-winged planes to carry military personnel to the interior, if needed.
• Establishment of an effective Coast Guard to protect Guyana’s maritime zones. Guyana needs to bolster its tiny Coast Guard with armed high-speed patrol boat to survey Guyana’s maritime exclusive economic zone and protect its offshore oil production from possible blockade, attack or seizure by Venezuela. The US would be here the natural partner.
• Acquisition of missile and drone technology to protect key infrastructure. Guyana needs to protect key infrastructure such as harbours, airports, and essential government buildings from possible naval and air attacks by Venezuela. This could be achieved by surface-to-air missile systems, including portable versions. In addition, the acquisition of combat air and marine drones from Ukraine or Turkey has to be considered. Marine drones have turned out to be highly effective in keeping the Russian navy out of Ukraine’s territorial waters. Drones could be deployed to deter Venezuelan troops or ships that fail to leave Guyanese territory after being instructed to retreat across the border. In addition, the annual exercises between the GDF and the U.S. Southern Command (USSOUTHCOM) in the areas of disaster preparedness, aerial and maritime security, and countering transnational criminal organizations could be extended to include training of Guyanese forces in the areas outlined above.
Liberal democracies need to have credible deterrents, which include both diplomatic and military elements, as one of the key lessons the West learnt from the cold war. Given this, the recommendations outlined above are meant to strengthen Guyana’s defense capabilities and they are not offensive in nature in line with Guyana’s long-standing policy of preserving peace in the region. Countries like Switzerland, which has a doctrine of armed neutrality to defend its independence, possess similar defense capabilities. As a concerned Guyanese citizen living in Europe, I sincerely hope that the Government of Guyana will review and consider favourably the adoption of the three-pronged approach outlined here in order to keep the Venezuelan threat at bay.
Sincerely,
Andre Brandli, PhD
Professor
LMU Munich,Germany
