Dear Editor,
1) Essequibo is not disputed land! 2) Every square inch of Essequibo belongs to Guyana as was settled by Arbitral Award in 1899; 3) Guyana is not an aggressor in this controversy, we are targets of Venezuelan bullyism and greed for Guyana’s natural resources.
The argued position that because CARICOM called for dialogue with Venezuela, Guyana had no choice but to acquiesce is rubbish. CARICOM’s internal business and decision-making is conducted by consensus and not a vote, and there are many decisions taken by CARICOM that are not implemented immediately by each member state or associate. Ultimately, implementation is guided by the national interest and geopolitical influence impacting respective nations. It would be naïve, after the recent St. Vincent meeting and statements emanating from various leaders, if one does not recognise that interest in Guyana’s border controversy is influenced by each nation state’s individual interest of which oil, debt write off and other economic considerations are key. One must also recognise the relationships in CARICOM are also being impacted by extra regional ties being formed through other regional groupings such as Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC).
Whilst it is important for Guyana to engage the regional and international bodies, Guyana’s best bet of ensuring a settled border controversy resides in the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Venezuela knows this and so too do our regional neighbours. It is therefore in our interest as Guyanese to reinforce this non-compromising narrative on the ICJ in any bilateral or multilateral negotiations. Nothing, no language, no compromise should undermine the ICJ ‘s role in the border issue our leaders, frontline officers and all Guyanese must speak in one accord. President Irfaan Ali, though starting from the standpoint that his government will not meet with Venezuela, subsequently recanted that position to meet out of deference for CARICOM and perhaps advice from Bharrat Jagdeo who seems otherwise influenced on how best to attend to the border controversy all by himself.
Maduro has succeeded with the help of CARICOM leaders in getting Ali to come to the table after his initial refusal and witnessing him unable to keep his word to the people of Guyana, as he signed a document clearly addressing what he promised not to address. Noted also is the failure of the parties to stick to the precise language of the Geneva Agreement that defines the border issue as a “controversy”, not dispute, as was sometimes used in the St. Vincent statement. We must insist this matter is defined as a “controversy” and dealt with as such, nothing more. Government and all Guyanese must remain firm that the matter is before the ICJ and must remain so until that Court makes a determination. Neither Ali, Maduro, nor Jagdeo must be allowed to change the course of history or the borders/territory of Guyana, be it land, air or sea.
If CELAC and CARICOM are concerned about the threat to peace in the region they could have pushed for increased and improved negotiations at the level of the diplomatic service. As it stands now, Guyana does not have an Ambassador in Venezuela which has created a vacuum to foster any positive relations and we must question why, also did they see the need to push for this post to be filled. If not, the nation must be told why. Had this level of diplomatic engagement been activated any hindrance could have then resolved at the level of the heads of state. The steps for de-escalation should commence at the level of the two embassies before jumping to force the Guyanese Head of State in the same room to sign an agreement, knowing fully well it does not bind either party and it gives an edge for Maduro to use same for propaganda purposes. The St. Vincent Agreement is no guarantee of improved relations between the two sides.
Sincerely,
Lincoln Lewis
