No one could have accused St Vincent Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves of equivocation when he spoke to this newspaper on Saturday; on the contrary he was disarmingly candid and clear-cut. It was the tenor of what he had to say which struck a discordant note with Guyanese.
He had three main points to make: Firstly, that Venezuela’s recent election was both democratic and transparent and that President Maduro was legitimately elected; secondly, that a Maduro government would best serve Guyana’s interest rather than one formed by what he called his “far-right” opponents; and thirdly, if Venezuela decided at any time to take military action he would condemn it.
As is now well known St Vincent and the Grenadines was one of only a handful of countries in this hemisphere to recognize Mr Maduro’s victory in the July election, and they did so with great alacrity. This is a bit mystifying for Guyanese, considering the role Mr Gonsalves played in 2020 to ensure the ascendancy of democracy here. Even left-wing leaders like President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of Brazil and President Gustavo Petro of Colombia have not recognized the declared result in Venezuela because the government has not produced the tallies to confirm it.
In defence of his position the Prime Minister told Stabroek News that Venezuela had “one of the most sophisticated systems of voting. The Carter Center has commented favourably on it.” As he surely knows, the problem is not with the Smartmatic machines which Venezuela uses for election purposes, but what happens after that.
After the electronic machines record a vote, they discharge a printed ballot paper showing how the person voted. The opposition put 80% of these online indicating that Edmundo González won by a clear majority; the government has produced none of the tallies to date, simply declaring that Mr Maduro won. It then went to the Supreme Court, which has no role in the election process under the Constitution, to have the judges there confirm the manufactured result, which they did. As for the Carter Center it deemed the election “undemocratic.”
So much for the Prime Minister conflating efficient machines with fraudulent government acts. This is in addition to a whole series of repressive measures directed against the opposition and critics in general, which a recent UN fact-finding mission has condemned. “The severity of repression, the effort to demonstrate results through incarceration, and the use of ill-treatment and torture have established a climate of widespread fear among the population,” it found. It went on to refer to the more than 2,000 arrests in the first week of post-election protests that included minors and those with disabilities, who were accused of terrorism and incitement to hatred.
While Mr Gonsalves appears oblivious to the evidence, he impliedly might also seem to suggest that Guyana should accept the official declared result of the Venezuelan election because it would be in her interest to do so. It was not, of course, expressed in that way. What he did say was that, “if you have a choice between Maduro and the right wing in Venezuela, I advise you to choose Maduro.”
His argument was that “The right wing will seek to allow the Americans to take the oil in Venezuela, to set up to take over PDVSA and try to run Guyana’s oil industry from Caracas.” Presumably he meant American oil companies, and not the US per se, but whatever the case, it is unlikely this country’s oil industry could be run from Caracas for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that PDVSA, the state-owned oil company, is very run down and in need of massive investment and retooling. In addition, Venezuela’s oil is a type of heavy crude which requires special processing, unlike Guyana’s sweet crude, which is considered ideal for petroleum purposes.
But the Prime Minister had other claims to make on this subject. He asserted that the Venezuelan right wing historically had always “been pushing against Guyana. Always!” He added, “The right wing will want to mobilise troops to enter [Guyana]. Why you think Cheddi was very leery of them?” They were also telling people, he said, that President Maduro would have to compromise with Guyana because they had “friends in the Caribbean like Ralph” and would want to press their “claim.”
Mr Gonsalves is perfectly correct to say that Ms María Corina Machado in particular – and presumably she is the one he is principally referring to – has traditionally been very hardline on the boundary, and there is no reason to suppose she has changed her views. While there have always been elements in Venezuela which have advocated occupation of our territory, that was not, however, at the forefront of the recent election campaign. The opposition spoke out, for example, against the holding of a referendum on Essequibo. They saw it as a diversion to avoid an election, or at least postpone it.
It also has to be said that contrary to expectation, Ms Machado and other critics thought that Venezuela should defend its case before the ICJ. Their opinion was that their country had right on its side, and that rigorous research should be done on the matter to present before the court. While this doesn’t sound as though the Venezuelan opposition, were it to come to office, would be spoiling for adventurism in Guyana, we always have to avoid complacency and remain on our guard. Even in the face of what one might suppose would be US opposition, they might still choose a military approach under pressure from the Venezuelan armed forces, for instance. They are a factor which should never be discounted, no matter who occupies Miraflores.
Which brings us back to Prime Minister Gonsalves who emphasized that any time Venezuela took military action against Guyana, he would denounce it. Conflict should be resolved peacefully, he said. He indicated he stood by the Argyle Declaration which was signed in St Vincent, and went on to ask, “Since the elections, have we heard anything out of Venezuela where they are talking anything about moving troops inside of Guyana?”
He omitted to mention that following Argyle there had been several reports supported by satellite data of Venezuelan military build-up on Ankoko and the west bank of the Cuyuni. The fact that there haven’t been reports in the media since the Venezuelan election does not mean that military activity has ceased. Nothing has been said either about any scaling back of the armed presence in Ankoko and on the Cuyuni.
And while the Prime Minister is apparently unaware of it, since the election the Special Commission for the Defence of the Territory of Guayana Esequiba [sic] and Territorial Sovereignty has been steaming ahead with preparing a draft law for a constitution for two-thirds of our country. This is to be presented for passage in the Venezuelan National Assembly. Is that not evidence of an intention to occupy our land? Surely Mr Gonsalves does not believe that the governmental authorities in Caracas amuse themselves by playing pretence games?
“Guyana is my friend,” said the Prime Minister, “Irfaan is my friend. The Guyanese people are my friends. Maduro is also my friend and I want peace between Venezuela and Guyana in the same way I want peace across the Taiwan Straits; the same way I want peace in the Ukraine.” This is all very well. Everyone wants peace in each one of those places, the issue is what kind of peace and how it is achieved.
Significantly while Prime Minister Gonsalves was insistent that he would speak out against any military action on the part of Venezuela, he did not say that he recognised Guyana’s right to Essequibo. Friendship is one thing, justice another.
