Guyana has to be one of the most studied and analysed countries in the world on a per capita basis, not necessarily by scholars operating on academic premises, but by other countries, which, of course is always in furtherance of one or another of their national interests.
One of the most consistent in the latter category has been the US, which through its “United States Agency for International Development (USAID)” just released a report that pronounced, in effect, on the state of the Guyanese state. Without irony it proposed what interventions the US ought to be making here, presumably to “improve” that state, through implementation of “Democracy, Human Rights and Governance” (DRG).
The report harks back to the beginning of our modern party system when the PPP split into two factions giving birth to the PNC. It did not mention the role the CIA played in the denouement of that split or the US’ interest then in such a presumably insignificant country: to “prevent the spread of communism” via the PPP. It did point out that in the present, US interests are firstly to prevent the flow of drugs from Guyana, which is strategically positioned in South America to perform that role. And secondly, that our now confirmed oil reserves bumped up our strategic profile more than a notch.
Fundamentally the report concedes that our state is moribund for a number of reasons. While the government, through the Finance Minister insists that our economy is “growing” the report states quite flatly that it is in fact “declining” because of the falling prices for most of our export commodities.
Politically, it pronounces openly about what Guyanese had always known, but what their leaders were bashful about acknowledging: to wit, that the support of the two major parties is ethnically based and they refuse to deal directly with the implications of that reality.
The report suggests that the APNU/AFC coalition is secure to the 2020 elections, but did not elaborate on the reason for the thinking. Most local analysts have pointed to the degutting of the Cummingsburg Accord, especially as it related to the reduction of the promised role for the PM, having placed severe strains on the coalition.
The Report’s conclusion means that the authors see the leaders of the AFC as being willing to ignore the discontent expressed by their supporters in the press. Recently, one of those supporters, former AFC MP Verasammy Ramayah quit as Region 6 REO because, as he stated, of the refusal of the AFC leadership to back his drive to root out corruption in his region.
But interestingly, the Report takes one side in the open difference of opinion and position between the AFC and APNU on a key demand of the former’s as it relates to constitutional reform. The Report is insistent that the government must move swiftly to initiate constitutional changes such as tempering the powers of the presidency and over-centralisation of power, which were proposed during the campaign. It stated: “These can help balance the power of the executive, address the winner-takes-all nature of the political and electoral systems, and devolve power to local government.”
Prime Minister Nagamootoo has been insistent that the powers of the President must be reduced and has promised the Report of the Steering Committee on Constitutional Reform will be submitted soon to a broad-based Committee that will include the PPP.
President David Granger, however, has gone on record as stating that while he supports Constitutional Change, he believes that the process of consultations with communities and the citizenry must be broader based.
In the run-up to the last two elections, the PPP had been quite sceptical of the work by the US through USAID’s “Leadership and Democracy” (LEAD) Programme, which they claim was geared more towards assisting the now governing parties. Their participation is crucial going forward and we hope they will comment on it shortly.
