The June edition of the Washington-based online news magazine, “The Diplomat”, offers a useful summary by a research associate of the Americas Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) on the recent roles of the US and China in the present conflict initiated by Venezuela in its century-long pursuit of our Essequibo. Basically, it enumerates a score of instances by both countries concerning the controversy that Venezuela has escalated and recommends a more robust role for the US since it shows China is running with the hares and hunting with the hounds when it comes to our interests. The writer cautions:
“These incidents underscore the fact that while China may appear to be playing both sides of the Essequibo dispute, it remains too important of a partner for either Venezuela or Guyana to dispense with. A more robust US strategy for engagement with Guyana is needed not only for Washington to better compete with China, but also to allow Guyana to engage on more even footing with both Beijing and Caracas.
“A starting point for this strategy should be doubling down on US core competencies in the security and defence sector. While recent moves to help modernise the GDF are encouraging, China has also made inroads in military cooperation with Guyana, having sold a Y-12 patrol aircraft and donated some US$2.6 million worth of vehicles to the GDF and Police since 2017. In fiscal year 2021, just 30 members of the Guyanese armed forces received training from the United States, none of them at US service academies or regional centres. Meanwhile, year-over-year, dozens of officers of the roughly 4500-strong GDF have received training in China.
“As Guyana looks to modernise and upgrade its defence capabilities with a much-expanded budget for the GDF, the United States should be at the forefront in providing assistance through Foreign Military Financing (FMF) and International Military Education and Training programmes.
“Argentina’s recent purchase of F-16 fighter jets with FMF is a particularly instructive example here. The deal was the first time Argentina received equipment through FMF in more than 20 years, and was important in countering China’s efforts to increase defence ties by marketing its own fighters to Buenos Aires. Increasing FMF to Guyana is a clear avenue through which the United States can maintain itself as a defence partner of choice and help Georgetown to maintain deterrence against its neighbour.
“Beyond security, the United States should leverage its development tools to compete with China on infrastructure and energy projects, where it has thus far been largely absent. Crucial to these initiatives will be the US Development Finance Corporation (DFC), which has been heralded as critical to spearheading the counteroffer to China’s Belt and Road Initiative. But the DFC’s reliance on World Bank country income classifications means it has limited ability to operate in Guyana, which was recently elevated to high-income status as a consequence of its oil boom. This label overlooks still-dramatic income disparities within Guyana and developmental needs in the energy transmission, transportation, health, and sanitation sectors. A more ambitious agenda from the DFC for Guyana can pave the way to allowing US companies to compete for contracts in these sectors instead of ceding them to Chinese firms.
“Finally, the United States should work to shore up the Argyle accords signed by Venezuela and Guyana, committing the two to peaceful resolution of disputes regarding Essequibo. Drawing attention to Venezuela’s escalatory rhetoric and compellence strategy toward Guyana is critical to demonstrate the international community is watching and invested in maintaining interstate peace in the region.
“Sustained US attention and support will also help to demonstrate the contradictory approach China has taken, and reinforce the value of the US-led rules-based international order at a time when such support is under pressure from all corners. Indeed, failure to maintain extended deterrence against Venezuela will carry far-reaching implications for all countries counting on Washington to support them in the face of pressure by revisionist powers.”
