Independence Day this year is being commemorated under a cloud occasioned by Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro. He insists he has conducted elections of a governor and 8 deputies to their National Assembly to represent Essequibo, which that Assembly had unilaterally declared two years ago was the 28th State of Venezuela. But as an independent nation, we have to look at this effrontery as a challenge that is testing our independence, and use it as an opportunity to help forge us into a nation and so become better equipped to deal with the new, evolving world order.
When we interrogate older nations that have withstood the vicissitudes of centuries-long challenges, we see that to a large degree they used external threats to forge the above mentioned feeling of nationalism to act most effectively to protect and project their national interests. As a matter of fact, the sentiment that Venezuelans were robbed of their birthright by the British – “perfidious Albion” – and its successor state of Guyana over Essequibo, has been one of the major nation-building tools by Venezuelan governments long before Maduro. The latter is merely using the issue opportunistically with Venezuelans that want him out, to “rally them around the flag” and overlook his government’s shortcomings. Venezuelans of all political persuasions, ethnicity, or residence agree that “Essequibo is theirs” and en passant; it is for this reason we have to be very circumspect in allowing the Venezuelans to enter as refugees. They can easily be converted into fifth columnists who will support a new government in Caracas in the future.
At this time, therefore, as Maduro ratchets up the pressure on our sovereignty, Guyanese must emulate the Venezuelans and be as one on the Border Controversy. It is for this reason that it was quite unfortunate – to say the least – for the Opposition in the National Assembly to not support the Bill that declares our stand that the 1899 Arbitral Award was full and “final”. This is tantamount to aiding and abetting the enemy. However, this anomaly may be rectified very soon since General Elections are due within months.
Gandhi once said in reference to the problematic of leadership that “There goes my people. I must follow them, for I am their leader.” Meaning that supporters of the Opposition can signal their rejection of the unpatriotic stance of their erstwhile leaders by voting for the party that has never wavered in their support of a national position against Venezuela’s presumptions on their border controversy. The Opposition leaders would then be forced to follow their supporters on this issue and in this manner possibly wider areas of commonality could emerge with the present government, which the former claim they desire.
Ironically, this move by the Opposition to ignore the sentiments of their supporters on the most pressing national issue comes at a point of our history when, for the first time since independence, we have the economic wherewithal to deal with the bread and butter issues that have challenged us since 1966. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs have long shown that man’s physiological needs must first be taken care of. The Opposition must be honest to accept that thousands of jobs are going a begging that can fulfil those physiological needs, while many claim they are “unemployed”. They must also be honest to educate their supporters that all development takes time and that in the early stages we are presently in, there may be some supply and demand mismatches in labour.
The news that Guyana is the only country in the world that can be self-sufficient in food production should be welcomed in view of concerns that we may experience Trinidad’s sorry history when our oil is depleted as theirs is presently. What that factoid suggests is that the government’s decision to diversify our economy in the production of food – crops, livestock, fish etc. – is very salutary, and will deliver us into real independence. The news that Trinidad had to accept food from India as aid, should be an object lesson for our leaders.
