Dear Editor,
Permit me to respectfully offer a response to the aforementioned articles featured in a certain section of the print media during the period February 23rd to 25th, 2017. It is unfortunate that I have to describe the contents therein as irresponsible journalism and lacking in professional journalistic objectivity, which is premised substantially on a basis of assumption. Professional journalism ought to be centred upon irrefutable facts, especially those which have been established by investigation. I cannot agree more with the response published by the Chinese Embassy in their defence: that the accusations made are unsubstantiated, and that legal action may be pursued. I would say that is the correct and appropriate course of action for the Chinese Embassy to take on this matter. In fact, I would even suggest that legal action be seriously pursued. I read the articles with interest, and could not find any evidence cited, hence my position on this matter.
Diplomatic relations between Guyana and China were established since 1972, and the two countries have enjoyed an extremely cordial and fruitful friendship. China has emerged quite rapidly as one of the world’s most powerful countries, and has made dramatic advances economically and industrially to have attained its current global dominance and power today.
Guyana has, for many years, benefited tremendously from China in more ways than one. China has provided invaluable assistance to Guyana’s healthcare system, as well as its infrastructure, such as the Guyana International Conference Centre at Liliendaal. During 2010, Guyana benefited from a US$8M grant for projects in the social sector. These are just a few examples cited to substantiate my contention. Overall, Guyana has received both technical and financial aid spanning all the various economic sectors.
Dealing with the matter at hand in regard to the accusation made against the Chinese Embassy and the argument put forward by some that the Chinese businesses are making local businesses less competitive has absolutely nothing to do with the Chinese, and much less with the Chinese Embassy.
Most obviously, the Chinese import their goods directly from China; and being a country which is known to be a ‘cheap labour’ country and the largest producer of goods and services in the world, it is therefore quite logical that goods emanating from this country directly will be far more competitive on the market. It is noteworthy to mention, too, that most of the goods branded in the US by multinational US companies are in fact manufactured in China for this very reason. Local businesses, on the other hand, purchase most of their goods from the US directly, and those goods would therefore be less competitive against the Chinese goods.
With respect to the claims of fraud by Customs/GRA, whereby it is claimed that Chinese containers are not checked, an investigation needs to be launched within the Customs body and the GRA to ascertain what the reasons are. It could be a matter of procedural loopholes, or there could very well be genuine and legitimate reasons. Unless a deeper investigation is launched and concrete evidence emerges, such an outrageous and baseless allegation should not be made in the public domain against the Chinese Embassy. As a consequence, this could potentially harm the diplomatic relations between the two countries, and that is a development that should be avoided at all cost. Again, in this regard, I will refer to the China/United States diplomatic relationship as an example. The US and China don’t always see ‘eye to eye’ on international matters affecting the two countries, yet they have to find satisfaction in compromising.
Yours faithfully,
Concerned Citizen
