Last week’s three separate skirmishes across the Cuyuni River border, in which civilian-clothed individuals shot at our GDF soldiers who responded, should be seen for what it is: an escalation by Venezuela of the hybrid warfare its leader Maduro has launched against us since 2013 when he assumed power. In November of that year, long before Exxon’s 2015 oil strike, Maduro had deployed the Venezuelan Navy to seize an Andarco survey ship in a block off our Atlantic waters, insisting it was Venezuela’s because the 1899 Arbitral Award settling our border was “void”. Three attacks, stretching across over sixty miles, had to have been a coordinated operation that cannot be passed of as being committed by “Sindicatos”, as was the case last February when six of our soldiers were injured.
These attacks make a mockery of the Argyle Agreement where Venezuela and Guyana had promised, “(they) directly or indirectly, will not threaten or use force against one another in any circumstances.” The kinetic escalation comes as another move in the Maduro’s hybrid war draws nearer: the election of eight deputies to the Venezuelan National Assembly, along with a Governor for Essequibo on May 25th. Not coincidentally, one day before our Independence Day. While many Guyanese have scoffed at the absurdity of Maduro’s “presumptuousness” since there will be no polling stations in Essequibo for any voting, we must understand the utility of this ploy in his hybrid war against us. These “representatives” will now “speak for” Essequibo in international fora, such as those organized by his allies Russia, China and Iran.
And this is where the present contretemps that has erupted within our country over the death of 11-year old Adrianna Younge is an instantiation of the deep ethnic fissures in our society can be exploited by Maduro. We can just see him shedding crocodile tears as he rails in these international gatherings, echoing the opposition’s criticisms of the government – regardless of which party is in government or opposition. The soon to be elected “governor and deputies of Essequiba” will give him that mandate to represent their “constituents” against, or instance, an oppressive Government that discriminates against groups or citizens – regardless of which party is in office.
And it is for this reason – if nothing else – that just as the President, the Opposition leaders have spoken as one to condemn Venezuela’s spurious claim on our Essequibo, they must begin to do the same on the exploitation of our ethnic differences for political gain. Ironically, the factor that might have made such exploitation politically rational – a mobilized ethnic group that could deliver by themselves an absolute majority – is no longer the case. We are now a nation of minorities and any taking of “one side” does not just alienate the “other side” but reifies the fissures to take us backward.
However, what has also been revealed is the widespread stubborn retention of attitudes and beliefs about each other that were instilled by the European colonizers to “divide and rule”. And here all groups are guilty – knowingly or unknowingly. We must also speak frankly about their attitudes and beliefs and question their genealogy and bona fides so that we do not insult each other with “fighting words”.
Take for instance, the term “Scrapeheads” or “Scrapes” that have recently entered the Guyanese lexicon. As an Indian, I would never defend, much less encourage, behaviour by Indian youths such as burning and looting stores because of their poverty or deprived background. Rather, they should be reminded that they should take, or create, whatever opportunities present themselves, to earn their living and do so within their means. I do believe, however, that we should be willing to have a national dialogue on this and other issues where it is clear that we have more than just a semantic gap.
Similarly, as a Hindu I was taken aback when it was widely claimed that poor Adrianna was “sacrificed” in a Hindu rite to gain or keep “wealth”. I know of no Hindu rite that calls for human sacrifice and even with the few animal sacrifices, those are gradually phasing out in favour of vegetable-based offerings.
In reference to one Scrapehead’s vile outpourings on Mother Lakshmi, it has been claimed this is a “creative freedom” and free speech issue”. But we should all know that free speech is not free of consequences and we have, for instance, the law of “obscenity” that mandates imprisonment upon conviction.
