The US attitude to Guyana has been too mysterious

Jan 10, 2014 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon

---

 

 

The announcement by the US Ambassador that the American-funded democracy project will proceed, despite the objection of the Government of Guyana, is news that should be welcomed by every citizen, in and out of Guyana, who want to see democracy and good governance in, according to the World Bank, the second poorest country in the CARICOM region.
For over ten years now, the American Government has tolerated drug trafficking, money-laundering and pathological corruption in the corridors of power. It appeared extremely confusing to political observers. It simply defied logic. Why the US did not move against some major politicians from 2002 onwards, when evidence came tumbling down like rain from the skies that connected them to nasty political immoralities, remained and continues to be seen as mysterious.
If what has taken place in Guyana had occurred elsewhere, the US would have intervened. Quite a large number of urban middle class Georgetowners have told me over the years that there has to be an explanation as to why the US behaved so nonchalantly to major abominations by the PPP leaders. What happened to the visa revocation policy that Ambassador Bullen implemented?
When two prominent citizens were before the courts for sexual offences, the US cancelled their visas before the cases were concluded. Yet in the area of corruption, we have seen no reaction from the American Embassy. Gerhard Ramsaroop of the AFC told me that a businessman went to buy a house and the cost was one million American dollars. Ramsaroop told me that his information was foolproof. The seller is a ruling politician that simply does not have such type of financial resources
Last week, the editor of this newspaper, Adam Harris, was on Spotlight, the interview programme on channel 9 hosted by Dr. Grantley Walrond. Harris made the point that in relation to proof of corruption, all you have to do is look at massive expenditures by someone not known to be wealthy and then do the accountancy investigation and huge holes will be found. This is how you can expose corruption.
How can a newcomer to the PPP bandwagon, without a background of wealth accumulation, sell a house for 205 million Guyanese dollars? By any stretch of the imagination that is worth investigation.
To date, the Bullen visa cancellation policy has not been resuscitated by the US Embassy since Mr. Bullen retired. If the US could have withdrawn the visas of two persons not convicted of any crime at the time, why can’t the same be done to corrupt persons in the PPP leadership?
Are we seeing a change in the Americans with the democracy project? One hopes so. What needs to be established immediately is the point that sovereignty of a country does not lie with the government only, and in Guyana we have a minority administration. The PPP leadership is contending that if the Government of a sovereign state rejects an arrangement with a foreign government then that foreign power should respect the country’s sovereignty.
But who speaks for an independent state? The government only? If that is so, then things become complicated when the government is a minority regime. What happens if the Parliament accepts a project from a foreign power? Does this mean that the Parliament has no legal basis for accepting an arrangement with the American Government?
This columnist would suggest Parliament proposes a motion to approve of the democracy project and if passed, then a parliamentary committee should seek dialogue with the US Embassy on the modalities of implementing the arrangement.
The announcement by the US Ambassador is one of the freshest winds that have blown through the windows of this land since the PPP became a nasty, oligarchic regime, especially under Mr. Jagdeo. One could just imagine what has gone through the minds of those in Washington, D.C who are in charge of American policy towards the Caribbean. It is clear to any impartial observer that the PPP has been taken over by power madness.
Not even under Forbes Burnham has this country seen a government that is so obsessed with control of every corner of this land. Perhaps for the Americans, the local government stalemate was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Perhaps, also, the stubbornness over the Procurement Commission.
The ABC ambassadors in Georgetown years ago came to the conclusion that the PPP does not want to devolve power to local organs but wants centralized control. They knew years ago, that the PPP is simply not interested in good governance. Let us hope the democracy project is the beginning of the end of elected dictatorship in Guyana.

 

---

---