Latest update November 24th, 2024 1:00 AM
Oct 29, 2008 Features / Columnists
The Parrot has been following the recent developments with regard to Suriname seizing a Guyanese vessel and the use of the Corentyne River. Obviously, something is amiss. As Lorrie would say, “Ting nah regular,” or “Ting plenty nah regular.”
Now, this is a border river, and like all border rivers, countries — in this case Guyana and Suriname — have equal rights in terms of use.
The Corentyne River has been where it is since ever. Agreements were reached in the past going back hundreds of years. Usage of this river has been generally peaceful, barring incidents like the CGX removal and the most recent sugar vessel seizure. Records have shown that our eastern neighbour has a tendency to resort to the use of force as it relates to vessels which have a link to Guyana.
Of course, we have taken a different approach — diplomatic resolution. We were vindicated in the use of this in the Tribunal Award. On the current crisis, letters were dispatched to the United Nations and CARICOM.
Why would Suriname resort to force without trying to have the matter resolved, at least through CARICOM? It was Guyana that presented Suriname’s case to join the regional fraternity. In addition to this, only a few miles separate us, and we are both part of the Guyana Shield. It is clear that Suriname’s action poses some challenges to CARICOM.
Guyana, during the EPA discussions, reiterated the need for regional integration. This was evident in our relentless effort to have the EU recognise the Treaty of Chaguaramas. One of the two clauses that were included before we signed the EPA speaks volumes for our commitment to regionalism.
Having taken this position, Suriname’s action must be seen as counter to this integration. Guyana has been in the forefront on regional integration from the inception, decades ago. We have always been the headquarters of CARICOM. We built a secretariat a few years ago. This is testimony to our resolve in this regard. Therefore, we cannot afford to be as irresponsible as Suriname. We have to continue to lead in the area of regional integration. As a result, Suriname’s action must be condemned by all, including CARICOM.
It is understandable that they would be disappointed at the Tribunal Award. This, however, is not an excuse for them to execute the actions they did. Their gun boats removed CGX eight years ago. Is it a coincidence that the seizure of the sugar vessel recently occurred almost the same time that CGX was to re-commence operations? Having read the Suriname Ambassador’s position a few days ago, it is difficult to see logic from their perspective. The question is: why these sporadic incidents of aggression?
When pressed to explain their reasons, reporters were told to check the archives. What archives? If there are, as the Ambassador claimed, statutes to vindicate their actions, then why not make them public? Why hide in the archives?
Further, the ambassador said the action was not one of aggression. Well, Roger answered that. What is it then, an invitation to dinner? Suriname has a history of internal conflicts; some unfortunately resulted in the loss of lives. I hate to believe that the scars of those conflicts would have caused Surinamese to become immune to aggression, so much so that it cannot be recognised. What is regular is their aggression. Sorry, Lorrie, some things are regular. Squawk! Squawk!
Nov 24, 2024
ESPNcricinfo – A maiden Test century for Justin Greaves headlined a dominant day for West Indies against Bangladesh on day two of the Antigua Test. After his 115 helped West Indies post 450 for...…Peeping Tom kaieteur News- Transparency, as conceived by Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo, seems to be a peculiar exercise... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News – There is an alarming surge in gun-related violence, particularly among younger... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]