Amerindians in the Centre

May 02, 2010 Features / Columnists, Ravi Dev

---

In a recent letter to the press, Dr Henry Jeffrey suggested that to break the logjam that has developed in Guyanese politics, an Amerindian be chosen as the Presidential candidate of a combined opposition at the next general elections. The argument was that, “a candidate from either of the major ethnic groups does not have the potential to significantly change the electoral balance and he pointed to the AFC experience in 2006… The Amerindian vote will be crucial at the next election and unlike the government, the opposition has little to offer to the hinterland communities. An Amerindian presidential candidate, backed up by all the good and the great in the opposition and total mobilisation, could radicalise the Amerindians and give general hope that change is possible.”
While in theory there is great merit in the argument, I do believe that such an arrangement will not come about because of the ground reality of our politics. In any coalition of forces that can call itself “a combined opposition”, there is first and foremost the problematic of the elephant in the room – the PNC. The problematic arises out of two major factors – the baggage of the PNC and what I have called “the disequilibrium of size”. The PNC is a party with a history: a history that includes the rigging of elections and the commission of severe excesses during its long period in office.
Some, including ROAR, had called for the PNC to jettison this baggage by acknowledging its past mistakes and offering an apology to the Guyanese people for those mistakes. From my own experience with the PNC on this issue, its invariable riposte is that the PPP had also indulged in excesses and how come they were not being called on to apologise. The observation that the PPP was not looking for coalition partners never cut any ice.
Part of the PNC’s refusal to budge on the issue arose from the second aspect of its problematic – its size. Before the success of the AFC at the 2006 elections, potential coalition partners were in the end given short shrift in the group decision-making processes. This is the disequilibrium that is almost always introduced in coalition building efforts when one partner has significantly greater assets (here size) than the others. Not enough importance was granted to the potential contribution of the smaller parties, which – even though small in absolute numbers -could contribute the necessary percentage to provide the plurality needed to secure the Presidency and the government. Marginal utility and all that.
Having arrived at these conclusions, ROAR came up with the notion of the “Centre Force” at the beginning of 2005: “ROAR believes it is time for a “Centre Force” to be created and nurtured. What is this Centre Force? For one, it’s not a “Third Force” that feels it can wish away the PPP and PNC. It’s a Force that should seek to occupy the political, social, and cultural ground between the PPP and PNC – hence “Centre”. Today in Guyana, there are a number of political parties outside the ambit of the PPP and the PNC – ROAR, GAP, WPA, JFAP, etc. that can begin the process of creating this Centre Force. These could be joined by the parties now in formation by other committed Guyanese.
What would be the ground rules for a Centre Force? Firstly, they should not get together simply to deny the PPP or the PNC the government. This would result in an arrangement of convenience that would quickly and acrimoniously fall asunder. They will have to be committed to a common programme. This does not mean they agree on each and every point. That they are different parties means that they do not. There’s nothing wrong with this…and in fact there’s everything right with it. No one party has all the answers for Guyana – the PPP and the PNC have proven that. The way forward is a confederation of parties, where they keep their identities as they work together to craft a common and truly national program (because of their diversity) for Guyana. In the crafting of such a program it is possible (and in our estimation quite likely) that much common ground can be found. But it will also demonstrate that there would be compromises that all of us will have to make.
Almost simultaneously with our “Centre Force” proposal arose calls for a “Third Force” which soon became the dominant slogan. The major difference between the two concepts was that the former envisaged the creation of a “hung” Parliament in which the Centre Force would vote with either the PPP or the PNC on specific bills to advance Guyana’s widest interest. The Third Force saw itself as an alternative to both the PPP and the PNC. Even though we felt this latter assumption was too ambitious, ROAR participated vigorously in the ensuing efforts at coalition building.
These efforts of 2005-2006 foundered primarily because of two reasons. Some parties supported the “Big Tent” initiative that would include the PNC. Others (including ROAR) balked because of the reasons stated above. The second, (from a ROAR perspective) – even for those parties that did not accept the PNC as a coalition partner – was the refusal to accept our argument that Dr Jeffrey is pretty much recapitulating in the present. To wit, that our best bet was to select a leader of the hinterland community – in this case the leader of the Guyana Action Party, Mr Paul Hardy, to be the presidential candidate for the 2006 elections
In addition to the tactical political rationale give by Dr Jeffrey (the greater incentive to secure the “swing” Amerindian vote) we pointed to the long term strategic benefits that it could give to our political, economic and cultural development by shifting the locus of the power-struggle away from the coast. Our future, we pointed out was inevitably linked with the rest of South America – through the Rupununi – and what better way to secure that future than by giving greater influence to those that have already understood and developed those linkages.
The argument did not garner support. Sadly it was not only because of swollen and inflated egos – and there was, and is, a surfeit of that – but also because of a deep-seated anti-Amerindian racism in our opposition political leadership. Many openly expressed consternation to me that I could run “under” an Amerindian. I do not believe that these attitudes have changed and consequently I see no change in the status quo as it relates to Amerindian leadership anytime soon.

---

---