Political leadership is a strange thing

Jun 11, 2010 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
The SN article of June 9 reported that the Alliance For Change (AFC) is activating the “rotation principle” for its leadership.
Whether this is based on the collective leadership (and by extension its principle of co-leadership) that the Working People Alliance (WPA) promoted and acted upon in the past is not spelt out but the rotation enactment is obviously a response to the fragile political climate in Guyana.
Like the WPA in the past the AFC is obviously mindful of the racial dialectic and is apparently responsive to the complexity of political leadership in a divided country.
But whatever criticism the pundits level at the WPA, it was born in alliance and forged alliances at all costs throughout its political career from the CDD (Committee in Defence of Democracy) all through to the PCD and beyond, losing the lives of three of its activists Edward Dublin, Ohene Koama and Walter Rodney in its unfinished struggle for a truly democratic Guyana. Now the AFC like the PNC is pondering its next electoral ‘face’.
The AFC is undoubtedly an important player but is it mindful that its apparent concentration on its electoral “success” driven by “polls” and the perceptible conclusion derived therefrom that it can displace the other major opposition force on its own while at the same time fighting the PPP does not fit in with the imperatives of the new political culture?
If this calculation assumes all is ‘normal’ in the Guyanese political system this would be frightening folly. Guyana is not normal – it has not been for a long time. While the AFC’s internal elections is its own right as a political party, its membership and leadership should also consider, in its political choices, the whole constitutional, moral and cultural future of the country.
The remarks of prospective leader Khemraj Ramjattan on the Demerara Waves internet radio a few months ago were an unfortunate if innocent defence of the old politics where ego appeared to trump the necessity of unity. Political leadership is a strange thing.
Sometimes it is from the grace of self-effacement and modesty rather than the pomp of immediate self-gratification that respect is forged and victories that satisfy both the collective and the individual are won.
The larger obligation of engaging a unified approach to successfully challenge a governing political party whose corruption trumps that of Patrick Manning and the PNM is somehow left on the backburner.
As David Abdullah of the Oilfield Workers Trade union of Trinidad indicated in a recent communiqué on the broad alliance that defeated the PNM:  “this resounding victory marks a significant and dramatic turning point in the political direction of the twin island Caribbean state. It is an unmistakable statement from the people that they were fed up of: corruption; the waste and mismanagement of the nation’s patrimony; the culture of maximum leader, arrogance of office holders and the centralization of power; and a paradigm of development that put mega-projects and international summits before the basic needs of citizens.”
Here it is clear that the unity among the groups was derived from the holistic need to confront the crisis in Trinidad and Tobago.
Given that Trinidad holds a different (first past the post) political system and an obviously more refined political culture than Guyana has so far been unable to muster, it will still be interesting to see if, for the future sake of the country that the Guyana opposition pulls together and establishes a broad challenge to the current political party in power. Given the sometimes puerile tension within the opposing groups this is quite unlikely.
The PNC, like the AFC, also has its own leadership choice issues but like other parties and individuals should ponder carefully on the danger of trading short term gratification of their respective political entities to the larger imperative of opposition unity.
If suspicion and the potential dissolution of their respective power bases is the issue, then they should all carefully consider resolving differences that exist through flexibility, humility, and a concessionary frame of mind perhaps supervised by a protocol that could be administered and supervised by respected independents or stellar citizens and/or organisations.
However, if the short term gain of sawdust Caesars is preferred, then it would be very easy to predict, based on past opposition performance, that Guyana will again walk down the dark road of a continued dominant political entity while the opposition is subliminally gratified with a few negligible seats in the parliament that holds little effect in an undemocratic Guyana political climate of 21st century Guyana.
Nigel Westmaas

---

---