The Teknik Perdana incident 

Oct 18, 2013 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

 

Guyana blundered when it gave permission for seismic research in what it considers its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). It further blundered when it allowed a vessel chartered by an American firm to undertake the research.
Guyana has to be more attuned to the political and economic sensitivities of the Venezuelans and should have deferred granting permission for this vessel to undertake sea-bed surveys because the Venezuelans were never ever going to sit back and allow that to happen.
As a result of permitting the sea-bed survey, the research vessel was detained by the Venezuelan navy last week for what the Venezuelans consider as an unauthorized encroachment into their EEZ. The Guyanese government on the other hand feels that the vessel was in its EEZ. The vessel has since been released, a sign that Venezuela is keen to diffuse tensions with Guyana, with which it has had good relations since the presidency of Hugo Chavez and which has continued under President Nicolas Maduro.
Venezuela has not renounced its claims to two-thirds of Guyana. This is what constitutes the basis of the territorial dispute. This dispute is germane to the marine boundaries, since the EEZ is a 200-mile area demarcated in relation to one’s coastline. Since parts of this coastline lie in the disputed area, there will obviously be problems in reaching agreement on Guyana’s marine boundaries with Venezuela. Similar problems have surfaced between Venezuela and other Caribbean countries.
The advice therefore proffered that Guyana should concentrate less on the issue of the seizure of the vessel and more on demarcating the marine boundaries is bad advice, since the marine boundaries cannot be divorced from the issue of the territorial boundaries which Guyana considers as settled, but which Venezuela disputes.
Despite the dispute, Venezuela has not objected to the economic development of the Essequibo, thus allowing for a new paradigm in relations between the two countries, one that went beyond the gridlock of relations in the past, where each side simply asserted its sovereignty to the disputed area. To open negotiations/discussions on the marine boundaries would be counterproductive, because the determination of those marine boundaries would once again force each country to reassert its sovereignty over the disputed area, and as a consequence there will be no agreement on the marine boundaries.
No nation is likely to easily concede sovereignty over territory which it feels it has a historical claim. And given the situation in Venezuela at this time, where the President got into office by a razor-slim margin, and given the problems between the government and its pro-American opposition, it would be impossible at this stage for the Venezuelan government to be seen as retreating on the issue of its claim to the disputed area.
The Venezuelans also would have sensitivities at this time towards the conducting of seismic research in what it considers its EEZ. This research is based on the prospects of oil exploration. The Venezuelan economy is heavily reliant on oil, and this is a finite resource. The main export market for Venezuela is the United States, which is also the country’s foremost enemy and which had been accused of being involved in a military coup that had temporarily deposed Hugo Chavez in 2002.
Given the hostilities between Venezuela and the United States, the former would be very suspicious of any vessel with American interests navigating in waters which the Venezuelans consider as being part of their EEZ. They would be equally concerned that the vessel was undertaking work in relation to future oil exploration, which can threaten the economy of Venezuela.
Given this background, it is not likely that any resolution of this incident would have been had at yesterday’s meeting between the foreign ministers of both countries being held in Trinidad. It would be an utter disaster if Guyana were to, at that meeting, broach the issue of demarcating the EEZ. As far as both countries are concerned there is an existing demarcation. This demarcation, as explained above, is linked to each country’s assertion to sovereignty over the disputed territory of Essequibo.
Guyana must also avoid being coaxed into an aggressive posture against the Venezuelans whose government remains on friendly terms with the Guyanese administration. Relations between Guyana and Venezuela were at their best ever prior to last week’s incident. So good were the relations that Venezuela indicated that it was not opposed to the development of the disputed area. This has led to a great many developmental initiatives in the Essequibo.
It was in the context of the quality of the relationship between the two countries that it was a tactical mistake by the Guyanese authorities to undertake the seismic research of the EEZ. This was bound to fuel concerns within Venezuela.
Guyana has a right to survey what it considers its EEZ for exploitable resources, but it has to be tactful in taking action in asserting that right. Considering the security, economic and political sensitivities of Venezuela at this time, Guyana should have deferred this decision to have a seismic survey and should have never granted permission to a firm with American interests.
Guyana’s best bet at this stage would be to defer this dispute over the vessel to the mediation of a team comprising representation from Caricom, the OAS and UNASUR. To go any other route would be counterproductive to Guyana’s interests.

---

---