Suriname withholds information on renewed claim to New River Triangle

Nov 01, 2015 News

– But Greenidge remains optimistic of resolution
By Abena Rockcliffe
While Suriname has not got aggressive with Guyana over the dispute surrounding the New River Triangle, ominous signs are around. The country is refusing communication with Guyana to clarify its stance.

Minister of Foreign Affairs, Carl Greenidge

Nevertheless, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Carl Greenidge, thinks that it is more than likely that a resolution will be met, soon.
The disputed area is known in Suriname as the Tigri area and in Guyana as the New River Triangle. It has been under Guyana’s control since 1969.
Greenidge told the National Assembly on Thursday that the relations between Guyana and Suriname continue to improve markedly.
“I am happy to announce that the members of the Guyana Border Commission and the Integral National Border Commission of Suriname have met four times for fruitful discussions and plans are afoot to convene a fifth meeting in Georgetown.
“In this framework, the Parties are exchanging and examining historical documents that could assist the Commission in arriving at a consensus on resolving the outstanding issues related to the Guyana/Suriname Border.”
Nevertheless, Suriname’s President recently told that country’s National Assembly that the “Tigri” issue will be placed “back on the agenda.”
The meaning of that statement is still unclear. Observers are wondering whether there is a strategy to come against Guyana at a time when it is consumed by the aggression of Venezuela.
According to Greenidge, Guyana sought an explanation as to what is meant by the statement “back on the agenda” but was given none and so remains at a loss.
However, Greenidge is saying that he would treat the Suriname and Venezuela’s claims as two distinctly different issues.
The Foreign Minister said, “In the Suriname case, these are two quite different issues. I would go as far as to say in the case of our western border (Venezuela) that you have a controversy because you have a clear and unambiguous arbitral award to which there are other parties, and the boundaries are very clear.

President David Granger

“While there is not a similar treaty or award capturing the border, we have over the years had agreements and understanding with Suriname which constitute a de facto acknowledgement of those borders but notwithstanding that you have a dispute.”
Greenidge then made mention of the joint commission which is due to meet before the end of the year. He said that on the agenda of that commission is work upon the dispute over the border including the new river area.
“It is my view that that forum is one where the matter can be resolved and we will pursue discussion on that forum on the understanding that it can be resolved,” said Greenidge.
Recently when President David Granger addressed the Parliament, he said that Guyana has never been in doubt as to the shape or the extent of the territory to which it succeeded upon independence on 26th May 1966. He added, “The Netherlands could not have bequeathed to Suriname at that country’s independence on 25th November, 1975 what it did not possess.”
President Granger said that Guyana is confident that the boundary between Guyana and Suriname was definitively established by 1936. He added that there is an agreement as to what constitutes the territory of Guyana and what constitutes the territory of Suriname despite the fact that there is no formal treaty that encapsulates that agreement.
“Suriname, in the absence of a formal treaty, sought to seize Guyana’s territory,” Granger stated.
Being the historian he is, President Granger noted that Suriname’s claim was based on an arbitrary, municipal, legislative resolution passed in October 1965 by which the Staten changed the name of Guyana’s New River to ‘Boven Corantijin’ or Upper Corentyne.
He chronicled, “Inter-state relations over the past 50 years have encountered testing times. The Suriname government in Operation Schoon Schip (Clean Sweep) in 1985 expelled over 5,000 Guyanese (and Haitian) workers, on the pretext of ‘national security’. Surinamese gunboats in 2000 evicted the Guyana-licensed, Canadian-operated CGX petroleum exploration platform from what is believed to be one of the region’s largest petroleum and natural gas fields.”
Granger, like Greenidge thinks that the best way at this time is the bilateral discourse.
He said that that discourse, however, must be grounded on the principles of mutual respect and a repudiation of the use of force.
The President said that Guyana has no doubt about the soundness of the bases on which it exercises sovereignty of its territory. It has no fear in having Suriname’s claim to its territory resolved by an adjudicatory process.
“The discourse will be helped by ready access to the archival documents which are pertinent to the issues to be resolved. These must be open to both sides for scrutiny in order to determine that there has been full adherence to the principles of international law as they relate to sovereignty over territory.
“Guyana has already made a large portion of its documents available to Suriname for its scrutiny. It is hoped that the Suriname Government will do likewise by requesting the Netherlands Government to open the relevant Dutch Archives to facilitate research by both sides. The British Archives are open to all. Guyana has nothing to hide,” said Granger.
Nevertheless, the President said that Guyana is committed to collaborating on reaching a peaceful solution to the territorial controversies.
He further stated that Guyana has no intention of displaying aggression towards its neighbours. It will continue to work to bring about a peaceful resolution to the controversies with Venezuela and Suriname.
However, the President made no qualms about saying “as far as Guyana is concerned,…the border takes first place.”