Will territorial crisis end in 2018?

Jan 05, 2018 Editorial

In his New Year’s address to the nation, President David Granger said that the United Nations (UN) Secretary General was expected to announce the UN decision on the Venezuela border controversy by the end of 2017. It did not happen.
At the time of writing, there is not a word from the UN on whether the issue has been resolved or its definite course of action if it is not. Even though Brazil and several other countries have supported Guyana’s position, it is not fair for the nation to be under constant threats from Venezuela, especially since the recent discovery of oil in the disputed area. It seems that the UN has once again dropped the ball on the issue.
The decision to use the Good Offices Process in 2017 to settle the border dispute was decided in 2016, by the former UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon shortly before he left office. It was agreed that if the process fails to produce results, the matter would be dealt with by the International Court of Justice (ICJ). António Guterres, who succeeded Ban Ki-Moon as the Secretary General of the UN in 2017 had indicated that he would accept his predecessor’s decision in the matter.
Herein lies the problem. For years, Guyana has been publicly advocating for the controversy to be settled by the ICJ. Upon taking office, the APNU+AFC government adopted the same position as its predecessor. Venezuela, on the other hand has rejected the ICJ. It has argued for the matter to be dealt with by Good Offices. President Maduro of Venezuela has recognised that his claim of the 1899 Accord which was signed in Paris was null and void will not hold up in a court of law, not even in the ICJ.
Despite Venezuela’s insistence for the matter to be addressed by the Good Offices, it is known that over the years the process never produced any positive results. Successive governments in Venezuela are fully aware that their rationale for using the Good Offices is to prolong their constant threats and intimidation of Guyana.
As far as Guyana is concerned, the decision established by the 1899 Paris Arbitral Tribunal was final. Venezuela disagreed but in 1962 it challenged the validity of the Tribunal, despite warnings from Britain and the United States that the Tribunal decision was valid.
Concerned over Venezuela’s new claim and possible aggression, Britain in 1966, signed the Geneva Agreement with Venezuela for a peaceful resolution to the problem. Prime Minister Forbes Burnham also signed the same document, thus making Guyana a full party to the Agreement prior to the country’s attainment of independence.
However, Venezuela defied the terms of the agreement and in October 1966, just five months after Guyana obtained its independence from Britain, seized half of the country’s Ankoko Island in the Cuyuni River.
We are now in 2018, and how much longer will the controversy continue, is anyone’s guess. No one knows for sure when and how it will end. The truth is that most border issues have ended in wars.
Guyana cannot harbour the thought of a military confrontation with Venezuela. It does not have the capability. What we know is that the Granger Administration would like to see an end to the controversy this year.
But it all depends on Venezuela, which from all indications will not abide by any decision made by the ICJ, which has no enforcement power.
With the disaster in Venezuela ¬entering a new and more dangerous phase as the economic noose tightens on its people, it seems that settling the territorial issue will be the last thing on President Maduro’s mind.

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News