Coronavirus and confidence in government

Apr 24, 2020 Editorial

It is said that politics is war by another name. Coldblooded political leaders many times view citizens in clinical military terms, specifically collateral damage. And in the war against the coronavirus enemy, some of this has surfaced through the casual, sloppy, and irresponsible ways in which some governments responded.
We start with China, where the government had but withheld timely, vital information. Suspicions and speculations first fuelled now look more solid. Conspiracy theories and the blame game aside, this has led to heightened fears, about what else is known, what is being held back, and how many were really stricken and fatally felled.
In India, the real numbers are unaccounted for, may even be officially unknown. The government has implemented a national lockdown. But how enforceable is that in the teeming slums where there is no space, besides shoulder to shoulder movement all day and daily. Of course, the gritty school of hard knocks breeds its own immunities. What is not being said or shared?
In America, the president is trapped in continuing battles with state governors, with manufactured enemies, with contradiction leading to conflict. This is while people are dying and can’t even be buried. It is a case of ego trumping the urgencies of circumstances, with the pointless coming from the clueless, and the latest storm being over when to reopen the economy. Why is the governance leadership, so powerfully needed now, so lacking?
In contrast, Israel recorded lower impacts because government acted early. It warned citizens in late January against non-essential travel to China. On January 30, it suspended all flights to China, and in mid-February, that travel ban was extended to much of Asia. And from March 9, all incoming passengers were mandatorily quarantined. Why did we not do earlier what had to be done here?
Similarly, the New Zealand and Australian governments imposed early lockdowns; the former did not even have a reported case when it did so. Additionally, good official communications and encouraging citizen cooperation kept virus numbers down.
Nearby, Trinidad took the bull by the horns through initiating a move aimed at a virus recovery plan. That is the priority of Prime Minister Keith Rowley, who will chair the charge, peopled by a small cross-section of his country’s stalwarts. Why are our political stalwarts at cross purposes currently?
From Barbados, the indomitable Mia Mottley, post-surgery found the strength to issue a resounding call for a unified approach. The honourable lady Prime Minister invited her two predecessors in national leadership to release the Finance Ministers who had served during their tenures to work with the holder of that portfolio in her government who, in turn, has been instructed to work closely with anyone answering the call to patriotic duty. Why are we committed to division right now?
Where is the Guyana government in this regard? Where is our esteemed opposition in its thinking and actions? Where are the rest of the contestants, who ran for national office?
Guyanese leaders do not inspire relative to what is being done. The endless traumas of elections and the happenings at GECOM interfere with total focus and channeling of energies aimed at minimizing the presence and effects of the virus. Both government and opposition have signalled that, when a united front is needed, each is content with division. Operating separately denies this country the comprehensive and potent approach required. This is dilutive, self-defeating, not workable.
It is clear that governments, including those in the region, have reacted strongly, seriously, and spiritedly against a viral foe that has no friends and needs no allies. It would have been most gratifying to observe the same occurring in Guyana. Who knows, it even may have offered a note of rare harmonies.
It would have been good to hear and observe the Granger government and the Jagdeo opposition (other political participants, too) step forward for cohesive action. It would have been for the exclusive objective, no matter how temporary, during a mutually agreed-upon and enforced elections truce, to confront the scourge that rents asunder all in its invisible and invincible path.
We recommend learning from other countries that did right, did so early, consistently. We are not collateral damage, not elections fodder.

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News