Jagdeo has a bagful of excuses

Jan 15, 2024 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

Kaieteur News – Guyana is pussyfooting when it comes to Gaza. President Ali himself has pronounced that the raging conflict in Gaza is the first case of a “televised genocide”.
In the context of this admission by President Ali, it is incomprehensible that Bharrat Jagdeo, his Vice President, can continue to sand dance around the issue of Guyana breaking diplomatic relations with Israel. Guyana has little other choice. It is a contradiction for Guyana to concede that genocide is taking place in Gaza, yet refuse to break or suspend diplomatic relations with a country practicing both apartheid and genocide.
Such a move at isolating Israel diplomatically would be symbolic but also send a powerful message that Guyana does not condone the violation of international law. Initially, Jagdeo’s position was that many of the Middle Eastern states had not broken diplomatic relations with Israel when the conflict first started. In other words, he was saying why should Guyana take a lead when Middle Eastern countries were not isolating Israel. Under the Abraham Accords signed between the Israel, the United States and a number of Arab countries including, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), along with Morroco and Sudan, there was a commitment towards normalization of relations with Israel. These accords have been viewed as an act of betrayal of the Palestinian question.
While Saudi Arabia has agreed to a process of normalization of relations with Israel it still does not recognise that country. This betrayal was essentially arms deal because under the agreement the United States agreed to sell the Saudis billions of dollars’ worth of military hardware.
Saudi Arabia was making progress towards relations with Israel when the conflict with Hamas broke out. Saudi’ position remains today that any normalization of relations with Israel is contingent on the establishment of a Palestinian State, which would mean that Israel must end its occupation of Gaza. Morocco also got a deal. For its agreement to normalize relations with Israel, it secured recognition of by the United States of Morocco sovereignty over Western Sahara. Bahrain got nothing in return.
Sudan formalized relations with Israel. In return for its inking of the declarative section of the Abraham Accords, it got a loan of US$1.2B and the removal of the classification of a state that sponsors terrorism. In 2020, the United Arab Emirates established diplomatic ties with Israel.
It became the third country, apart from Jordan and Egypt, to do so. It is looking to purchase jet fighters from the United States.
It is incomprehensible that Jagdeo should be using these countries as a referent point in deciding on Guyana’s relations with Israel. Guyana has its own foreign policy and should be guided by that policy which emphasizes respect for international law. Burnham and Jagan certainly were not concerned about the countries which retained diplomatic and trade ties with South Africa during the apartheid era. Burnham went ahead and imposed trade and political sanctions on South Africa, measures which were supported by the PPP/C.
When asked recently about the prospects of Guyana breaking diplomatic relations with Israel considering the President’s remarks about “televised genocide” Jagdeo again mustered a lame excuse.
He argued that South Africa, which has taken Israel before the International Court of Justice has not severed diplomatic relations with Israel. He also claimed that South Africa has only recalled its diplomats, and noted that Guyana does not have any diplomatic presence in Israel.
South Africa cannot at this stage sever or suspend diplomatic relations with Israel. It has a case before the ICJ and it would incongruous for South Africa to file an action against a state with which it does not enjoy diplomatic relations.
Jagdeo may not be aware that the South African parliament unanimously passed a resolution in November calling for the suspension of diplomatic relations with Israel, until such time as the siege of Gaza ends.

The ruling African National Congress (ANC) voted in favour of that resolution.
But the South African government is concerned that the suspension of such relations would affect its ability to represent the Palestinian cause, protect its national in Israel and provide consular services to them. Guyana has no such concerns. A Caribbean country, Belize, has already broken diplomatic relations with Israel as has Bolivia. The least Guyana can do is to suspend relations with the genocidal State of Israel.
This would conform to the responsibility to protect. Under international law, where a population is suffering serious harm because of war or other forms of conflict and the country in question is unable to halt or avert this suffering, the principle of non-intervention yields to the international responsibility to protect those who are subject to harm.
In responding to “situations of compelling human need” countries may adopt appropriate measures, including sanctions and international prosecution, and in extreme case military intervention.
The United States and the United Kingdom, the two main handmaidens of imperialism, will not allow for the Security Council to authorize a military intervention to protect the people of Palestine. As such, the least countries, like Guyana, can do is to send a powerful message by suspending or severing diplomatic relations with Israel. But don’t dare mention that to Jagdeo. He has enough excuses to fill a duffel bag.
(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)

---

• Bharrat Jagdeo, Gaza, ICJ, Peeping Tom

---