Bring it on-President Ali’s seminal defence of Guyana’s road map

Apr 01, 2024 Letters

---

Dear Editor,

President Irfaan Ali ‘more than fared well’ when he upended Stephen Sackur, the host of BBC’s “HardTalk” who presumed he could have ‘schooled’ his ‘chosen interviewee.’ He came equipped with his ‘lines of attack,’ but his defence was lacking, as an eloquent, perspicacious and informed President Ali debunked and silenced him. Thus, I lavish kudos on the Guyana Head of State; he made Guyanese proud, and sent a message that ‘we will not be browbeaten.’ Yes, “Struggling we struggle, and we don’t look for trouble… (BUT)  we ain’t backing down.” In the end, Stephen Sackur was forced to ‘tuck-in his tail between his hind legs’ as he and the world must now embrace that “Guyana will aggressively pursue oil for national development.” After all, it is to this “Dear Land of Guyana, (that we will) we give Our homage, our service, each day that we live … (so that  we will become) More worthy our heritage…”

Editor, I have a few things to say on this interview and related matters.

First, this was, and still is, another seminal moment for the Government PR machinery to pounce on. Why have they not? I read the reports in the dailies, and none of them reflected a proper grasp of the subject matter nor the ‘grounds’ covered by President Ali. All the reporters did was merely to ‘copy and paste verbatim’ what we all saw and heard and for sure is still available for consumption. I am forced to ask whether or not our reporters actual research before they hit the keyboards, are they able to write forcefully and convincingly (?), and also wherein and to whom their loyalty lies. I get the distinct impression, that even the Guyana Chronicle and Guyana Times are lacking in a really thorough pro-PPP/C thrust, and I do not mean that they have to propagandise.

Let me buttress this point a bit more.

In the “Economic Times,” March 30, the actual title was quite searing, It read “Are you in their pockets?’: Guyana’s President Irfan Ali accuses reporter of ‘western hypocrisy’ in climate debate.” That I say is quite hard-hitting. In the actual synopsis, the article highlighted that President Ali challenged Sackur’s authority on the topic, “… suggesting bias due to historical environmental degradation by Western nations (and) defended Guyana’s environmental efforts, highlighting its substantial forest cover that stores 19.5 Gigatons of carbon … He (also) criticized what he perceived as hypocrisy from developed nations and called for them to take responsibility for reducing carbon emissions.”

What was quite fulfilling was the rhetorical onslaught from President Ali. I heard the resounding responses of acquiescence from the likes of Sackur, when he was asked “Are you in the pockets of those who have damaged the environment? Are you in the pockets? Are you and your system in the pockets of those who destroy the environment through the industrial revolution and now lecturing us? Are you in their pockets? Are you paid by them?”

Then in “Business Today,” March 30, the title read “’I’m not finished yet’: Guyana President schools BBC scribe on climate.” Again, the point was lucid and telling, as the article’s impartial writer delineated host Stephen Sackur’s unethical and immoral posture,  “… questioning his authority to lecture on climate change and implying bias towards industrialised nations.”

To the joy of millions across the world, “Ali, countered the journalist’s query that Guyana’s extraction of oil and gas will lead to more than two billion metric tonnes of carbon emissions from its coast, saying, “Do you know that Guyana has a forest … forever …  that is the size of England and Scotland combined? A forest that stores 19.5 Gigatons of carbon, a forest that we have kept alive.”

When the journalist questioned him about whether that would give Guyana the right to extract oil and gas and release emissions, the voluble and ready Ali, said, “Does that give you the right to lecture us on climate change. I am going to lecture you on climate change because we have kept this forest alive. The store’s 19.5 gigatons of carbon that you enjoy, that the world enjoys, that you don’t pay us for, that you don’t value, that you don’t see a value in, that the people of Guyana have kept alive.” “Guess what? We have the lowest deforestation rate in the world. And guess what? Even with our greatest exploration of the oil and gas resource we have now, we will still be net zero. Guyana will still be net zero with all our exploration.”

Enough said, but I need to endorse what the Guyana President said, noting that “… those who had destroyed the environment are now questioning his country. “I am just not finished as yet because this is a hypocrisy that exists in the world. The world, in the last 50 years has lost 65 percent of all its biodiversity. We have kept our biodiversity. Are you valuing it? Are you ready to pay for it? When will the developing world pay for it…”

My second contention is that Guyanese must be apprised of issues of this nature. They are not recondite. All it calls for is some ‘reading up’ and a dose of candour and fealty to national issues and the party for which reporters are working.

For example, Guyanese must be informed that the UK is more responsible for global warming than any other country, if global carbon dioxide emissions are allocated using  per capita calculations. Based on this formula, the UK is rated the world’s top carbon polluter, followed closely by the USA, Canada, Russia and Germany. China, currently the world’s leading emitter, lies in 19th position. And who are the top 3 carbon emitters? They are China, the United States, and the nations that make up the European Union.

Take this for a closure: Total UK territorial emissions were estimated at 417 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO2e) in 2022. Guyana cannot even come close to this.

And as for Stephen Sackur, I remind all that Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention criticized Sackur for suggesting genocide as one of two “realistic options” for the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh during a HARDtalk interview with Ruben Vardanyan. Sackur actually suggested the Armenians of the Republic of Artsakh either accept “a political deal or leave” due to the 2022–2023 blockade of the Republic of Artsakh. According to Lemkin Institute, Sackur had blamed the victims for the blockade: “Artsakh is under blockade not because of the genocidal designs of Azerbaijan, but because of some inexplicable stubbornness on the part of Armenians in Artsakh or their leaders – or both, as he seems to believe”. The Lemkin Institute further criticized Sackur for trying to suggest the word Artsakh (the historical Armenian name for Nagorno-Karabakh) was illegitimate and for ignoring the rights of self-determination.

What a man! And he is confronting President Ali!
Sincerely
Deodat Singh

---

• Development, Guyana, Nagorno-Karabakh, President Irfaan Ali, Stephen Sackur, western hypocrisy

---