REVISITING THE VENEZUELA/ GUYANA BORDER CONTROVERSY

Apr 07, 2024 Consumer Concerns, Features / Columnists, News, Waterfalls Magazine

---

By PAT  DIAL

Waterfall Magazine – Over the last few years, this column has carried articles on the Venezuela/Guyana border controversy and on this occasion, we again revisit it in view of the outrageously false, contradictory and non-factual narrative which the Venezuelans continue to retail and the lawless action of the Venezuelan Parliament and President Nicholas Maduro of passing laws “annexing” approximately 70% of Guyana’s territory and naming it the province of Essequiba Guyana and even appointing a governor!  This comedy of insanity would normally have been derisively ignored but it has to be taken with seriousness since   Venezuela has a huge modern military which is controlled by persons who may recklessly invade Guyana’s territory since they mentally and psychologically live in the times of Napoleon and Bolivar when stronger countries could invade and annex weaker countries or parts of them with impunity. Toleration of such aggression has long passed away in International Law and Relations and this has led to Venezuela’s isolation and almost universal support for Guyana. Another reason why Venezuela is not treated with respect is its duplicity and failure to honour its agreements.  The Argyle Declaration in which Guyana and Venezuela solemnly pledged themselves from any threatening and aggressive action towards each other and the Barbados Agreement where President Maduro undertook to allow the Venezuelan Opposition freedom to contest the forthcoming national elections in exchange for the lifting of American sanctions are two examples of Venezuela failing to honour its promises.

What was the genesis of the Controversy?    By the Treaty of Paris of 1815 which ended the Napoleonic Wars, Britain was awarded the Dutch colonies of Essequibo, Demerara and Berbice which were united as the colony of British Guiana in 1831. In the 1840’s, the British employed a German cartographer Robert Schomburgk to demarcate the boundaries of the colony which he successfully completed.  Venezuela claimed that Schomburgk had taken part of their territory.  The British, who at the time ran a world empire, could not turn their attention to the comparatively unimportant matter of Venezuela’s claim.

The United States was at that time resuscitating the Monroe Doctrine and Venezuela asked them to press their claim with Britain for arbitration of the Guyana /Venezuela border.  President Cleveland even threatened war and Britain reluctantly became a party to the Treaty of Washington with Venezuela in 1897 wherein Venezuela insisted that the Treaty be an arbitral one.  The Treaty was signed by Jose Andrade and ratified by the Venezuelan Congress with Joaquin Crespo, its President describing it as “an effort of intelligence and goodwill worthy of praise and thanks from us”.  Venezuela appointed the Chief Justice of the United States as its arbitrator and Britain appointed a Judge of equal status on its side with the chairman being a famed Russian international jurist.  The Arbitral Award was to be “a full, perfect and final settlement of all questions referred to the Arbitrators”.   In their work, the Arbitrators scoured the Archives of Spain, Holland and Britain and did as thorough an investigation as possible.  The Arbitral Award was made in 1899 and Venezuela and all parties fully accepted it with Venezuela being particularly jubilant.

Venezuela insisted that the demarcation of the boundary be done with immediacy and in 1900 a Joint Boundary Commission was established and British and Venezuelan surveyors went to work in demarcating the boundary which they completed in 1905 with Venezuela fully accepting it.  And Venezuela did so until 1962 when Guyana was about to be granted its Independence.  Britain was anxious to withdraw from the colony and in 1966, the Geneva Agreement was arrived at wherein the Controversy was to be settled in 4 years thus allowing Britain to grant Guyana its Independence unhindered. Both parties however chose to use the Good Offices process of dialogue under United Nations auspices and this went on for nearly three decades without coming to a solution. Both parties withdrew from the Good Offices process and the matter then reverted to the Secretary General who was then obligated to recommend a solution.  He recommended that the matter be referred to the International Court of Justice.  Guyana duly went to the ICJ but Venezuela said the Court did not have jurisdiction in the matter.  The ICJ and everyone else rejected the Venezuelan position and the ICJ is now deliberating as to the validity of the 1899 Arbitral Award.

It should be mentioned that Venezuela has proffered two points to try to negate the Arbitral Award: The first is that Guyana was part of the Venezuelan Captain Generalcy under the Spanish Empire, Guyana was never part of the Captain Generalcy and there was never any Spanish colonial presence in “the Wild Coast of Guyana”.  This Venezuelan allegation was rejected by the 1899 Arbitrators.  The second point was a posthumous letter by Mallet-Prevost, one of the junior lawyers at the Arbitration who claimed that the British and Russian judges colluded to rig the Arbitration in favour of Britain.  No evidence or proof of Mallet-Prevost’s allegation was ever forthcoming from the Venezuelans.

The question is asked as to why Venezuela has been  making  this fraudulent and dangerous claim on Guyana’s territory at this time and the answer which is universally given is that Venezuela is actuated by greed for Guyana’s new found Oil wealth which it feels it could seize with impunity since Guyana is a small, poor state with a very small military  and secondly, the Venezuelan national elections will occur within a year and President Maduro who is contesting for another term of office,  is bound to lose and in his desperation, he is threatening war on Guyana to seize its territory so as to stimulate nationalism and increase his electoral support.

Venezuela recognises that it has no case in fact, logic and Law and so it is reverting to threats of military violence to intimidate Guyana and seize its territory but the Venezuelan aggression has been adequately met by Guyana and its allies, in particular the United States.  The policy of the United States, Guyana, CARICOM, Brazil   and the other American states in maintaining the Caribbean as a Zone of Peace has acted as a deterrence to Venezuelan military adventurism but the danger has not passed away and still requires constant vigilance.

---

• Border, CONSUMER CONCERNS, controversy, Guyana, Venezuela

---