Jagdeo’s logic and the $10M-a-month lone ranger lobbyist

Jul 06, 2025 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

Kaieteur News – It must take a staggering amount of audacity—or an unshakable belief in the gullibility of the Guyanese people—for Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo to look this nation in the face and suggest, with his usual  certitude, that the Government of Guyana hired a Washington lobbying firm to “represent” the country’s interest in relation to Venezuela, but gave no instructions or clearance regarding the content of politically explosive tweets linking a local presidential hopeful, Azruddin Mohamed, to the Maduro regime.

We are not talking about some mid-level PR consultant in a basement making offhand comments. We are talking about a high-powered lobbying firm, being paid, reportedly, to the tune of G$10 million per month from the public purse. The Vice President would have us believe that this firm, retained to act on behalf of the State, fired off communications to members of the United States Congress making bold political claims about a Guyanese citizen—one who just happens to be emerging as a political rival—without so much as a nod from the government that hired it.

Is this what Jagdeo wants us to swallow? That we are paying a firm with our taxes and it is acting unilaterally, without instruction or supervision? That it is functioning like a lone ranger, issuing unsolicited warnings to American lawmakers and naming names—all without checking with the very government it represents?

The idea is so laughable, so patently absurd, that it should not have survived one round of journalistic inquiry. But herein lies another travesty: the stunning silence of the local press corps. Why haven’t our journalists, with access to email, phones, and WhatsApp, asked the lobbying firm outright: Who instructed you to send those tweets? Did you receive clearance from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs? Were you acting at your own initiative? What evidence, if any, do you have to back up the claims you made about Mohamed?

The government’s default response to scandals has long been to blame everyone but itself, to issue blanket denials with smug impunity, and to count on a compliant or distracted media to do nothing more than publish the press release and move on. But this time, the stakes are dangerously high. The tweets in question were not mere policy points; they were politically damaging attacks, shared with influential U.S. lawmakers, essentially labeling a Guyanese businessman and potential candidate as a stooge for a hostile foreign power. That is no small accusation. And if it turns out those messages were sent under the government’s contract, then Jagdeo and his colleagues must explain why State funds were weaponized to attack political opponents.

If, on the other hand, the firm acted without clearance, then Jagdeo’s admission is just as damning. It means the government has lost control of the very firm that it is paying handsomely to represent our national interests. In any self-respecting democracy, this alone would be grounds for terminating the contract immediately, if not for launching an independent investigation into the chain of communication between the firm and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Lobbyists are not freelancers. They do not fire off messages in a vacuum. Their job is to carry out the precise instructions of their client. Every tweet, letter, or talking point sent on behalf of a sovereign state is by protocol supposed to be cleared in advance. The idea that a firm could send such explosive content without the government’s knowledge is, frankly, insulting to our intelligence.

Jagdeo’s claim collapses under the weight of its own contradictions. If the firm acted independently, why hasn’t it been publicly rebuked? Why hasn’t the Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a formal clarification or retraction to U.S. lawmakers? Why is the government not demanding an apology or, at the very least, an explanation? And if the government did instruct the firm, then Jagdeo is being deliberately deceptive—and using the smokescreen of plausible deniability to avoid the political fallout.

This is not a partisan matter. It is a question of accountability, of how public funds are used, and whether the machinery of the State is being hijacked to malign and destroy political competitors. Guyana’s democracy is still young, still fragile. It cannot afford to be bent into a tool of political warfare by those entrusted to uphold it.

The lobbying firm must now go on record. It must say clearly whether it received any guidance or green light from the government before sending the tweets. It must say who supplied the information that constituted the accusations contained in the tweets.  It must disclose what evidence, if any, it has to support such serious claims. If it refuses, then its credibility, along with that of the government that hired it, should be irreparably damaged.

As for Jagdeo, he should know that every time he opens his mouth to defend the indefensible, he chips away further at the dwindling reservoir of public trust. If the Vice President expects the public to believe that $10 million a month buys you a firm that answers to no one, then he is not just insulting the people—he is gambling with their patience.

(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)

---

• Azruddin Mohamed, Bharrat Jagdeo, Maduro regime, Peeping Tom, Washington lobbying firm

---