Investors come first

Apr 07, 2026 Editorial, News

---

(Kaieteur News) – “Sends a terrible signal”, and “a very bad idea”, that would not be well-received by investors all over the world.  In those words, US Ambassador, Nicole Theriot, made the position of the US government clear relative to the 2016 Production Sharing Agreement (PSA) that Guyana signed with ExxonMobil.  A country that seeks to renegotiate a terrible deal, a very bad oil contract, is being influenced into a specific direction.  Above all else, it must consider the interests of investors first, and abandon the interests and aspirations of its own people.  Investors must come first, before the interests of a country’s own citizens.

A PSA was signed with a US oil giant that held all the cards, monopolized all the related oil information, and used those to push Guyana into a contractual relationship that binds it in a state of servitude.  For Guyana to renegotiate that rotten ExxonMobil PSA would send a “terrible signal” to the investors around the world.  In other words, suck it up, live with it, and let it be, for fear of interfering, however marginally, with the profits of the global investment community.  The global investment community, or the profits of US multinationals, of which ExxonMobil is a leader?  We at this publication wonder what tune the US Ambassador would have been singing if it were non-US companies, investors, and their interests involved.  When other countries find that they have concerns with Chinese investment initiatives, and they move to take back control of their assets, what was negotiated before, the US has not had a history of being hotly against such a development.

For example, in Africa, Kenya, Uganda, and Ghana have begun proceedings to cancel contracts with Chinese investors, or have already cancelled them outright.  In Asia, Afghanistan rescinded a US$540M oil contract sealed with a Chinese multinational.  We didn’t hear any sound from the US of the priority of investor rights in those situations.

In this hemisphere, Panama has made moves to end two port contracts granted to a Chinese (Hong Kong-based) company.  Where has the US been with its concerns about the paramountcy of investor interests, considering that the Panama Canal is in Central America, and a highly sensitive strategic gateway for the US?  Once investor interests are given the super footing that Ambassador Theriot places them on, then the US shouldn’t engage in cherry-picking, as it is doing with the ExxonMobil PSA.  Contracts are inviolable, and there is no recourse, regardless of which countries the companies originate.  What goes for one group of companies and their investment partners, that must be the standard that applies universally.

The Africans and Afghans have cancelled their contracts with Chinese companies for a variety of reasons.  Those have covered from poor execution to lack of transparency to poor terms and conditions for the countries that have extensive mineral wealth.  We have been tirelessly sounding the alarm about some of those issues for which there have been little resolution.  Firstly, Guyana is forced to coexist with a PSA that delivers a horribly cheap and insulting 2% royalty.  Secondly, ExxonMobil has been tricky with disclosures about the number of barrels of new oil discovered, and what is the current total of Guyana’s proven reserves.

Thirdly, the US$214M reported in findings from one auditing report have been pushed around like a yoyo for years.  Fourthly, via some high-level collusion, the US$214M in audit findings plunged to US$3M, with ExxonMobil moving quickly and smartly to distance from what reeked of a crooked arrangement, and let responsibility for that fall elsewhere.  Fifthly, the 2016 PSA provides for 75% cost recovery before the half and half profit sharing between Guyana and ExxonMobil is calculated.  Yet, when the call from this paper is for those billions in US dollars of expenses to be disclosed in the interests of transparency, there is stubborn resistance from the company.

Controversy and lack of transparency have undermined the credibility of the ExxonMobil PSA.  The US ambassador mentioned tangible benefits, which are really pittances, when compared to the hauls that the company grabs from Guyana’s wealth.  This lopsided PSA that devastates Guyana’s interests must be renegotiated, and there must be other Guyanese who think similarly, notwithstanding US government ‘signals.’

---

• Editorial, ExxonMobil, investors, Nicole Theriot, Production Sharing Agreement

---