Posted February 23rd. 2005 - Special Feature by David Hinds

Guyana needs a political solution before the 2006 elections

Stabroek News editorial on the scheduled 2006 elections (Tuesday February 13) was on the ball up to the last couple of paragraphs. After correctly analyzing the problem surrounding elections as essentially racial in nature, the editorial went on to advance solutions that were devoid of racial considerations. The suggestion that the PNC mount a campaign on issues so as to put itself in a position to push for constitutional reform after the election is off the mark. No one doubts that the PNC needs to clean up its act. But what about its supporters who feel a sense of alienation from the affairs of government and state? Must they wait until after another election for this to be addressed?

One-race rule in Guyana, even in a formal democratic environment, is a recipe for disaster. It transforms the opposition race into unreasonable losers and the governing race into unfeeling winners. Have we not had enough of slow fire and more fire since 1997? Have we not had enough of murderous freedom fighters and phantom squads? Why are we asking for more after 2006?

Stabroek News' editorial ignores real people. Politics is not only about structures, rules and organization, but more importantly it is about people's lives and livelihoods. African Guyanese are seething with frustration and despair. They feel that all doors are closed to them in both the economic or political sphere. Of course part of this is racial perception, but part of it is rooted in recent history.

The answer is not armed rebellion, but it is also not racial subjugation politically, economically or otherwise. What Guyana needs now, not after a 2006 election, is a clear political settlement that guarantees the security of all races and classes. The PPP, PNC and other people's representatives need to promptly negotiate such a settlement. I stress negotiate not dialogue. If the PPP does not want to negotiate with the opposition then the opposition must negotiate with the world. The PPP must no longer be cuddled. For a party of fifty-five years it has learned very little from history and this ignorance has caused Guyana much grief. If the PNC carried out the blatant acts between 1964 and 1992 then the PPP helped to write the script.

As is the case in 2005 so it was in the early 1960s. Sydney King and the African Society put power sharing on the table for Racial Equality (ASRE) in 1961, but Dr. Jagan and Mr. Burnham roundly rejected it. When Dr Jagan came around to it in 1962, it was too late; Burnham and the Americans had already made up their minds. This refusal by the sitting government to wait until the eleventh hour to reach for a political solution made it easier for the race riots of the 1960s and the subsequent twenty-eight years of authoritarian rule. The PPP is today making the same mistake. I am sure I speak for many Guyanese when I say I do not want to witness racial violence and I don't want to have to live under a dictatorship again. At the risk of being charged with inciting violence, I make bold to say that another election with the same rules and under the same conditions as those in 1997 and 2001 is an invitation to trouble.

PNC: A commendable stand

Profound changes for the better are a rarity in Guyanaese politics. But every now and again one section of the political divide does something that gives hope for the future. The PNC's recent decision not to attend the election meeting at the office of the President falls into this category. The party's reasoning that the other parliamentary parties should have been invited is an example of political fairness and broadmindedness. But more than that, the PNC's action isolates the PPP as the party that is most resistant to democratic deepening in the country.

It has become clear that the PPP is intent on continuing party paramountcy. In the process, it has skillfully manipulated the PNC's reluctance to definitively break with that ideology. It is for this reason that the PNC's boycott of the meeting is significant; it does not follow the script. Does this signify the introduction of a new kind of politics by the PNC? Time will tell. But for now, Mr. Corbin and his party must be commended for taking a worthy stand on the side of democratic governance.

David Hinds lectures in Caribbean and Africana Studies at Arizona State University in the USA. He is also a political and social commentator who has written extensively on Guyana and Caribbean politics. More of his writings can be found on his GuyanaCaribbeanPolitics.com website.