By Moses V. Nagamootoo
On Friday, December 18, 2020 the International Court of Justice (ICJ) gave the green-light to hear our country’s application on the validity of the Treaty that settled the border between Guyana and Venezuela.
President Irfaan Ali spoke for all of us when he hailed the ICJ’s binding ruling on the jurisdictional point as a huge historic victory!
But he dropped short of the magnanimity that the occasion demanded by withholding full credit to the Granger Coalition administration for its unrelenting prosecution of the Guyana case.
NO COMPROMISE
Ali struck the right chord when he noted that the ICJ ruling showed the importance of all partners working together for Guyana’s development and her future, and that there should be no compromise on our sovereignty.
That contrasted sharply with the bitchiness by the PPP, then in opposition, towards use of monies from the US$20 million “signature bonus” from ExxonMobil to pay lawyers and other experts to fight for Guyana.
As for “no compromise” there is still no explanation by the PPP why its leader Jagdeo, was considering a “slight concession” of Guyana’s territory to Venezuela. (Inewsguyana – October 23, 2015).
Reporter Jomo Paul quoted him as saying, under his tenure he would have considered the option of surrendering parts of Guyana’s riverain territory to Venezuela. He said: “You could probably on the maritime area, give Venezuela a channel out to the sea”.
SALAMI EFFECT
I recall the reaction by Stabroek News (October 24, 2015), that Jagdeo’s offer could have, what former President Forbes Burnham had described as the “salami effect”; that is, once you gave Venezuela one slice, it would come back for more.
To project a semblance of national solidarity against the spurious claim by Venezuela, then Foreign Affairs Minister, Carl Greenidge, strongly and repeatedly advised his Coalition colleagues not to repeat what Jagdeo had said, and to keep his embarrassing remarks under the lid.
In his address at the United Nations on September 20, 2016, then President David Granger underlined the fatal effect of Venezuela’s false claim which could deny Guyana not only access to the sea but our entitlement to fishing, and oil and gas potentials.
At that time, too, President Granger had retorted: “We cannot sell out. We cannot give away. We cannot offer the adversary any corridor or any passage.”
In my column on September 24, 2017 under the caption “Country First”, I had noted that “irrespective of ideological leanings, the world respects adherence to international law, and would eventually agree that only a juridical settlement to Venezuela’s contention, before the International Court of Justice, is the clear path to peace and justice”.
In 1899, some 121 years ago, a five-member Arbitration Tribunal had fixed the boundary-line between the then Colony of British Guiana and the United States of Venezuela. The Tribunal Award was binding under an international Treaty “as a full, perfect and final settlement of all the questions referred to the Arbitrators”.
FINAL SETTLEMENT
However, during an earlier episode of imperialist intervention in Guyana’s internal affairs, Venezuela back-peddled on the Treaty. In 1962, for the first time, it falsely claimed that the Award was void, and without effect.
As we approach a full hearing, we need a national accord. Whatever our political differences, we must not split hairs over the sanctity of our borders. For all of us, Country comes first. Without our Guyana, we are nothing. Our collective, patriotic heart must therefore beat and live for our beloved Guyana.
In the meanwhile, a Merry Christmas to all!
