The Government of Guyana must prioritise ongoing discussions on territorial integrity and defense, involving both the Opposition and wider society, said Dr. Gary Best, retired Chief of Staff of the Guyana Defence Force (GDF) and an Attorney-at-Law. He emphasised that in the context of the Government of Guyana, the Opposition is a key component of governance, while civil society’s involvement is constitutionally mandated.
Tensions between Guyana and Venezuela escalated dramatically on 1 March 2025, following a brazen incursion by a Venezuelan naval vessel into Guyana’s territorial waters. The vessel, identified as a Venezuelan Coast Guard ship, illegally entered Guyana’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in the early morning hours. The ship maneuvered dangerously close to ExxonMobil’s Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO) units in the Stabroek Block, a vital area for Guyana’s booming oil industry.
The Venezuelan crew falsely claimed the area as “disputed international waters” over radio communications, before continuing further into Guyana’s maritime territory.
Dr. Best has previously called for a review of Venezuela’s increasing aggression, which he argues has shifted from soft power to hard power. He cited last month’s attack on GDF soldiers deployed along the western border by armed Venezuelan forces. He stressed that any analysis of Venezuela’s actions against Guyana must be understood within the context of its illegal territorial claims over two-thirds of Guyana’s sovereign territory, including its adjacent territorial sea and EEZ.
Best reminded Guyanese that Venezuela’s illegal occupation of Guyana’s portion of Ankoko Island, situated in the Cuyuni River, dates back to the eve of Guyana’s independence. This occupation is part of a broader pattern of aggressive actions by Venezuela, despite the 1899 Arbitration Award, which definitively established the boundary between the two nations. For 59 years, Venezuela has continued to illegally occupy part of Guyana’s territory.
Best further contended that this is a calculated strategy that has spanned multiple Venezuelan governments, regardless of their political ideologies—be it capitalist, Bolivarianist, or socialist. Venezuela’s ultimate goal, he argued, is to seize two-thirds of Guyana’s territory through both soft and hard power, and this escalation should be cause for concern for even Venezuela’s leadership in Miraflores.
Best disagreed with the view that the attack on GDF soldiers was carried out by criminal gangs or “syndicatos.” He argued that accepting this narrative would ignore the evident facts of Venezuela’s hegemonic behavior and fall into the trap of Venezuela’s façade of “good neighbor” conduct. He emphasized that such an analysis would be akin to falling for a Venezuelan ruse, similar to the Argyle Declaration.
According to the retired Rear Admiral, the attack on Guyana’s soldiers represents a clear Venezuelan effort to capture Guyana’s territory through hard power, following the failure of its soft power tactics. “This is an attack on the nation-state of Guyana,” he asserted.
Venezuela’s Use of Soft Power and Its Failure
To frame this recent attack as a localised criminal act would ignore Venezuela’s longstanding hegemonic ambitions and its ongoing efforts to present itself as a benign neighbor, a pattern seen in past events such as the Argyle Declaration. There is no question that Venezuela is carefully strategising its next moves.
Best pointed out that Venezuela’s use of soft power has consistently failed. Attempts to bilaterally negotiate a new border agreement, the repeated violation of international law, refusal to sign Article 15 of the Law of the Sea Convention (which addresses the delimitation of territorial seas between neighboring states), and the failure to persuade Guyana to sign the 1979 Search and Rescue Convention (SAR) have all fallen short. Now, Venezuela is shifting towards hard power.
Hard Power Action
Dr. Best noted that Venezuela’s shift to hard power began with the persuasion, backed by some Petrocaribe states, for Guyana’s President to engage in discussions with President Nicolás Maduro after Guyana secured key provisional measures from the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The signing of the Argyle Declaration, a document with minimal international standing, was seen as an attempt by Venezuela to initiate bilateral talks with Guyana, which Venezuela would later accuse of bad faith.
This was followed by Venezuela’s referendum on the sovereignty of Guyana’s Essequibo region, the appointment of a governor and military commander for the region, and a massive military buildup along the Guyana-Venezuela border. These actions contradict both the Argyle Declaration and the provisional measures issued by the ICJ.
Best further highlighted the unreported entries of Venezuelan naval vessels into Guyana’s offshore oil concessions, the increased military deployments along the border, and the construction of a bridge to Ankoko Island. These actions, he said, point to a nation that cannot be trusted.
Critical Questions and the Need for a Bi-Partisan Inquiry
In light of the ongoing Venezuelan military buildup, Best posed a series of important questions about the recent attack on GDF soldiers:
- “Given Venezuela’s large military presence along the border, how could Venezuelan criminals operate in the Cuyuni River without detection?”
- “How was it possible for these criminals to fire on GDF soldiers from the Venezuelan side of the Cuyuni River, under the watch of Venezuelan forces?”
- “Why would these criminals engage GDF soldiers, knowing the GDF has superior power to neutralize them?”
- “Who took the pictures of the GDF soldiers?”
- “Who took the pictures of the dead ‘so-called’ criminals?”
- “Why did the media, the Guyana Police Force, and the Government so quickly label these individuals as ‘syndicatos/criminals’?”
These are questions that should be addressed through a bi-partisan inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the attack on GDF soldiers protecting Guyana’s western border, Best argued. Absent clear answers, the sequence of events points not to a criminal attack, but rather to a calculated Venezuelan move to further test Guyana, possibly forcing territorial concessions or outright aggression.
International Implications of the Attack
Best contended that the attack on the GDF soldiers should be classified as an international incident, a violation of international law that demands positive state responsibility. While Guyana’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs responded swiftly by summoning the Venezuelan Ambassador and demanding a formal condemnation of the attack, Venezuela’s accusatory response—blaming Guyana for the incident—only strengthens the argument that this was not a criminal act, but another Venezuelan attack on Guyana’s territorial integrity.
Dr. Best asserted that any change to Guyana’s borders must be determined through a national referendum. He called for greater collaboration between the Government of Guyana, the Opposition, and civil society on this critical issue, as required by the Guyanese constitution.
While acknowledging the GDF’s relative small size, Best emphasized the importance of ensuring that it is well-equipped to fulfill its mission of identifying aggression and delaying the enemy, while securing international support for Guyana’s territorial defense. He praised the GDF soldiers for their bravery in repelling the attack, but stressed the need for continued investment in their capabilities.
“A nation that commits all its resources—human and material—against an enemy positions itself to win,” Best concluded.
