Guyana’s IT & AI Contracts Should be given to Proven Providers instead of Middle Eastern Companies

Dear Editor,

It is curious why Guyana is seeking I-Tech and AI services from companies in UAE, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia instead of India or Singapore, America, UK companies with proven record. UAE, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia are not known for I-Tech expertise or AI. India and Singapore are giants in the fields of I-Tech and AI; UAE, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia have used services of Indian companies, and many Indian software engineers have been hired by companies in these three countries for ITech and AI services. American, Canadian, and other Western companies have sought the services of I-Tech companies and skilled personnel from India. So why is Guyana seeking services from the Middle East which in turn will simply sub-contract the work to Indian companies? Something is fishy!

The government’s recent inclination to award major IT and digital infrastructure contracts to companies based in Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and UAE raises serious questions about strategic judgment, transparency, accountability, and long-term national interest. Why not a Singaporean or American company?

The three Middle East countries have been rapidly expanding digital capabilities. However, Guyana’s pivot toward Middle East deserves public scrutiny. The government’s decision appears less grounded in technical merit than in favoring friends or corrupt partners in those countries. Recall the contract given to a Middle Eastern company to make ID cards to Guyanese. Middle Eastern IT firms often come with higher cost structures, opaque procurement pathways, and limited track records in their own countries and overseas in public-sector digital transformation. By contrast, Singapore, American, and Indian firms have built entire national digital ID systems, e-governance platforms, cybersecurity frameworks, and cloud infrastructure for many countries.

Guyana must consider capacity and digital security. Can companies in Middle East have the capacity to deliver when they depend on outside expertise? Entrusting sensitive national data and critical government systems to companies with no established footprint increase the risk of compromises in security and not to mention higher costs.

So why these three countries? Are there Guyanese owned companies or favored corrupt partners in them that will get the contracts and then sub-contract to Indian companies. This had happened with the construction of hospitals and in power generation. Guyana should abandon the plan to contract companies in Middle East that may burden taxpayers, limit local participation, and compromise the country’s digital future.

The plan to use Middle Eastern companies for I-Tech services raises a lot of questions and must be revisited.  Contracting I-Tech services must be rational and transparent and obtained from countries with proven track records.  Guyana’s digital transformation must be guided by national interest and affordability and obtained from companies with proven track record; such capacity and track records are limited in the Middle East.

Respectfully,

Nathan Barton