By David Hinds
It is a mere four weeks since the PPP/C was installed in office. I say installed deliberately because I believed then and believe now that external forces had more than a passing interest in the outcome of the elections. When historians dispassionately sift through the rubble, Guyanese will be quite surprised at what transpired in that regard. This observation is important as those developments to which I allude have direct and indirect impact on the tenor and shape of the actions of the new government over the last four weeks.
There are consequences of regime change, not only for the beneficiaries, but also for the victims. The government that emerges becomes a puppet regime, it bows meekly to every wish of the external godfather and his clients. In that regard sovereignty is sacrificed for the power to dictate local power. It is against that backdrop that one must view the swift foreign policy changes by the new government and the concomitant reign of terror against perceived supporters of the Coalition and with the politicization of State institutions.
The wholesale dismissal of public servants in key areas of government and the persecution of PNC members and GECOM officials are well orchestrated. The gross violations of human rights and total disregard for officers and norms of the judiciary are not accidental. So too are the open political tampering with the leaderships of police force and the army. In four weeks, Guyana has moved from a stable democratic State to a volatile police State in which fear and anger abound. It is a dangerous situation.
What is even more dangerous is that the targets and victims of this political and human rights assault are of one ethnic group. That the PPP feels comfortable pouring gasoline on the ethnic flames in our society tells us something about that party’s perception of its own mandate and the place in the society of the supporters of its political opponents. I feel it is not too early to sound the alarm that we may be headed in the direction of communal conflict.
I am in no doubt that the government and the PPP are acting against the backdrop of what they believe to be the cover of the countries and the organizations whose stances were pivotal to the outcome of the elections. In other words, one of the consequences of regime change is that the government assumes the right to run roughshod over the State and society without fear of reprisals from external and local actors.
I firmly believe that the lack of militancy by the opposition is also a consequence of regime change. They appear to be constrained by fear of further sanctions by the external forces. Many of their supporters are frustrated by what they view as a failure to defend the constituency. This not only emboldens the government, but it leads to fallout among the leadership. And critically, it leads to fear and alienation among the base.
This situation cannot be allowed continue. If the leadership of the Coalition does not come to the rescue of those targeted, at some point the people would take matters into their own hands. History has shown that such developments could have both positive and negative outcomes. Since the PPP will stop at nothing, the ball is in the Coalition’s court.
