THIS past week, the APNU+AFC announced that it was prepared to enter into dialogue with any of the opposition political parties. This announcement , described as an “olive branch” by this publication, came against the background of concerns that the longer the impasse arising out of the March 2 elections continues, the more the stability of the country is potentially compromised. As the APNU+AFC statement sates: “The APNU+AFC Coalition, in the national interest, and with a view to maintaining stability and peace, remains open to dialogue with other political parties and stakeholders on the way forward for our country. The APNU+AFC Coalition is prepared to act responsibly to bring a resolution to the ongoing political situation.”
Without even seeking clarification on exactly what aspect of the impasse the coalition wishes to dialogue on, the PPP and the other parties promptly rejected the offer. The PPP repeated its well-known bottom line—it will not talk to the coalition until the PPP is declared the winner. A similar sentiment was echoed by the smaller parties. This is indeed unfortunate that seemingly responsible parties are prepared to sacrifice the country’s stability for their narrow pursuit of partisan power. It is really a sad day that our country has reached this plateau of naked political selfishness.
We do not use those words lightly. But we feel they are warranted. Its now almost five months since the elections and all parties are entitled to brandish their narratives. However, there comes a time when the needs of the country must supersede the partisan impulses. That time is now. When the dust settles, it is the Guyanese people who will have to do the rebuilding of trust.
Be that as it may, this publication congratulates the coalition for its political maturity. It is common knowledge that there have always been communal undertones and overtones in our elections. This point was recently brought to our attention by elder Eusi Kwayana and is worth quoting here: “ I only wish to warn, as I have done since the 1960s, that what in many Caribbean countries is simply an election among citizens, in Guyana includes other complexities. Here in Guyana, in the tissues of every general election are the fibres of communal struggle resulting from conscious designs of the colonial occupation.”
It is plain for all to see that the country is on the edge. On both sides of the political divide, the popular masses have remained committed to their respective parties. That is their right. But in the process they are also expressing their fears. While the matter is wrapped up in the courts, the issue of the fears in the wider society is the responsibility of the political leaders. When in 1997 there was a similar post-election impasse, in the face of political instability the two parties quickly went to the table to negotiate a settlement of the issue. The outcome was the Herdmanston Accord, which ultimately led to an end to street protests. It also led to an audit of the elections and electoral reform.
This is the spirit that we feel is absolutely necessary in the current circumstances. The PPP’s refusal to come to the table may be influenced by its perceived support from the external forces. If this is true, then it is quite unfortunate. There is much at stake here—the very survival of the country. History will not be kind to those who by their acts of omission allow the situation to further deteriorate. The PPP still has a chance to redeem itself and do what is right for the country. There is a golden opportunity to live up to our aspiration of One People, One Nation, One Destiny.
Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_7-26-2020