Guyana/Venezuela 1899 Arbitral Award

OCTOBER 3, 2016 marked 177 years since an international tribunal unanimously settled the border dispute when it awarded Essequibo to Great Britain, thereby staving off what could have been a war with Venezuela, Great Britain and the United States.

An arbitral award is final and binding on all sides. This is the position Guyana respects, and shall not deviate from.

In 1962, Venezuela made known to the United States its rejection of the Award on a claim that its representative on the 1899 panel, Severo Mallet-Prevost, held a different view, which he purportedly requested be revealed after his death, and, more importantly, after the fact (1899); requiring Guyana to go through the paces of resolving what has become a “controversy.”

A threat to annex Essequibo, two-thirds of our land and its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), is a threat to who we are as a people, our sovereignty, natural resources, and collective development. Famed son of the soil Dave Martins, and the Tradewinds, in the song “Not A blade O’ Grass”, succinctly and effectively reminds us of what is at stake and what we cannot afford to give up. Its lyrics not only make for easy reference to a situation every citizen should be intimately aware of, but its rhythm is also catchy. This song is deserving of being repeatedly played on the airwaves — television and radio — as a matter of public service.

Where it is being argued that music is proving an effective tool in education, the Ministry of Education may also need to look at incorporating “Not a blade…” in the curriculum as a mean of ensuring that students at every level understand the rudimentary that led to the Award, what it means for us, and the importance of holding steadfast. It is not an unfair statement to say that today’s children are not as intimately au fait with the controversy as the children of the 1960-1980s, and this anomaly ought to be addressed.

Guyana has lost some ground in the information war in the presence of Venezuela’s unrelenting position in socialising its citizens to believe the wrongful claim that Essequibo is theirs. It is most welcome that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs last week published its booklet, “The New Conquistadors, The Venezuelan challenge to Guyana’s Sovereignty”.
Such augurs well for knowledge- sharing; and its mass distribution, including that of hard copy and an electronic format, is look forward to.

It should be said that in this multi-media era, all channels of information-communication must be targeted to ensure maximum reach. Guyanese and the world must be made aware that Essequibo is ours to travel and reside in peacefully, and to sustainably exploit the resources therein to our collective development.

An examination, through historical lens, of Venezuela’s move to the UN in 1962 recognises it was the period of the Cold War and Guyana was agitating for political independence from Britain. Although, in hindsight, it was a prudent move to have a diplomatic approach to resolve the contention through the Good Officer channel, this has prolonged throughout the years, with seeming no end in sight. When the APNU+AFC Administration assumed office in May 2015, it communicated interest to have the controversy settled through the International Council of Jurists (ICJ), the world’s highest court.

We are being advised by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon that he would engage Venezuela further on the matter. Subsequently, Venezuela President Nicolás Maduro said that country prefers retaining the Good Officer route. Maduro’s stance can only be seen for what it has always been — a country making a case without merit, but revelling in the attention such attracts and hindering the desire of Guyanese to fully exploit the resources in the region in furtherance of our development.

Venezuela is a relatively bigger society than Guyana, is of greater military might, and is one of the world’s largest exporters of oil. As that country continues to hinder our progress, its Government continues to violate our space as though daring a confrontation.

The ‘settling’ of an issue already settled must be pursued through a multi-pronged approach, including encouraging friendly nations to join us in calling on Venezuela to respect the Award, and the UN pursuing the path of the ICJ. We remain confident that the ICJ would uphold the Award, and in the meantime ‘We ent giving up nothing that belongs to we.’