Skip to main content

FM
Former Member
PYO slams Hardt’s position on LEAD project
PYO slams Hardt’s position on LEAD project

PYO slams Hardt’s position on LEAD project

UNITED States Ambassador to Guyana, Brent Hardt, remains in the spotlight over his position on the implementation of the $300M USAID-funded Leadership and Democracy (LEAD) project.

alt

US Ambassador Brent Hardt

The Progressive Youth Organisation (PYO) is the most recent to condemn his position.
In a statement issued on Friday, the youth group said: “The PYO views the position taken by the ambassador as very offensive and directly ignores the principles of sovereignty and national self-determination that is publicly espoused by the American State Department.
“It is a violation of all aspects of independence and non-interference when the chief diplomat of a foreign nation chooses to ignore the Executive power of their host nation. It is a direct challenge to Guyana’s autonomy and seeks to impose the will of a single person over that of an entire people.”
The PYO called on the Ambassador to recognise that he has overstepped his ambit by pursuing a project that has not met the approval of his host country.
The statement said: “The ambassador must know that he has challenged, in a very public manner, the sovereignty of a nation.
“The ambassador must know that by ignoring diplomatic norms and decency he has managed to sour, what have been friendly relations between the USA and Guyana.”
According to the group, while it recognises that the American organisation,the International Republican Institute (IRI), has been tasked with the implementation of the LEAD project, it also recognises that the IRI has a reputation of interference in the internal politics of a country.
“They have been implicated in the overthrow of Aristide in Haiti, have supported the 2009 coup in Honduras, and have created political coalitions in Poland, etc. These activities have been in direct violation of the principles of self-governance and self-determination. The use of such an organisation and the public stance of the ambassador can only lead to the conclusion that there is an active attempt by the ambassador to usurp democracy in Guyana,” the group said.
The PYO called for national condemnation of the public stance of the US Ambassador.
“We note that while the USA has had over 200 years in shaping its democracy and did not suffer interference of foreign powers, likewise Guyana too has a right to pursue its democratic development,” the PYO stressed.

Replies sorted oldest to newest

 

The PPP is a minority government and does not get to decide whether the nation gets help on a democracy project. That is why the PPP are in office. They depended on US help directly and indirectly. Guyana is divided. There is hardly a nation that needs help more in the area of democracy. But then the PPP as usual alone knows.\

 

BTW The US helped put Aristides in office. They hid him here in the us, defended and financed his return to Haiti...to what...surely not to murder  his people as he did. If anyone helped to remove his murderous behind from office and it was them; they had an obligation since they helped put him there. In a parallel way, the US owes us better government than the one they helped put in office...the PPP!

 

 

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Danyael:

 

The PPP is a minority government and does not get to decide whether the nation gets help on a democracy project. That is why the PPP are in office. They depended on US help directly and indirectly. Guyana is divided. There is hardly a nation that needs help more in the area of democracy. But then the PPP as usual alone knows.\

 

BTW The US helped put Aristides in office. They hid him here in the us, defended and financed his return to Haiti...to what...surely not to murder  his people as he did. If anyone helped to remove his murderous behind from office and it was then they had an obligation since they helped put him there. In a parallel way, the US owes us better government than the one they helped put in office...the PPP!

 

 

Well said!

Mitwah

The official website of the People's Progressive Party/Civic has a document titled "History of PPP."

Here is the entry for the year 1990:

"...the PNC called elections for 1990 with a flawed electoral list, but after intense opposition from the PPP and other opposition parties, and a visit from former US President Jimmy Carter, the elections were postponed and eventually a new Elections Commission was appointed with a new Chairman and a new list of voters was prepared. President Hoyte was forced to concede to a number of electoral reforms demanded by the PPP and other opposition parties. October 5, 1992 Elections were eventually held and the PPP/Civic emerged victorious with 54 percent of the votes. These elections were monitored by an international team of observers, headed by former US President Jimmy Carter. The 1992 elections were

declared by the observer team as free and fair. Dr. Jagan became President and Sam Hinds was named Prime Minister."
 
In1990 the PYO didn't issue a statement claiming that President Carter's actions ignored "the principles of sovereignty and national self-determination that is publicly espoused by the American State Department" or that they were "a violation of all aspects of independence and non-interference."
 
 
 
 
FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:

The official website of the People's Progressive Party/Civic has a document titled "History of PPP."

Here is the entry for the year 1990:

"...the PNC called elections for 1990 with a flawed electoral list, but after intense opposition from the PPP and other opposition parties, and a visit from former US President Jimmy Carter, the elections were postponed and eventually a new Elections Commission was appointed with a new Chairman and a new list of voters was prepared. President Hoyte was forced to concede to a number of electoral reforms demanded by the PPP and other opposition parties. October 5, 1992 Elections were eventually held and the PPP/Civic emerged victorious with 54 percent of the votes. These elections were monitored by an international team of observers, headed by former US President Jimmy Carter. The 1992 elections were

declared by the observer team as free and fair. Dr. Jagan became President and Sam Hinds was named Prime Minister."
 
In1990 the PYO didn't issue a statement claiming that President Carter's actions ignored "the principles of sovereignty and national self-determination that is publicly espoused by the American State Department" or that they were "a violation of all aspects of independence and non-interference."
 
 
 
 

 

Gil is openly supporting the overthrow of the PPP.

 

Karma will catch up with these PNC thugs. It is vicious and never fails.

FM
Originally Posted by yuji22:
O

Gil is openly supporting the overthrow of the PPP.

 

Karma will catch up with these PNC thugs. It is vicious and never fails.

The point is do you see a contradiction between the PPP who needed the US support to coerce a reluctant PNC to return the nation to Democracy and their present position. There are nothing in these services being proposed that asks the PPP be removed. They are instead setup as an instrument to facilitate the assessment of our democracy and in event of weaknesses, help in transformation to better. The PPP cannot decide for us what sorts of education services the opposition avails itself to. 

FM
Originally Posted by yuji22:
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:

The official website of the People's Progressive Party/Civic has a document titled "History of PPP."

Here is the entry for the year 1990:

"...the PNC called elections for 1990 with a flawed electoral list, but after intense opposition from the PPP and other opposition parties, and a visit from former US President Jimmy Carter, the elections were postponed and eventually a new Elections Commission was appointed with a new Chairman and a new list of voters was prepared. President Hoyte was forced to concede to a number of electoral reforms demanded by the PPP and other opposition parties. October 5, 1992 Elections were eventually held and the PPP/Civic emerged victorious with 54 percent of the votes. These elections were monitored by an international team of observers, headed by former US President Jimmy Carter. The 1992 elections were

declared by the observer team as free and fair. Dr. Jagan became President and Sam Hinds was named Prime Minister."
 
In1990 the PYO didn't issue a statement claiming that President Carter's actions ignored "the principles of sovereignty and national self-determination that is publicly espoused by the American State Department" or that they were "a violation of all aspects of independence and non-interference."
 
 
 
 

 

Gil is openly supporting the overthrow of the PPP.

 

Karma will catch up with these PNC thugs. It is vicious and never fails.

what the ass you know about karma every indian fight the pnc so the Constitution can change today the ppp is using this same Constitution to rob the guyanese blind in 1990 the people of guyana was more unite than we are today

FM

Let us be thankful that the US is not funding armed insurgency in Guyana yet. That day may come, but so far there is no indication that they have taken this step as they have done in many other nations.  Currently it appears that the US is only prepared to fund the opposition to even the playing field in political campaigning. The PPP has used the publicly owned media to their advantage while the opposition were shut out from that forum.  

FM
Originally Posted by BGurd_See:

 Currently it appears that the US is only prepared to fund the opposition to even the playing field in political campaigning. The PPP has used the publicly owned media to their advantage while the opposition were shut out from that forum.  

Wow! Did someone teef Bgurd_See's handle or is this a miracle?

Mitwah
Originally Posted by BGurd_See:

Let us be thankful that the US is not funding armed insurgency in Guyana yet. That day may come, but so far there is no indication that they have taken this step as they have done in many other nations.  Currently it appears that the US is only prepared to fund the opposition to even the playing field in political campaigning. The PPP has used the publicly owned media to their advantage while the opposition were shut out from that forum.  

it is not a dispensing of monies ad hoc. It is the funding of seminars on democracy. Recently, reporters were exposed to a workshop on what it is to reliably report the facts. These workshops can introduce concepts that would foster a culture that expects best practices in the field.

FM

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×