The USAID Project: The PPP/C Govt’s

latest political football

DEAR EDITOR,
Sadly, the USAID democracy project has now become just another political tool for the PPP/C regime. It is clear that the government intends to use all its energy to make this issue the chief symbol of its diversionary tactic.
Like all its other political schemes, the PPP/C government has decided that it will make ordinary Guyanese the “pawns” in this USAID/PPP/C debacle. In its effort to make the people the hostages in this unwarranted situation, the government has again resorted to its usual psychological campaign against the people. The operatives at Office of the President and Freedom House hatched out their plan and carved out the government’s PR campaign to achieve the following objectives;
1. Drive sufficient fear into the minds of the people so that they subconsciously succumb to the thinking and actions of the regime
2. Project the PPP/C government as the victim of bullying, by the US government
3. Use the democracy project and actions of the US ambassador to force Guyanese into believing that they constitute serious and dangerous threats to Guyana’s sovereignty.
In order to achieve its objectives, the PPP/C has unleashed its propagandists in the letter sections of the daily newspapers to pedal its gibberish. These messengers are instructed to inundate the papers with the regime’s message, in an attempt to coerce the people. In the minds of Guyana’s dictators, the people must be made to support them in all their oppressive actions, even if those actions are detrimental to the people and inimical to the national socio-political and economic agenda.
The PPP/C’s attack on the people has always been brutal, impertinent and unconscionable. This government has been shameless in demonstrating its indifference for the people. Interestingly, the US government is getting a firsthand glimpse of the kind of treatment that the Guyanese people experience daily.
The regime’s attitude is reflective of a culture which thrives on a belief of total disrespect, dominance, subjection and mass oppression. Why else would this government feel that it can simply brainwash Guyanese into believing that a project intended for their own empowerment should be rejected merely because the government feels that the Guyanese people should not be so empowered?
It is not coincident that Dr. Luncheon and those who speak for the government are using certain terms and phrases to describe the democracy project, and the actions of the US ambassador. Those of us who understand how tyrannical regimes operate will recognize why terms and expressions like; US intervention, intrusion into Guyanese politics, threat of Guyana’s sovereignty, disrespectful to the PPP/C government, and the like, are used by the government’s messengers to describe the actions of the ambassador and the USAID project. These are very strong words which the PPP/C has deliberately decided to use as key verbiage in its message.
The regime believes that these words are supposed to evoke sufficient anti-US sentiments, tug at the “fear strings” of the people and coerce the Guyanese population to submit only to the thinking of the PPP/C. The paid brainwashers employed by the government to execute the PPP/C’s plot against the democracy project are reminded that swift and clear repetition must be the hallmark of their involvement.
I have been paying attention to the letter sections of the daily newspapers since this USAID/ PPP/C catastrophe started.  My observation is that, the “PPP/C bandwagonaires” loyalists and “propagandists” are forcefully executing their duties. They are making their rounds in the press and the planned strategy is being unreservedly unleashed on the Guyanese people. I do not have time to refer to actions of all the mischief makers but I will take the time to refer to two to them, Faruk Mohamed and David deGroot.
On 1/4/2014 a letter appeared in KN under the name Faruk Mohamed and captioned “Is Guyana about to repeat its tragic past?” In this dispatch Mohamed, if he exists, begins his piece by breeding scorn at the opposition parties for their apparent support for the USAID democracy project. The propagandist then boldly states that the US ambassador is knowingly engaging in acts which blatantly disregard Guyana’s sovereignty [note the use of the word sovereignty].
In fact, Mohamed shamelessly asserts that the ambassador’s action “is simply the beginning of a replay of the US intervention into Guyana’s internal politics in the 1960s.” He continued that, “The difference may lie only in the purpose of the intervention.” It is clear that this particular line was specifically injected to affect the “hardcore” PPP/C supporters, if there are any left. In the minds of the PPP/C rulers, this tactic is supposed to fuel wrath in minds of a few who harbours anti-US sentiments.
It is clear that the PPP/C government’s vileness knows no boundary. Again, the decision of the government to brazenly peddle this line demonstrates the simplistic manner in which they view the people. To further play on the minds of the PPP/C sympathizers, Mohamed went on to claim that the US$300 million USAID project is an attempt by the US government to team up with the PNCR/APNU to overthrow the PPP/C from office.
What claptrap! The government is aware that Guyanese are generally, nationalistic and would be ready to defend any aggression towards the nation; hence the word sovereignty becomes a main ingredient in its missive. However, it forgets that the people have become accustomed to its tricks and will not be fooled.
In the letter, Mohamed also subtly calls on the Guyanese people to support the PPP/c regime in its effort to adopt a more, according to him, “Chavez/Venezuelan approach” to the US. The PPP/C letter writer went on to assert that “The American Government has converted stable and prosperous societies into war zones and living hell…” he then infers that the US has now turned to Guyana to do the same.
Let me pause here to say that without the United States’ assistance the PPP/C has been drastically taking Guyana down the path of that “living hell” – one only has to check the state of corruption, the crime and security situation, the overwhelming examples of bad governance, discrimination, victimization and utter lawlessness that prevails in the highest offices in the land.
Faruk Mohamed, pointedly intimates that the US has used certain strategies to transform stable countries into war zones, and that these methods, he states, “are similar to those currently being used by the US Ambassador to Guyana.”  Mohamed contends that Ambassador Brent Hardt is executing a US policy that is “supporting and building the capacity of reactionary opposition forces which cannot gain power through the ballot box.”
Again, this obsession with power is noted. Authoritarian and dictatorial regimes are always consumed with the fear of losing power hence they do everything in their “power” to suppress the masses. Shutting down the democracy project is a good example of an attempt to suppress and control the people.
The PPP/C regime has, time and again, unleashed this kind of fearful and outlandish tactic on Guyanese in order to promote racial strife, cause political fear and panic, and keep a section of their supporters (mainly Indo-Guyanese) in a perpetual state of fear and intimidation. This idea of people wanting to take away the power of the government is used as a “trump card excuse” in every situation where the government is asked to account and exercise good governance.
For instance, when public servants protest for better wages the government claims that it is the PNCR working to grab power through the back door, when criminals terrorize the people and create mayhem the PPP/C again shouts “PNC/R trying to take the government’s power”, the rain falls too much is “PNCR trying to grab power”.
This government is so caught up in its repressive policies that it does not care how ignorant and dangerously wicked it projects itself. Its members are so consumed with power that they are threatened by their own shadows. Guyanese people have demonstrated that they are much smarter and more responsible than their own government credits them for, hence will not be bullied into adopting a PPP/C posture on this issue of the USAID democracy project. It is time the PPP/C government understands who the true government is. It is time that it recognizes that the power truly rests with the people.
Mohamed ended his letter by intimating to us that the US ambassador and the US government are attempting to make Guyana, in his words, “the Tunisia, Egypt, Libya or Syria of South America.” This line is intended to conjure up so much fear that we should abandon independent thinking and probably run the ambassador out of Guyana.
In the psyche of the PPP/C rulers, to liken the atrocity in these countries to some specific action or policy of the US government would be more than enough to provoke Guyanese into unthinkable outrage and animosity towards the US government.  Their hope is to also to have us vividly recall images of these atrocities in order to make the idea of a “living hell” real and symbolic of the democracy project. This is another strategy used to heighten the fear. I deem this as a wicked, distasteful and dangerous attack on the people. Why make such sensational statements, Luncheon has laid the groundwork for this type of claim and the messengers are advancing the plan.
The PPP/C believes in swift and constant repetition, so two days after the Mohamed letter a known PPP/C gate keeper, David deGroot, penned a letter in SN titled “The US LEAD project has alerted suspicions.”
In this letter, deGroot states that Ambassador Brent Hardt’s action is “an audacious assault on the authority of the cabinet of this country.” Rehashing the fundamental positions of the larger PPP/C strategy, deGroot boldly commented that “Our sovereignty is not for sale.” He then attempted to hoodwink the readers with his bunkum when he posed this question; “what about undermining of the legitimacy of the PPP government, and US interference in the politics of this country during the early 1960s?”
Again the idea of the PPP/C losing power is the main concern. No effort is made to deal with the objective and the content of the project. Soon after this line, deGroot concludes with this statement “The $300M US project has alerted grave suspicions”.
The only suspicion the government should have is that the people will become more involved in the politics of the country, so why is the PPP/C afraid?
Breaking it down, the two letters were intended to serve the same purpose and make the same points, Head of the Presidential Secretariat, Roger Luncheon, made. It is clear that there is a letter-writing campaign orchestrated by the PPP/C regime on this USAID debacle. It is, however, unthinkable that at a time when countries across the globe are trying to reform their practices to adopt more forward-thinking approaches to governance, the PPP/C is attempting to rob the Guyanese people of an opportunity to learn from, and participate in discussions which centre on cogent democratic ideals and practices.
Why is the PPP/C so suspicious and afraid of the people becoming enlightened and empowered on principles which promote democratic values? Is the PPP/C government really democratic? Clearly, the actions of the regime are consistent with the thinking of those repressive regimes, which strive on a policy grounded in that archaic oppressive belief which supports the idea of “suppression of the masses in order to control them.”
The Guyanese people need to know how the USAID democracy project can enhance their own development and improve the political, economic and social situation in the country. It is time that we know more about the project. I ask the government to stop playing politics with the future of the country and tell us how this project will help us to be more informed citizens and become active participants in the democratic process.
We are at stage where local government elections will soon be held and it is only fitting that the people know how they can become involved in the process in order to help advance the state of local politics. How can a government, which claims to support democratic ideals, openly denounce a program intended to enhance democracy? Can Luncheon provide a logical explanation to this incongruity?
We the people need to be educated on how we can be meaningful participants in the democracy we hope to foster. We are indeed the true government; let us decide on the USAID project.
Lurlene Nestor