Did Ramjattan’s call reflect a genuine desire for reconciliation

A LOT has been already said by politicians on both sides in this current campaign to cause consternation, but the one thing that surpasses them all is the call made by one of the leaders of the AFC, Mr. Khemraj Ramjattan, “to move beyond the history of the PNC,” (SN 4/3/2015). This is like granting unconditional amnesty on the one hand and an invitation to historical amnesia on the other. After all, amnesty is amnesia. The two are related.The PNC has had a long and chequered history in Guyana since its inception almost sixty years ago, including those tumultuous years in Government of party paramountcy, when there was no difference between party, state and Government. Since Mr. Ramjattan himself knows only too well this history, it would have been helpful to us if he had stated which specific events and which period in the history of the PNC he has in mind.
We agree that invoking history for the purposes of the present political discourse can be fraught with danger. Olivier Nyirubugara, the author of “Complexities and Dangers of Remembering and Forgetting in Rwanda” speaks of the ways in which “ethnic identities and related memories constitute a deadly trap that needs to be torn apart if mass violence is to be eradicated in that country.” He shows how “memories” follow ethnic lines and lead to a state of “cultural hypocrisy” and permanent conflict.
We see how politicians and demagogues, scholars and intellectuals around the world always want us to remember the “lessons of history” to justify policy, influence opinion and win votes. Americans are reminded of Pearl Harbour as an annual ritual, and China uses every dispute with its neigbours to remind its population of Japanese atrocities. Here in Guyana, our intellectuals talk of the “second enslavement” of Blacks, presumably by Indians, and a while ago when Indian students topped the CXC both at CAPE and CSEC we heard about “apartheid in education.” Since 1992, we have never ceased to hear about the “twenty eight years.”
Having accepted the view that history is often manipulated for propaganda purposes, I am unaware of the call anywhere in the world to forget history without any accountability. To underscore the importance of history, the inimitable George Orwell is reputed to have said: “Whoever controls the past controls the future. Whoever controls the present controls the past.” History is wound up in the very theologies of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. And as far as the Jews are concerned, we know no people has insisted more that history has a purpose and humanity a destiny.
We can’t simply wish away the Holocaust of Jews, the horrors of the Atlantic slave trade, the Soviet pogrom under Stalin, the Kurdish genocide, the killing fields of Cambodia, the Rwanda genocide, the American destruction of Vietnam, the European decimation of the indigenous populations of the Americas and the Caribbean, and particularly, the genocide of the Native American Indians.
We have a duty to remember history. Pope Francis has recently reminded the world of the Armenian genocide much to the annoyance of current Turkish leaders, as the world is marking its 100th anniversary. It has been reported that the Chinese President Xi Jinping is calling on Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to take responsibility for Japanese atrocities both before and during the Second World War, and Abe is expected to make a major statement to mark the 70th anniversary marking the end of the war. Nazi war criminals and the perpetrators of the Bosnian genocide are hunted down and brought to justice.
Those of us who follow events in the United States will know that no American politician, including Obama, speaks without invoking, “our founding fathers,” many of whom were slave owners. Only recently, days after Mr. Ramjattan’s bizarre call, President Obama, paying homage to John Lewis and other heroes of the Civil Rights movement, stood on the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma to mark the 50th anniversary of Bloody Sunday, the event that was the turning point in the Civil Rights movement.
In Guyana, we have our own version of Black History Month and Guyanese are involved in the struggle for reparations for slavery which hopefully will become a reality one day. We observe Emancipation Day and Arrival Month. We remember the Berbice Slave Rebellion and have set up one of the most imposing monuments, at the Square of the Revolution, in its memory, and we teach our children about the Demerara Martyr, John Smith. We remember the Enmore Martyrs. We never forget the Haitian Revolution that shook empires all around the world.
Mere remembering, however, without healing and closure will only ensure permanent suspicion and conflict. Nelson Mandela has shown how we can remember and heal at the same time. Under the guidance of Archbishop Desmond Tutu, South Africans have been engaged in one of the most momentous experiments in world history aiming at truth and reconciliation. The lesson for us in Guyana is that either we seek reconciliation or live in perpetual fear of one another.
Let us bear in mind that reconciliation is not what Mr. Ramjattan is advocating. He is not calling for us to guard against the “malady of history” in the Nietzschean sense, where it can be manipulated for cheap political gains, nor is he pointing out to us the pitfalls of “historicism” as described by Karl Popper. He is simply urging an arbitrary blanket, ugly one-sided cover-up of a sordid phase of our history. But exactly, which particular events of PNC history he wants us to forget?
Does he have in mind, for example, the accommodation the PNC had with Britain and the United States to remove the PPP from office? Does he have in mind the massacre of Indians in Wismar, or the rigged elections from 1968 to 1985, with thousands of dead people voting? Does he have in mind the terror unleashed on this nation by the thugs of the House of Israel, or when being “caught” with a loaf of bread was a criminal offence?
Or the terror when a prominent trade unionist was taken aboard a GDF plane and threatened to be thrown overboard or the in famous Knowledge Sharing Institutes when women had to barter their bodies for food for their children? Or, does he have in mind the many political murders culminating in the murder of Walter Rodney?
There are other questions that surround Mr. Ramjattan’s call. Who, for example, is his target audience? He obviously could not be asking the PNC and the authors and perpetrators of that history to move beyond their own history. After, the PNC stands adamantly defiant regarding its history. Time and again, the current leader of the PNC, who himself boasts of the credentials of a historian, has said in no uncertain terms that there is nothing to apologise for. On the contrary, there is talk of building a memorial for the victims of the ill-fated Sun Chapman. What is there to move beyond when there is nothing to apologise for?
So it is reasonable to conclude that he is asking the Indians of this country, who, to a large extent, perceive themselves as the victims of that history, to forget it. I believe that Mr. Ramjattan lost a golden opportunity. If he wanted Indians to forget PNC atrocities, the least he could have done was to call for PNC accountability. After all there is the precedent of Mr. Raphael Trotman, who urged the PNC to apologise for its excesses. Had he shown the same courage and fortitude, then the Indians of this country could begin to take him seriously. Otherwise, political ambitions apart, we would simply be piling injustice upon injustice.
It is interesting to note that the coalition campaign fancies success because of the large number of young voters who have no knowledge of the PNC era. Would it not be better for young voters to be educated about our history? To gleefully exploit and prey upon young people’s alleged ignorance is one thing.  To conspire to enable ignorance is quite another. This is what Mr. Ramjattan’s invitation to historical amnesia will ensure.
In conclusion, I am not sure whether Mr. Ramjattan’s call reflected a genuine desire for reconciliation in which case, one-sided as it is, it could have warranted some serious consideration. It is obvious that he sees the history of the PNC as a major impediment to his political aspirations. But, in directly calling on Indians to move beyond this history of the PNC, he is asking Indians to negate and deny their own experiences. He could go down in history as yet another Indian politician sacrificing Indians on the altar of political expediency and his personal ambition.
SWAMI AKSHARANANDA