LACK OF TRUST undermines APNU/AFC’s ‘marriage of convenience’ – History predicts charlatan betrayal of AFC given PNC’s bad track record of coalition politics
Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo
Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo

THE People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR) has disguised itself under the banner of A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) and coalesced with the Alliance For Change (AFC), a band of detractors, but history has shown that none of the players involved can be trusted.

This was elucidated by Guyanese Head of State, President Donald Ramotar, as well as his predecessor, Dr Bharrat Jagdeo, over the course of the past week, beginning with the highly anticipated annual ‘pilgrimage’ at Babu John in Berbice, in memory of the iconic Founder-Leader of the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) Dr Cheddi Jagan.

President Donald Ramotar: making a defining difference with humble leadership
President Donald Ramotar: making a defining difference with humble leadership

The APNU+AFC coalition was formed with the sole purpose of coming up against the incumbent PPP/Civic Administration, against whom the coalesced Opposition has banded together to oust from office on May 11, the date set aside for the holding of General and Regional Elections.

Former speaker of the National Assembly, Ralph Ramkarran
Former speaker of the National Assembly, Ralph Ramkarran

Dr Jagdeo, in no uncertain terms, told the Babu John gathering that it is the same players involved in the betrayals of the past, the destruction of the economy and access to basic human liberties that have re-emerged under the guise of a coalesced Opposition front.

At the Babu John gathering, the former President made it clear that the AFC has run out of leverage in its negotiations with APNU and, come Nomination Day, the party would be in for a rude awakening.

The two, APNU+AFC, will have to submit one list, with one leader of the list.
The former President has since predicted and maintains that the Opposition Leader, Brigadier (rtd) David Granger, will be selected as the Leader of the List, the position that determines who goes to Parliament.

According to Dr Jagdeo, it had to be naivety or desperation on the part of the AFC to link up with the PNC-controlled APNU.

In rallying his troops, the former President explained the importance of the representative of the list and said, “When they [APNU+AFC] choose a Leader of the list and I suspect it’s going to be Granger, remember they contesting as one party, so the Leader of the List decides who goes to Parliament….they (AFC) are going to be in for a rude, rude awakening.”
Dr Jagdeo recalled that the United Force “had it in the past and they (AFC) will get it, because they don’t have any leverage anymore.”

The APNU+AFC coalition came into being on February 14 last, under the ‘Cummingsburg Accord’ or as some prefer, as was first described by this newspaper, the “Valentine’s Day Marriage of Convenience.”

Former Speaker of the National Assembly, Mr Ralph Ramkarran – known for his tedious research and public stance against the current administration, recently offered his take on coalition politics in Guyana.

alt
Moses Nagamootoo

He noted that the Cummingsburg Accord is only the latest in the history of alliances in Guyana’s post-war politics.

The PPP, he said, emerged out of informal class and ethnic alliances in 1950. “The PNC-UDP sought to merge African working and middle classes in the 1950s, with some resistance. The “moderate” PNC came together with the “right wing” UF in 1964.
The Opposition formed the little known VLD (Vanguard for Liberation and Democracy) in the late 1970s and the PCD in 1985, which comprised groups of differing ideological persuasions. The WPA emerged out of an alliance of several left/radical groups.”alt
He recalled that the PPP sought to engage the PNC by offering “critical support” in 1976 and in 1977 and offered too to sacrifice the presidency and take the second spot of prime minister in a new constitutional formula outlined in the National Patriotic Front in the interest of national unity.
Ramkarran, who has always been known for offering his frank views, recalled “it was the epitome of political magnanimity in Guyana’s modern political history…The PPP saw working-class unity and the strengthening of the leftist trend initiated by the PNC Government, as the outcome.”
It was rejected however, a trend Jagdeo and Ramotar insist will be repeated by the PNC in its coalition with the AFC.
Ramkarran in his recent writings on coalitions in Guyana recalled too that in 1985 the PPP was again prepared to sacrifice the presidency in talks initiated by the PNC.
“The economic situation had deteriorated so dramatically, and the IMF’s proposed conditionalities so draconian, that the PNC Government sought help from the socialist countries…This was only forthcoming if its issues with the PPP were resolved. The talks were terminated by Desmond Hoyte after [Forbes] Burnham passed,” Ramkarran stated.

Attorney General Mr. Anil Nandlall
Attorney General Mr. Anil Nandlall

Attorney General and Minister of legal Affairs, Anil Nandlall recently also added his voice to the fray and detailed too that the personalities and players involved in the coalition will be crucial in determining whether or not any agreement between the APNU+AFC union will be actually enforced in practice
According to Nandlall, “when you examine the record of the PNC, they had coalitions before, they had coalitions with the United Force (UF) in 1964, and it did not work, it lasted a few years and the leader of the PNC, at that time, Forbes Burnham, he made a public declaration that the PNC would never enter a coalition arrangement again.”

Leader of the Opposition, David Granger
Leader of the Opposition, David Granger

Minister Nandlall recapped that during the governance of the PNC, all efforts at coalition politics were rejected, and on the contrary “the PNC kept themselves in power by rigged elections and use of authoritarian methods, employing instrumentalities such as the army to keep this power.”
He elaborated that the PNC resorted to violence to keep themselves in power, and so it is easy to deduce that “the party is rooted in an ideology, a history, and philosophy not to share power.”
Only recently vocal social commentator, Ramon Gaskin was quoted in the media expressing disappointment with the manner in which the discussions between APNU+AFC were conducted.
Gaskin surmised that despite the fact that the two parties have been preaching that they wish to see a government of “national unity” and wanted what was best for the Guyanese people, this was not reflected during or after their dialogue.

alt
AFC Leader Khemraj Ramjattan

“I noticed that in the coalition talks, they were only talking about who gets what and what goes to whom. I am very disappointed with that, because in the entire discussions, all they could have said was that this goes to that person, he gets that, she gets this and nothing is said about the needs of the Guyanese people,” according to Gaskin.

He suggested: “They should have first worked out a programme for what is to be for the good of Guyana. You are preaching that you want the good of Guyana, then show that! Have discussions on the University of Guyana, the Guyana Sugar Corporation, the Guyana Power and Light, the Amaila Falls project and what will be done about the situation before moving on to decide who gets what and what goes to who. Those things should have been in the discussions. In my opinion, they did it the wrong way around.”

 

SHARE THIS ARTICLE :
Facebook
Twitter
WhatsApp

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All our printed editions are available online
emblem3
Subscribe to the Guyana Chronicle.
Sign up to receive news and updates.
We respect your privacy.