IT WOULD have come as a quite disturbing disclosure this Easter weekend that the Ambassador of the United States of America to Guyana, Mr Brent Hardt, remains involved in pushing for implementation of a local “democracy” project here after being officially advised of the government’s decision to suspend its continuation pending further clarification to determine future modus operandi.Disclosure of this development came on Thursday at the media briefing conducted by Dr Roger Luncheon, Head of the Presidential Secretariat, who had just returned from sick leave.
The veteran political thinker, a medical doctor by profession, has been serving in that position since the PPP‘s return to government in 1992, after nearly a quarter century of systematically rigged elections by the People’s National Congress. At the media briefing he deemed as “provocative” Ambassador Hardt’s collaboration in reactivating this suspended project-WITHOUT any prior engagement with the Guyana Government.
‘Provocative’ is often used as a diplomatic euphemism instead of “telling it like it is” in Guyanese parlance. Mr. Hardt’s own otherwise impressive career in the US diplomatic service should have served to remind him that he was engaging in unnecessary “provocative” political behaviour. Hence, there is an alternative option now open for action by the Guyana Government while remaining committed to sustaining principled bilateral relations between Washington and Georgetown.
For a start, President Barack Obama’s administration should be officially alerted to the shenanigans involving Ambassador Hardt in relation to the LEAD project that extends to partisan politicking with the Opposition parties—APNU and AFC. And relatedly, considering that the LEAD project has benefited from funding by the US Agency for International Development (USAID).
It is on record that both the governments in Washington and Georgetown, initially had made clear their commitment to the implementation of LEAD. However, it seems that Ambassador Hardt may have unintentionally become entangled with the political opposition that resulted in manifestations of unhealthy, if not exactly, prejudicial political behaviour inimical to the original initiatives for the LEAD project.
There is more to be said about LEAD and the partisan politicking by Ambassador Hardt. But for now we await the Government’s next move following Dr Luncheon’s statement about “provocative” behaviour involving the US Ambassador to this country. Also, to ascertain whether Ambassador Hardt intends to be in communication with the government in response to Dr Luncheon’s statement on “provocative” interference.