I want to revisit the arguments regarding the possible disappearance of the AFC as a political party. Readers should immediately note three critical points. Firstly, the AFC’s emergency announcement regarding their electoral plans resulted from the onslaught of criticisms against the attempt by the Trotman faction to stultify the rotation principle.
Secondly, Ramjattan has not yet been named and certified the presidential candidate. There is simply a commitment to run the former PPP man in the presidential slot and the former PNC man in the prime ministerial slot. Thirdly, the question of the party leadership, as distinct from the presidential candidate, is still an open question.
Political analysts are of the firm view that the AFC cannot win an election on its own strength. Aligning with the WPA and GAP won’t make much difference. The only option, therefore, for the AFC, is to go to the PNCR. The AFC is ‘weight and scale’ on this issue. The party is now the quintessential flip-flop party.
One day Trotman is reported to be meeting with Hartley Henry and Winston Murray, and then a few days later, Sheila Holder is denying that her party is having discussions with the PNCR. Here is the question? Is the AFC ashamed to be seen with the PNCR in public?
The AFC is a young and inexperienced party and it should not underestimate the political capacities of the PNCR and Mr. Corbin. The PNCR will not allow this new (flip-flopping) party to push it into an alliance on the AFC’s terms. That project is beyond Hartley Henry, the controversial Bajan connected consultant who is advising the Alliance for Change.
If the AFC runs on its own it will remain an insignificant force. If it runs with the PNCR, it will have to give up so much that after the deal is done, there will be no AFC. I therefore project that the AFC will either remain a weak political entity, or ‘sucked up’ by the more experienced PNCR political machinery. That is quite a dilemma to be in.