Dear Editor,
PLEASE allow me to respond d to Tacuma Ogunseye who falsely attacked me as a defender of the PPP. (Guyana Chronicle NY edition). He subsequently lectured Mr. Clairmont Lye (in “I was privy to report citing withdrawal of ministerial offer to Thomas” SN Jun 24) claiming that he (Tacuma) does not engage in public polemics.I have always had the greatest respect for Tacuma for his Afro-nationalism, but he is wrong in seeking to label me. As Martin Carter penned, Tacuma does not have to bend facts to defend the regime that now feeds him. I remind Tacuma that he wrote he could not bring himself to tell all he knew (the whole truth of PNC violent atrocities against political opponents ) during the Rodney CoI because “it would benefit the PPP.”
To the best of my recollection, and I have written thousands of articles since 1977, I never defended the PPP except for its right to govern (not its policies and programmes) after winning free and fair elections. And I did so because individuals like Tacuma threatened and or actually used violence against the PPP government and its supporters. I do recollect reading in the papers Tacuma threatening violence against PPP supporters during the election campaign in 2011 if the PPP were not defeated. Contrary to Tacuma’s “polemical attack” on my character, countless articles of mine critiqued the PPP administration; so much so that I was not welcome at Freedom House. It is not an exaggeration to say I critiqued the PPP much more than Tacuma or others ever did. I always critiqued the PPP for its unwillingness to share power with the true (elected) representatives of the various ethnic groups.
I was never viewed as a defender of the PPP. On the contrary, I was viewed (post-Jagan in particular) as a critic and hater of the PPP. Some even went so far to say I was WPA because of my sympathy for and financial donation to it. I do recall (in 1997) a former PPPite (a lawyer), now a minister with the AFC, at a Georgetown nightclub rebuking me for “criticising the PPP,” adding that I am not liked at Freedom House. The late Lionel Peters, who was present during that conversation, praised my objective and balanced commentaries. I also remember walking on Main Street one mid-day (2001) when I bounced up with another former PPPite, now politically unaligned and perhaps the most respected political figure in the country, who lectured me about my critiques of the PPP, saying: “You want the PPP to lose the elections with your criticisms.” I should also note that friends who sat in the Central Committee and Ex Co of the PPP informed me that I was a frequent target of cuss down by the PPP leadership. It is also a fact that some ACG chaps in NY maligned my name as AFCite, a Nagamootoo-ite, and a Ramkarran-ite for my objective commentaries and reluctance to support discredited elements in the PPP and its policies. Has Tacuma missed the several pieces from Clement Rohee over the years rebuking my criticisms of the PPP? Instead of engaging in polemics and unsubstantiated attacks, Tacuma should re-read my analyses on the PPP’s governance or the period of time it was in opposition.
Tacuma is misleading in his claims about Dr. Jagan’s offer of a ministry to Prof Clive Thomas. Jagan made three offers to Thomas and the WPA and they declined all three.
It was the WPA that opposed Dr. Jagan being the consensus presidential candidate for the PCD, saying Africans would not vote for an alliance led by Jagan. The NY activists I was involved with agreed with that sentiment, and we travelled to Guyana and made efforts to convince Dr Jagan to back down as the consensus candidate. Dr. Jagan made several (malleable) conditions for backing down from being the nominee. In conversations with me, he suggested Bishop George or Roger Luncheon as the nominee, neither of whom was acceptable to the WPA.
Jagan was willing to accept a WPA proposed nominee, but Jagan insisted that the PPP would get a majority of seats and cabinet posts. The WPA objected to the condition on the flimsy ground that since previous elections had been rigged, the real support of the PPP could not be determined. My recollection was PPP was offered 25% (?) of the seats. That was insulting to the PPP, resulting in the collapse of talks over a consensus nominee. In a subsequent meeting, Jagan told me that the PPP took the position of going into the elections with himself as the nominee and with a Civic component. Dr. Thomas was offered to be Dr. Jagan’s running mate as the prime ministerial candidate. The WPA declined the offer. I travelled back to Guyana and met Jagan over the issue. He insisted that he wanted Clive Thomas as his running mate and urged me to ask him to reconsider. I went to Rodney House on Croal Street, and conversed with Rupert Roopnaraine, Eusi Kwayana, Nigel Westmaas, Wazir Mohammed and several others in separate meets. A few times, Ravi Dev and I visited Rodney House to discuss the issue. The response from virtually everyone was that the offer of Prime Minister was made to Clive Thomas and not the WPA. It was semantics; these chaps were playing games, seemingly because they did not want to support Dr. Jagan’s candidacy. I travelled to UG and met Thomas; Father Malcolm Rodrigues (whom I had met on the Corentyne in March 1977 during the Berbice Students uprising) gave me a lift inside the compound as we reminisced about the student strikes and conversed about the PCD talks. In his brief exchange with me, Dr. Thomas gently declined Jagan’s offer. He told me he was not interested in the position, and he suggested that Dr. Luncheon was more deserving of it, since he was with the PPP for so long. Other emissaries also met Thomas whose answer was a consistent “no.”
As time was going, Jagan named Sam Hinds as his running mate. I travelled to Guyana again, urging Jagan to find a way to accommodate Thomas. Jagan was agreeable. But he said he could not withdraw his (PM) offer to Sam Hinds as it had been made publicly, but he would like to have Thomas on his team with a cabinet post. Thomas ran as the presidential candidate of the WPA with Rupert Roopnaraine as the prime ministerial candidate; the WPA secured just over 2% of the votes as compared with the PPP’s 53%. That was a blunder of Thomas and the WPA. Dr Jagan told me he would offer the Planning Ministry to Thomas. In my subsequent meeting with President Jagan, I urged him to give Thomas the Finance Ministry. He said he had promised and offered it to Asgar Ally who had left his Central bank job in Jamaica. In a follow-up trip to Guyana in February or April (1993) or could have been Christmas period 1992 , I met President Jagan at Freedom House and urged him to find a way to include Thomas in the cabinet. He said the Planning Ministry was still vacant and urged me to ask Thomas to reconsider taking up the offer. I went to see Brother Eusi on why the WPA was not taking up the offer. Eusi’s response was that the ministry was given to Thomas and not to the WPA – a play on semantics. I also conversed with Roopnaraine, Westmaas, Wazir, etc and all gave the same groupthink response. I visited Thomas at UG and conveyed Jagan’s offer, and he politely declined the offer saying there were other individuals in the PPP who were more deserving of the post. I was disappointed with Thomas’s response given the enormous respect I held for him and the important role he could play in development. I do not know when, and if, the Planning Ministry was ever withdrawn. I do not remember if it was ever filled and who held the post. Is it not reasonable for a ministerial offer, that was consistently rejected over several months, be withdrawn? Would not the politics and development of the country been different if the WPA or Thomas had not declined Jagan’s offer of the PM position or the Planning Ministry?
Yours truly
Vishnu Bisram