HIS Excellency Dr. Irfaan Ali’s declaration of the “One-Guyana” initiative is a step in the right direction. In the words of President Ali, “Today we are moving in one direction… we are going to create this Corridor of Unity” to move Guyana forward, and all communities will be involved. These words will continue to reverberate across Guyana and the One-Guyana initiative will be a rallying cry of the Ali administration for the next four years. This initiative will be split into sub-initiatives such as the “Republic Unity Cup” to reach numerous communities to ensure inclusion, management, and execution. In this process, the probability of errors will be minimised, and the drive to defeat parasitic, partisan politics to achieve unity and progress sounds realistic. Guyanese prefer the politics of patriotism, but how and when this preference can be achieved would be a humungous challenge for the One Guyana Commission, the body tasked with the responsibility of fostering unity among Guyanese.

The President’s remark that nation-building requires a movement from “abstraction to action”, is impressive, because ideas must be backed by actions. Too often many ideas are brought to the table, but few resources are available to support them, thereby causing them to hit a dead end. Howbeit, one must not be discouraged by sharing ideas since thoughts not expressed are generally wasted thoughts, buried in the mind. That said, the One Guyana Commission is up against some formidable obstacles in the drive for a new Guyanese order.
On an international level, after more than 50 years of independence, Guyana is still struggling to meet the average expectation of growth and development for its 750,000 citizens. There are, of course, a range of reasons for Guyana’s predicament: neocolonialism; capital flight; structural adjustment programmes; foreign interference; dubious foreign investment; the border controversy; and not a high standing in world affairs, save for environmental stewardship in the rainforest.

At the national level, Guyana suffers from corruption; electoral fraud by opposition elements; out-migration; unease in relation to race; an unskilled civil service and the refusal of the opposition to recognise the sitting administration. In one sentence, these are home-grown problems. There are, of course, many more domestic challenges plaguing Guyana, which, if explored further, will provide fodder for any comedian. Every Guyanese politician is aware of Guyana’s potpourri of problems since they have not been external to them. To their credit, myriad measures and mechanisms have been used to tackle Guyana’s challenges, but for some reason, their attempts have not provided or produced any substantial solutions, save for a few.

Guyanese are aware of the country’s potential oil wealth, which will be used to promote growth and development of the country. The main hiccup of the One-Guyana initiative, however, is the acceptance of it from the opposition, which has so far shown mixed signals. The opposition has welcomed the One-Guyana initiative, but has also blasted it as an attempt to hoodwink Guyanese. One expects the opposition to critique the One-Guyana initiative, but we will have a better feel of the opposition’s take when the One Guyana Commission shares its plan with the public. While we wait for the One Guyana Commission’s plan to arrive, a few important steps could be embraced. The current situation is fertile ground for new ideas when regime change occurs, particularly when democracy was comprised to meet the neologism of bizarre narratives. Some of these steps are: (a) the upgrade of institutions to maximum functionality, so much so that they regulate the individuals who are assigned to them rather than the individuals regulating the institutions on their terms; GECOM comes to mind; (b) promote and support an active civil society versus an “armed” society, while not ignoring the needs of the military and police; (c) establish with the opposition a mutual understanding of national affairs; and (d) develop policies and plans under a top-down and a bottom-up approach in which they meet at a point of mutuality, that golden spot of exchange