Dear Editor,

MY engagement with academicians and many who supported AFC had felt just a year after the Coalition came into office that APNU and AFC dug their own political grave by their blunders and mis-governance. In contrast, a year later, the PPP/C administration has been fulfilling manifesto promises. Voters have embraced the Presidency of Irfaan Ali, whose approval ratings are much higher than David Granger during the same time in his presidency.

Respondents in a survey I conducted back in 2016 said that the PNC returned to the old ways — done out of natural instinct, noting that’s how the PNC behaved and governed between 1966 thru 1990. (Hoyte tried to change the PNC between 1990 and 1992, but he went right back to the behaviour of the old PNC after the cremation of Jagan’s body in 1997). Those who cheered for change in 2015 were the ones who concluded that it was in the political DNA of the PNC to govern the way it did between 2015 and 2020 – victimisation and vindictiveness against non-traditional supporters. The PPP/C, on the other hand, historically has embraced non-traditional supporters with inclusive governance.

Granger, Moses Nagamootoo, and the entire political leadership of PNC, AFC, and WPA disappointed a large number of their supporters. In particular, ‘AFCites’ and ‘PPPites’ who crossed over from PPP/C and voted for Granger in May 2015 to give him the presidency felt betrayed. The voters gave Granger a chance and the ‘AFCites’ and ‘PPPites’ supported him (with favourable approval ratings) through the first year, realising afterward that he would not run a racially inclusive government.

Those who supported AFC and PPP/C and had moved over to the Coalition in 2015 became dejected and felt betrayed and moved away from Granger, gravitating back towards Bharrat Jagdeo who had become leader of the PPP/C replacing Clement Rohee and Donald Ramotar. The PPP/C’s cross over (so called floating) voters accepted they erred in supporting APNU and PNC thinking it was a changed party. In politics, perceptions matter whether or not they are rooted in reality. And the perception of the APNU (PNC)-led government was it was PNC II, which was seen as a replay of PNC I under Burnham.

The PNC failed to recognise that since 1992, under the long period of PPP/C democratic governance, there has been the emergence of a vibrant civil society, which was not prepared to accept authoritarian rule or bad governance as quietly as they did pre-1992. The PPP/C made errors and paid the price in 2015. APNU and AFC failed to recognise that PNC II would not be accepted post 2015, and that the US would not close its eyes to rigged elections as it did pre-1992. And in 2020, the US rejected the attempt to rig the elections to stay in power.

The AFC allowed itself to be taken for a political ride. A small number of those at the pyramid of the AFC did have a joy ride with the trappings of office. After a few months, they themselves were complaining of their lack of influence and holding PNC accountable. They became ineffective in representing the interests of their supporters. They resigned themselves to being rubber stamps, accepting corrupt deals, undermining their own political survival. They were politically blind by the perks of office.

Very early on, they should have recognised it would be a one -term government and took measures to counter the PNC to remain relevant in politics. Had the leadership of AFC acted professionally and with integrity, they could have saved Granger, the Coalition government, and the AFC. But they were crippled by the material trappings of power.

Nagamootoo, a seasoned politician with widespread appeal and political sympathy, disappointed the most for failing to speak out against racial discrimination and the closure of the sugar estates and the neglect of agriculture where he had cut his political teeth. He could have reigned in Granger and the hard core anti-Indian elements of the PNC. But he was silent.

As Freddie correctly penned, Granger was a Burnhamite incapable of changing even when so many Indians embraced him. He repressed his Burnhamite characteristics and instincts (Freudian sublimation and Freudian repression as Freddie calls it) as Opposition Leader and only displayed them at the right time when he was fully entrenched into the presidency. It would also be his undoing. He made no attempt to reform the PNC or the State or the Constitution, all of which he had committed in the 2015 campaign. Indians bitterly complained they faced harassment and discrimination when PNC was in power pre 1992 and felt the same experience under PNC II.

Granger made virtually no attempt to embrace Indians who supported him, not even those in North America and Guyana who welcomed him in their homes. Almost all of them were in shock at his behaviour as President in failing to run a non-discriminatory State and felt betrayed. The ethnic composition of the government was diverse but power and distribution of resources were glossed over by PNC’s ethno nationalists. The almost total exclusion of resources for Indians, Chinese and Portuguese were bound to blow back in the long-term.

If the PNC were wise, they would have focused on healing the wounds of its past governance and include credible Indians who were marginalised pre-2015 and who embraced change, crying for good governance. It did neither, allowing the racial division to grow wider. The PNC seemed programmatically incapable of reforming itself and running an inclusive government in doling out resources the way PPP/C did for 23 years and has been doing since August 2020.

As Freddie analysed, Jagdeo read the political tea leaves right. Jagdeo, a seasoned politician and master strategist, recognised the blunders of the PNC and AFC. He quickly began revamping, reforming, and rebuilding the PPP/C after he replaced Rohee as General Secretary, readying the party to take the reins of government. Meanwhile, the ruling Coalition was in destructive mode and was unable to recognise its own mistakes, even refusing to accept it made errors when told by their own analysts and independent thinkers.

Granger has taken a leave. The general conclusion among the public is there will not be a return of a President Granger. The Coalition has to find a replacement, a personable, charming leader. That would be a difficult task as activists from the opposition have been routinely involved in some kind of personal, crude attack on opponents. The party or its principal leaders is yet to dissociate or condemn the vulgar attack on Priya Manickchand who is more likeable and popular than anyone in the opposition.

Yours truly,
Vishnu Bisram