DR Stanley Paul has inserted more commonsense, apart from intellectual analysis, into the argument for Guyana not taking the road of confrontation with ExxonMobil over contract renegotiation.
But Dr Paul’s response to a letter written by a gentleman who signed his name as Mohamed Zafar and stated his designation as a barrister in Canada, was not forceful enough.
Mr Zafar opined that “a democratically credentialed Guyanese leader in power cannot ignore the will or desires of the people on the 2016 PSA.”

That correspondence in the Stabroek News of January 11, 2025, is so mediocre in a basic understanding of traditional and fundamental political theory, that I thought Dr Paul would have demolished it with instant flippancy.
Dr Paul instead dignified Zafar’s poor approach to political theory and in the process makes the reader feel that Mr Zafar made a plausible contribution to the contract renegotiation exchange.
Dr Paul in praising Zafar’s entry into the debate wrote the following: “Mr Zafar presents a compelling argument regarding the role of “a democratically credentialed leader” in responding to the will and desires of the people.”

I beg to disagree and I am unrestrained in my view that Mr Zafar lacks familiarity with how an elected government leader responds to the things a society wants. In ancient society such as the Greek city-states with their small populations, it was easy to gauge what a society wants, as Socrates did.
In the 21st century, it is almost impossible to determine what the priorities of the population are when those priorities exist in a competitive mode. The most reliable source of what a nation wants from its head of government is a tight scientific poll.
It is outrageous to claim as Zafar did that the Guyanese population wants a renegotiation of the ExxonMobil contract. Where did he get that information from? The whole world knows where he got it from – the anti-oil lobby, but let’s stick with what the citizenry wants.

Here is what I would suggest: organise a number of symposia in Regions Two, Three, Four, Five and Six. But the best mind that argues for demanding contract renegotiation and put the Attorney-General to explain what will happen to Guyana if ExxonMobil refuses to negotiate, and seek sanctions against Guyana and perambulate the corridors of power in the hegemonic countries of the West, then ask the audience to vote for or against contract renegotiation. I and the whole of Guyana know what will be the result.
What Dr Paul should do in the coming days is simply ask Mr Zafar how he knows that Guyanese want a forced contract renegotiation. Where was the poll on that? Who measured the will of the people on that, so Mr Zafar could conclude that President Ali should listen to the people?
Dr Paul did educate Mr Zafar on political theory through his elucidation on the responsibilities of a head of government. An elected leader has to look at the international consequences of domestic policies and make hard choices.

The perfect example is Uganda that tabled legislation to execute convicted homosexuals. Uganda began to face enormous sanctions from the West and the World Bank that it has backed down on the death penalty for homosexuality.
It is arid thinking to demand that a democratic leader has no space to manoeuvre and must abide by what sections of the population demand. Such an approach to the exercise of power is infantile.

All elected leaders in normal societies will not accede to any and every demand made upon it. They will argue that in not acceding to the demands they are protecting the integrity of governance.
I began this article by noting that Dr Paul has injected commonsense into the debate. He has articulated the danger of geopolitical backlash should small states confront hegemonic power. The term commonsense is apt because if you read the totality of criticisms against the government for not seeking renegotiation, not one of them brings in the geopolitical dimension.

Don’t take my word for it; read every article urging the government to drag ExxonMobil to the table and you will see not one of them recognises the international implications for Guyana. The latest is the Monday edition of the Stabroek News which shouts loudly for renegotiation and there isn’t even one line on the danger lurking.
Finally, I would urge Dr Paul to continue to confront the mediocrity in the anti-oil lobby’s demand for contract renegotiation. Dr Paul needs to understand as he continues to write that this anti-oil lobby is not an intellectual force, but a plain, naked, anti-government bandwagon.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Guyana National Newspapers Limited.