THERE was something unusually consequential in Bharrat Jagdeo’s remarks at the late Robert Corbin’s wake.
They were not merely words of tribute to a former political adversary. They amounted to a political warning, a challenge and, perhaps most importantly, an invitation.
Jagdeo’s central message was simple but profound: Guyana cannot continue to allow the politics of race, historical grievances and permanent suspicion to determine the country’s political future.
He is right. For decades, Guyana’s politics has been trapped in a binary contest in which political identity has too often been shaped by ethnicity rather than ideas, performance and national interest.
The PPP and PNC have been the principal actors in this drama, and Jagdeo’s admission that the two parties have far more in common ideologically than their political history suggests deserves serious consideration.
His reference to Robert Corbin makes the argument even more compelling.
Corbin, Jagdeo recalled, was prepared to engage the PPP during his (Jagdeo’s) presidency. Those discussions ultimately collapsed because political opponents accused Corbin of selling out. That episode tells us something deeply uncomfortable about Guyana: sometimes the greatest obstacle to political co-operation is not disagreement, but the fear of being accused of co-operation. That cannot be allowed to remain the political culture of the future.
Jagdeo’s description of Corbin as a man who defended the PNC fiercely but possessed a “bigger vision” is perhaps the most important part of his tribute. A politician does not betray his party merely because he speaks to his opponents. In a mature democracy, the opposite should be true.
The strongest politicians are those capable of defending their principles while still sitting across the table from their adversaries.
That is the political maturity Guyana desperately needs, and this is where Jagdeo’s remarks have relevance beyond the PPP and the PNC.
Guyana has entered a dramatically different political era. Oil has transformed the economy. New generations are demanding different forms of representation. Social media has weakened the traditional gatekeepers of political information. New political movements have emerged, and voters are less willing to inherit political loyalties simply because their parents or grandparents did.
Jagdeo understands this reality. His warning that the traditional parties could face “extinction” if they refuse to change should therefore not be dismissed as political rhetoric. It is a warning to both sides.
The PPP cannot assume that electoral strength guarantees permanent dominance. The PNC cannot assume that historical political identity guarantees permanent relevance. Both must continue earning the confidence of Guyanese.
That is also why Jagdeo’s remarks should be viewed against the emergence of We Invest in Nationhood (WIN). WIN is now a parliamentary reality. Its 16 MPs and the election of its leader, Azruddin Mohamed, as Leader of the Opposition cannot simply be wished away, but parliamentary representation and political permanence are not the same thing.
WIN is still a relatively new political movement. Its long-term ideological identity, institutional depth, national political philosophy and ability to survive beyond its founding leadership remain to be demonstrated. It entered Parliament with remarkable speed, but Guyanese politics has repeatedly shown that electoral breakthroughs do not automatically become enduring political institutions.
This is why Jagdeo’s apparent preference for a serious conversation between the PPP and the PNC is understandable. It is not necessarily an attempt to exclude WIN. It is a recognition that the two traditional parties have decades of political experience, institutional structures and historical constituencies that give them a particular responsibility for stabilising Guyana’s political system.
WIN has every right to seek influence. It has every right to challenge the government. It has every right to develop into a permanent political force.
But it must earn that permanence through substance. A movement cannot demand to be treated as the principal architect of Guyana’s future simply because it achieved a spectacular first electoral breakthrough. It must demonstrate seriousness, consistency, policy depth, institutional discipline and an ability to put the national interest above political convenience.
That is particularly important because Guyana cannot afford a politics driven entirely by personalities.
The country needs political parties capable of discussing constitutional reform, economic diversification, education, healthcare, national security, race relations, corruption, governance and the management of oil wealth without every conversation descending into partisan warfare.
The answer, therefore, is not for the PPP and PNC to form some artificial political marriage. Nor is it for opposition politics to disappear.
The answer is political co-operation without political surrender. The two parties can begin by rebuilding trust through regular dialogue, bipartisan committees on national issues, agreed rules for political engagement and frank discussions on constitutional and electoral reform. They should also establish mechanisms through which disagreements can be managed without turning every dispute into an ethnic confrontation.
They must learn to compete fiercely at elections while co-operating intelligently on matters that transcend party politics. That is what mature democracy looks like. And WIN, if it wishes to become a permanent player, should ultimately be invited into that broader culture of co-operation, but on the same basis as everyone else: seriousness, accountability and substance.
The future cannot belong to racial politics. Neither can it belong to convenience politics.
It must belong to national politics. Jagdeo’s remarks, therefore, should not be interpreted simply as an appeal to the PNC. They are a challenge to the entire political class.
Guyana has changed. Its economy has changed. Its demographics have changed. Its aspirations have changed. Its young people have changed.
Politics must change too. Corbin apparently understood that possibility. Jagdeo says he wished their earlier effort at co-operation had succeeded. Perhaps the greatest tribute to Corbin now would be for Guyana’s political leaders to succeed where they once failed.
The PPP and PNC do not have to agree on everything. They simply have to agree that Guyana is bigger than both of them. If that principle finally becomes stronger than race, resentment, and political convenience, then Jagdeo’s warning about extinction could become something far more hopeful: the beginning of a new political era in Guyana.

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.