Diaspora politics

Some diasporas in the United States attempt to influence how Washington engages with their countries of origin. The classic case is that of the Cubans, whose voting power in Florida is dictating US policy towards Havana even although the traditional stance no longer makes sense. Thanks to them, President Obama’s brief change of direction was abandoned by his successor and still has not been reinstated. The Sunshine State has great importance in presidential elections, of course, both in terms of the size of its population and because until very recently, at least, it was something of a swing state.

Guyana is no Cuba, of course, and neither does its diaspora have the numbers to equate to the Florida Cubans and their hispanophone allies. The epicentre of the Guyana migrant community is probably Brooklyn, New York, not, one might have thought, the most expansive base for a foray into the highest levels of the American government. Yet one segment of our diaspora has managed to do just that. The first thing to be noted about Guyanese in America is that they are not like their counterparts in the UK, for example. It is true that the diaspora there comprises a much older age group than is the case elsewhere, and as a consequence is less involved with modern politics in the homeland, but the most important thing about it is that it tends to identify as Guyanese and less as African Guyanese or Indian Guyanese.

In contrast, for the most part the US-based diaspora reflects the ethno-political divide of Guyana itself, although there are always those who decline to be defined in terms of their homeland politics. What Brooklyn does have from the point of view of some politically inclined members of the diaspora, is Mr Hakeem Jeffries, a longstanding representative of the 8th Congressional District (i.e. southern and eastern Brooklyn) and prior to his most recent appointment, the Chair of the Congressional Black Caucus. He is now the Minority Leader in the House of Representatives, having succeeded Ms Nancy Pelosi in that post. In other words he is now the leading House Democrat.

Mr Rickford Burke of the Caribbean Guyana Institute for Democracy was presumably not unmindful of the opportunity an association with him would present, and clearly established a relationship. The connection became apparent in the Congressman’s statements in 2021 and last year which harmonised with the position CGID was promoting. It must be said that while Mr Burke is a talented lobbyist, his perspective in relation to this country’s party politics fall at the extremist end of the spectrum and are counterproductive at a minimum, if not potentially destabilising. As it is, he will have to face a criminal charge should he return to Guyana. During an address in a Seventh-day Adventist church last year, Mr Jeffries referred to the fact that Guyanese were living in a situation of “racism”, and that “We are not going to tolerate racism down in Guyana…” His remarks the year before during an event labelled an ‘Anti-PPP Racism March & Rally’ arranged by Guyanese Organisations Against Racism, produced a response from the government that these were appalling. It described itself as being “disappointed” that the “Congressman has allowed himself to be negatively influenced by individuals who are … instigating … division among our people.” It invited Mr Jeffries to have discussions “on matters of mutual interest.”

An invitation was issued for the Congressman to meet President Irfaan Ali, but it did not take place. The President alleged that he never responded, although that was disputed, but whatever the case the head of state then launched into a most impolitic criticism of Mr Jeffries’ presumed dereliction. “He has not responded to the ambassador’s invitation. Ask yourself, why? If you have all these concerns, why you haven’t attended a meeting that you were invited to?” he asked. The President continued in

even more imprudent vein: “Stop playing politics with the future of a country. This President will not allow it. I will speak about it. And in stronger terms as I speak about it,” he said.

This year, presumably after the government got the full measure of exactly who it had been lecturing so patronisingly over the previous aborted confab, an invitation was extended for the House Minority Leader to meet the President. There has been no official statement from the Office of the President on what emerged from the encounter, but Foreign Secretary Robert Persaud, reflecting a more diplomatic approach said on his Facebook page: “We are happy that the Congressman and Democratic Leader in the House responded to the government’s request to meet which enabled a constructive discourse on regional issues and the trajectory of Guyana’s socioeconomic development.”

House Minority Leader Jeffries also had something to say on his Facebook page, indicating he was accompanied by several congressional Democrats with various areas of expertise. He said they discussed matters which included, “regional and energy security, the climate crisis and the importance of an inclusive society in Guyana that involved full economic participation and civic engagement by Guyanese-Africans and Guyanese-Indians. We also discussed electoral reform, strengthening democratic institutions and the need to bolster access to banking and financial services in the Caribbean region.”

There is nothing suggesting any kind of extremism there, although the President might have been resistant to what was said about inclusion. That he was not happy was implied by the fact that the OP carried photos and reports on various meetings he had with a number of US political leaders, although not Mr Jeffries. The appointment with the latter had been sought most likely because the government knew he was going to meet the opposition, which he subsequently did, and it wanted to neutralise in advance any negative messages that side was likely to convey.

The encounter with the opposition took place at the end of last month, again in the presence of various other congressional Democrats. This time on his Facebook page Mr Jeffries said, among other things, “[W]e discussed a vision for a Guyanese economy and a society that is inclusive, developed and equitable for everyone, including the Afro-Guyanese community … “We will continue to engage with our Guyanese counterparts and other regional neighbors and encourage the government and the opposition to work together to ensure that all Guyanese citizens, regardless of race or ethnicity, benefit from the growth underway in the South American nation”.

As was pointed out in our report on the above story, what Mr Jeffries had to say was largely in tandem with what former US Ambassador Sarah-Ann Lynch had said during her term here, as well as in an interview with this newspaper before she left. She said that both the government and opposition wanted what was best for the country, and should begin discussions among themselves which would include all stakeholders. Such discussions should not shut out civil society, whose role should be taken seriously in holding politicians accountable, she said. As for the two main political parties, she encouraged them to “talk, communicate, debate and listen. You know it’s through conversations that we all grow and we all learn from each other.”

If Mr Jeffries sounds less like Mr Burke, and more like the US government as represented by Ms Lynch, and, it might be added, Secretary of State Antony Blinken too, it is because he is in a different position. He will now have much wider access to information, including, perhaps, from the State Department which derives its information directly from its mission here.

The problem with our parties is that they have a bizarre, not to mention unrealistic way of going about things. Instead of inaugurating the conversations here which are necessary to deal with our issues, they seek to sway American officialdom into putting pressure on one side or the other to reflect how they see the problem. In this case it was Mr Jeffries who was the recipient of arguments from the opposition that the government was racist, and no doubt from the government that the real racists were the opposition. At least, that is what VicePresident Bharrat Jagdeo spends a fair amount of his time insisting in his press conferences.

However, at the end of the day it is the PPP/C which is in office, and it must be the one to inaugurate the processes which would allow for meaningful exchanges and the adherence to the Constitution. The tools for giving ‘inclusion’ some meaning are in its hands. Government by referee simply can’t work. The solutions, long term though they might be, lie here in Guyana, not in the United States or in the hands of any government official in the United States. In addition, it should recognise, that excluding the representatives of the African population in this country will be construed outside as a form of racism, and the only way for it to counter the allegations of the African-Guyanese diaspora lobbyists, is to develop a strategy for inclusion.

After all that has been said on both sides that will not be an easy task, but a tentative beginning can be made with the President bringing himself into conformity with the Constitution on consultation. We do not need diaspora politics grafted on top of our local political landscape.