TroublingstatementsbythePPPonVenezuela

Dear Editor, In recent times, two prominent PPP leaders have made troubling statements on the Venezuela- Guyana border controversy. Given that the PPP is controlled by a clique, which in turn is controlled by Mr Bharrat Jagdeo, the burning question is whether these public comments reflect an internal position of the clique which dominates the PPP. The other question is whether the PPP’s professed public claim of unity with the government against Venezuela’s claims is nothing but a grand show and act. Mr Peter Ramsaroop’s recent suggestion for Guyana to engage in a tri- nation resource exploitation arrangement with Venezuela and Suriname is ludicrous, and could enable the occupation and annexation of Guyana by Venezuela and Suriname. One has to question Mr Ramsaroop’s acumen when he utters a plan to bring not one, but two, neighbours with territorial designs on Guyana into the domination of Guyana’s economic resources, which happen to be located in the very zones spuriously claimed by these countries. Who in their right mind would, in the face of territorial threats, ever propose the kind of solution that could even facilitate possible territorial consumption?

Now, we have Mr Clement Rohee, General Secretary of the PPP, worried about being seen as hostile to Venezuela. Mr Rohee wanting to be seen as docile to Venezuela is the sort of foolishness that emboldens aggressors.

Do those who dominate the PPP support Venezuela? The recent comments encourage that perception. It is time for PPP supporters to wake up and start making their views heard before the impression is given that Freedom House might become Casa de la Libertad. Yours faithfully, M Maxwell