We cannot fully explore US strategy towards Jagan without considering how deep Jagan was embedded in Soviet orbit
Dear Editor,
Please consider this brief note in response to Mr. Harry Hergash’s letter (SN, Dec 6, 2021) in which he took issue with my blog on the SN online edition noting that Dr. Ramharack’s essay was based on original sources; hence, they cannot be seen as “lacking in academic analysis” as his letter of Dec 3 claimed. Ramharack’s columns in the Stabroek News on “Rethinking Forbes Burnham… ” and “Reimagining Cheddi Jagan…” referenced primary sources – thus they are consistent with historical methods. In addition, Ramharack is the author of two books – one on Balram Singh Rai and other on Dr. J.B. Singh – which follow excellent historical techniques. It should be noted that letters and newspaper columns have strict word limits.
Hergash forgot to mention that I noted in a Stabroek News blog that the columns could be developed into a formal paper for a peer-reviewed journal providing they model the tit-for-tat between Jaganite and Burnhamite ethnic factions, and the ultimate failure of these two leaders to shape a national ‘self-interest’ in response to great power conflict or strategies. We just cannot understand these men unless we consider how each was reacting to the perceived strategies of the other, as well as the solid ethnic vote bank of the other
side. I feel the recent Burnham-Jagan essays in Stabroek News are important contributions for the historical account that should be recorded in a well-indexed journal so that 50, 75 or 100 years from now researchers, journalists and opinion leaders can access them.
But notice what I said above, I am not for cussing out Burnham without a serious exploration of his reaction function which embodied his response to Cheddi, Cheddi’s ethnic base, and aspirations of his own Afro-ethnic base. Similarly, I do not support cussing down Jagan without considering his reaction function to Burnham and the PNC’s ethnic base, as well as the aspirations of his largely East Indian base. At minimum, I expect an economist or political scientist to examine tit-for-tat strategies and how these have resulted in the underdevelopment of Guyana.
With much pen-waving, Mr. Hergash also forgot another point I made in the blogs. In spite of its glaring political flaws, American society and federal government are still quite open. At least the Americans have released information on the efforts of the CIA to destabilize and remove leftist governments, including that of Jagan. However, the other great power was not willing to release information and its derivative is still quite closed and nontransparent today. As a result, we are only able to explore and criticize the reaction function of the USA.
Nevertheless, the United States has its reaction function which embodies its security concerns and perceived threats from the former USSR and today’s great and lesser powers. We cannot fully explore the US strategy towards Jagan without considering how deep Jagan was embedded into the Soviet orbit. Indeed, after I proposed this question in the online comments someone posted a link to the following essay: “Cheddi Jagan and Guyanese overtures to the East: Evidence from Czech National Archives.” I find it quite revealing and I hope Guyanese researchers in this line of inquiry will further explore the depth of Jagan’s and the PPP’s engagement with the old Communist bloc.
Studying the strategic interaction of great powers is exactly what astute leaders in small countries must do. Making lofty UN speeches about the New Global Human Order never really impressed me when the strategic choices of these leaders still produce many hungry bellies in their own countries. Therefore, an exploration of the US-USSR strategic conflict and the failure of Guyanese leaders of the era to fully account for them by molding a strategic national ‘self-interest’ is of significant importance today.
As I noted in my blog, which was missed by Hergash’s pen-waving, such knowledge will have significant applications for the Jagdeoian PPP of today. I think it could help to contextualize how another great power underbids on contracts and then later reveals the true cost as overruns (e.g. the airport project and Skeldon sugar factory) with the possibility of converting cash flows (something that looks like an asset now) into a debt.
Finally, I asked another question on the blog, how come shirt jac-wearing Marxist-Leninists of the old PPP produced the transactional leaders of the Jagdeoian PPP? I feel researchers of the behavioural sciences need to explain this for us.