{"id":1712,"date":"2023-12-14T08:13:51","date_gmt":"2023-12-14T08:13:51","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/cls-uk.org.uk\/?p=1712"},"modified":"2023-12-14T08:13:51","modified_gmt":"2023-12-14T08:13:51","slug":"this-region-must-remain-a-zone-of-peace","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cls-uk.org.uk\/?p=1712","title":{"rendered":"This Region Must Remain a Zone of Peace!"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\"\"For the first time in many decades our Caribbean Region is experiencing major tensions \u2013 conflict even <\/span>– <\/span>between states. We have had crises before that have threatened or caused great instability, but these have taken place within a state. We cite, for example: the coup <\/span>d\u2019etats<\/span> that have occurred in Haiti, Dominican Republic; the destruction of the Grenadian Revolution and the assassination of the Prime Minister and other leaders in October 1983; the 1990 attempted coup in Trinidad and Tobago. And of course there have been myriad military coups and civil wars in Central America and Venezuela which all share the Caribbean Sea with us. <\/span>The ongoing and developing conflict between Venezuela and Guyana, however, is a conflict between states.<\/span><\/div>\n
\n

The Movement for Social Justice (MSJ) wishes to state at the outset that we firmly stand by the position that the Caribbean must be a Zone of Peace! This is a position that CARICOM has adopted and reiterated on many occasions \u2013 long before today\u2019s conflict arose. It is also the clearly stated position of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) of which all CARICOM states are members as is Venezuela. <\/span><\/p>\n

The MSJ therefore says that all the peoples of the region, all the citizens of the member states of CELAC and CARICOM must demand that <\/span>Caracas and Georgetown fulfil their international obligations which are moral, if not legal, obligations to ensure that the Region is and remain<\/span>s<\/span> a Zone of Peace! <\/span>This must be the first premise upon which a resolution of the conflict is arrived at.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

There is <\/span>a lot of wisdom in the<\/span> old proverb that <\/span>\u201c<\/span>it takes two to make a<\/span> quarr<\/span>el<\/span>, one cannot blame an argument entirely on the other side.\u201d The root of the problem lies in the old border definitions that were set out in the 1899 Arbitral decision. This was in the era of British colonial and imperial dominance in the world and when the US as the rising power in this hemisphere saw the region as \u201ctheir backyard\u201d as articulated in the Munroe Doctrine, which incidentally was laid out almost exactly 200 years ago today. Venezuela has long felt that this was unfair to the point where successive generations of Venezuelans have grown up verily believing that the Essequibo is an integral part of Venezuela. At the same time, Guyanese, whether born after political independence<\/span>,<\/span> or before<\/span>,<\/span> and those whose fore-parents were born in colonial British Guiana also verily believe <\/span>that <\/span>the Essequibo is an integral part of Guyana.<\/span><\/div>\n
\n
\n

These conflicting beliefs, however, never escalated in the 55 years since Guyana became independent to this level where \u201cdrums of war\u201d are being sounded. What then has led us to this flashpoint? <\/span><\/p>\n

In a word – geo-economic and political developments. More specifically, as soon as Guyana began \u2013 as is their right given that the Essequibo is within its borders \u2013 to issue licences to multinational companies to explore for oil and other valuable minerals in the Essequibo, Venezuela became disturbed. They are of the view that Guyana should not have issued licenses in an area that is <\/span>in dispute.<\/span> <\/span>The point must be made that<\/span> the very rapid production of oil <\/span>in <\/span>Guyana <\/span>by Exxon-Mobil in the last 5 years is not in the disputed region.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

Exxon-Mobil has a very fractious relationship with Venezuela. It refused to abide by decisions of the then Chavez government <\/span>for new tax and other measures and the Chavez government then took control of their operations. Exxon-Mobil sued Venezuela in US courts and lost. Venezuela views Exxon-Mobil as an extension of US foreign policy, particularly since the US Secretary of State under President Trump was Rex Tillerson, a former Exxon-Mobil CEO. Tillerson, we must remember visited Guyana but no other CARICOM country at the time when the US heightened its efforts at regime change in Venezuela \u2013 specifically to remove President Maduro. <\/span><\/p>\n

The presence of Exxon-Mobil in the Essequibo is therefore perceived, rightly or wrongly, by Caracas as being the thin edge of a US wedge against it. Perception <\/span>often becomes that person\u2019s reality. And we must note that Venezuela has been under the US pump for years, so<\/span> how they perceive a situation <\/span>is different from how we would. It is perhaps significant that the decision for the <\/span>R<\/span>eferendum was made after Guyana announced that it would begin auctions for oil licences in the Essequibo region.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Caribbean has, since the 15<\/span>th<\/span> Century, been a region of imperial contest and a theatre <\/span>for <\/span>wars between European colonial and imperial powers, and then later for US colonial and imperial military intervention. We cannot and must not allow this to be continued. The God given resources of the region must not be the raison <\/span>d\u2019etre<\/span> for foreign companies and powers external to the region to lead us into conflict and war. That is why we insist that the Caribbean is and must be a Zone of Peace. <\/span><\/p>\n

The MSJ is deeply concerned about the increasingly noisy and belligerent positions being <\/span>adopted by both Caracas and Georgetown. The holding of the Referendum by Venezuela was a matter of their internal decision and it was, <\/span>in our understanding done in accordance with their national Constitution. That is why the International Court of Justice <\/span>(ICJ) <\/span>did not rule that the Referendum by itself was a violation of international law \u2013 as Guyana claimed. However, at the same time, the outcome of what was a Consultative Referendum <\/span>cannot <\/span>be used by Venezuela as giving it any right to unilateral<\/span>ly take actions over Essequibo, which it now is doing.<\/span> Unilateral action by a state against another state<\/span> is wrong in international law, whether it is the US im<\/span>posing<\/span> unilateral sanctions or Venezuela issuing decrees.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

What has been happening in the days before, and since, the Referendum is the beating of the \u201cdrums of war\u201d by both sides. Georgetown has announced that it is establishing defence arrangements with the United States. The US Secretary of State has held discussions with Georgetown. The US Southern Command is involved. This is <\/span>definitely <\/span>not helpful<\/span> and will be seen by Caracas as a threat<\/span> and facilitating US military incursion into Ven<\/span>e<\/span>zuela<\/span>.<\/span> On the other hand, Caracas has announced that it has appointed a Governor for Essequibo, who happens to be a General and has stated that it is inviting companies to bid for licences for mineral exploration an<\/span>d production. This is not good and is seen by Georgetown as a threat<\/span> of invasion<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n

The MSJ calls on both capitals to take down their rhetoric. We say that there must be no foreign intervention or involvement \u2013 military or otherwise \u2013 in this conflict. Such involvement will only push us closer to the conflict escalating beyond words and announcements into deeds from which <\/span>it will be hard to retreat. External forces of whatever stripe will only pursue their interests, which history has taught us i<\/span>s<\/span> never in the interest of our peoples and region.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

The issue of borders that were arbitrarily drawn by colonial powers in their interest, without any consideration of the culture and life of the people who lived in those areas, has caused crises and wars all over the world. However, reversing those decisions decades or even hundreds of years afterwards is also extremely problematic as this would alter, for example, every border in Africa and most in South and Central America.<\/span><\/p>\n

The MSJ believes that the way forward lies in dialogue and diplomacy. Not war. Disputes can be <\/span>best <\/span>settled by dialogue and discussions. In a war there may be victor militarily, but the loser will not accept the outcome which was imposed on it. <\/span>While the issue of the substance of the dispute is before the ICJ, it is often better \u2013 as many trade unions would know \u2013 for a matter to be settled bilaterally between the parties in dispute, rather than having a court impose a judgment. The present situation with the ICJ has been made more difficult because Venezuela does not recognise the ICJ\u2019s jurisdiction to determine the dispute while Guyana and CARICOM definitely do.<\/span><\/p>\n

CARICOM is in a unique position to ensure that such dialogue takes place. For one thing, Venezuela and CARICOM have had excellent relations especially since President Chavez took office just over 20 years ago. There have been important actions of collaboration \u2013 <\/span>PetroCaribe<\/span>, Operation Milagro, the T&T-Venezuela gas partnerships. In the last six months three CARICOM Heads of Government \u2013 PM Ralph Gonsalves, PM Mia Mottley and PM Philip Pierre have been to Caracas and others have been previously. There are bilateral agreements between CARICOM member States and Venezuela, often to our benefit. At the recent UN General Assembly in <\/span>September, several CARICOM Heads spoke in defence of Venezuela and openly called on the US to end its illegitimate and punitive unilaterally imposed sanction<\/span>s.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

Prime Minister Rowley has, o<\/span>n several, <\/span>done the same and the T&T Government has gone further to engage the US on removing or at the minimum easing the sanctions so that T&T and Venezuela can exploit our natural gas resources for the benefit of both nations and our peoples. PM Ralph Gonsalves recently received Venezuela\u2019s highest national awards and at present is the President of CELAC. <\/span>There are therefore possibilities to avert any further escalation of this dispute. <\/span>Most CARICOM countries recognised President Maduro as the legitimate and duly elected President of Venezuela in spite of intense pressure from the US, Canada and the European Union. We stood by principle. <\/span>Venezuela has to recognise and appreciate that.<\/span><\/p>\n

For the record and in keeping with full transparency, we wish to state that the MSJ\u2019s Political Leader, David Abdulah, publicly spoke about this border issue on November 8th – a month ago -when he was interviewed on WESN TV by <\/span>one of T&T\u2019s<\/span> most experienced journalists, Mr. Andy Johnson. Since then he has been interviewed by two US radio stations \u2013 WPFW in Washington DC and WBAI in New York. <\/span><\/p>\n

Secondly, <\/span>the MSJ has stated on many occasions we are a member party of the Sao Paulo Forum which is a grouping of Latin American and Caribbean left and progressive parties. The PSUV \u2013 the party of Presidents Chavez and Maduro – and its coalition partners in Venezuela are also members of the Sao Paulo Forum. However, our relationship with them does not in any way bind <\/span>us to adopt their party positions as each party can independently take positions on issues that affect their countries. It is to be noted that the current governing party in St. Lucia \u2013 the St. Lucia Labour Party – is also a member of the <\/span>Foro<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

Through our relationship with the PSUV and <\/span>the <\/span>Bolivarian labour movement<\/span>,<\/span> leaders of the MSJ also met with the two Venezuelan MP\u2019s who were in Trinidad last week for a public forum held at the Cipriani College of Labour and Co-operative Studies. Both MP\u2019s are long standing and senior leaders of the trade union movement and also are in the PSUV. Our position to them was as we have stated in this release \u2013 that the Caribbean is and must be a Zone of Peace and that the<\/span> con<\/span>flict must be resolved through dialogue, diplomacy and not by war. We noted that this position was <\/span>publicly <\/span>articulated by them at the said forum. So this suggests that in spite of all the rhetoric there is hope for a peaceful resolution. <\/span><\/p>\n

Different to our open and transparent declaration, the Opposition UNC has been playing games on Venezuela. It must not be forgotten that they backed the imposter Juan <\/span>Guaido<\/span>, were constant critics of the Dragon gas field negotiations, wanted the US to sanction this country for meeting with top leaders from Caracas, and now are pushing the drums of war. This is not the example of statecraft that is needed at this time. <\/span>We have issued a very detailed statement on this situation since short comments and sound bites cannot do justice to what is a delicate and complex issue.<\/span> We trust that his helps our people to better understand the situation at a time when emotional responses and some misinformation abound.<\/span> We look forward to a progressive outcome from tomorrow\u2019s CARICOM Heads meeting.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

Movement for Social Justice
\n<\/span>David Abdulah<\/strong>
\n<\/span>Political Leader<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

For the first time in many decades our Caribbean Region is experiencing major tensions \u2013 conflict even – between states. We have had crises before that have threatened or caused…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1712","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-campaigns"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cls-uk.org.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1712","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cls-uk.org.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cls-uk.org.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cls-uk.org.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cls-uk.org.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1712"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/cls-uk.org.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1712\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1716,"href":"https:\/\/cls-uk.org.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1712\/revisions\/1716"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cls-uk.org.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1712"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cls-uk.org.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1712"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cls-uk.org.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1712"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}