Facing the Venezuelan threat

The news that the Venezuelan Government, through its Foreign Affairs Minister Delcy Rodríguez, has objected to Esso/Exxon about their oil rig preparing to explore for oil off the coast of Essequibo in a concession granted by the Guyana Government, should be cause for concern for all Guyanese.

Informing the United Nations Secretary General; the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR); the Organisation of American States (OAS) and the Commonwealth, the Government of Guyana reacted with alacrity to the provocative action: “The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has requested that the Government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela desist from taking any actions that could only result in the stymieing of the development of Guyana and its people and that would be in contravention of international law.”

This action is even more serious than the last response to Guyana’s effort to exploit its mineral resources in the area. Back in October 2013, the Guyanese Government had hired the oil drilling company Anadarko to conduct studies for future oil concessions in the Roraima Block off Essequibo’s coast, where it was concentrating on petroleum exploration. The Venezuelan Navy intercepted the ship and forced it into a port at Venezuela’s Margarita Island. The captain, a Ukrainian national, was charged with violating Venezuela’s Exclusive Economic Zone while the rest of the crew were released.

As in the present situation, our Foreign Affairs Ministry made a stern response: “The Government of Guyana is of the firm belief that the actions taken by the Venezuelan navy vessel constitute a serious threat to the peace of this sub-region and the Government of Guyana, therefore, strongly condemns these actions.”

From the statements of the Venezuelan Opposition, it was clear that they were behind the objections to the Guyanese petroleum exploration efforts in light of the accommodative posture adopted by then President Hugo Chávez to the Venezuelan pretensions to two thirds of Guyana. The Venezuelan Opposition claimed that the Government of Nicolás Maduro was now in favour of the idea of Guyana exploring for oil in waters off the Essequibo contra to Venezuelan claims that the Roraima Block was located in Venezuelan waters off Delta Amacuro state, in eastern Venezuela.

In the subsequent effort to deal with the matter, the Foreign Ministers of Guyana and Venezuela met on October 17 in Trinidad and hashed out an agreement that a technical team would meet within four months “to explore mechanisms within the context of international law to address the issue of maritime delimitation”. As Foreign Minister Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett noted at the time, both sides restated that their individual and contradictory claims were valid, but in an evident coup for Guyana, the maritime demarcation was delinked from the fallacious claim Venezuela had been making for Essequibo.

This latest objection to Guyana developing its petroleum resources off Essequibo by the Venezuelan Government – without explicit arms-rattling by its Opposition – suggests that the Maduro Government is extremely weak and is attempting to preempt Opposition criticisms in the face of their necessary equivocation in the face of the mega US oil company being involved in this venture.

For us in Guyana, it is a salutary reminder that no matter what might be the personal relationships developed with the leaders of Venezuela, the border controversy is so deeply embedded in Venezuelan nationalistic politics, it can never be taken for granted. It is very heartening to note that Opposition Leader David Granger has supported the Government’s stance on the issue, just as Cheddi Jagan had done when the Venezuelans had invaded our portion of Ankoko Island. Not a blade of grass then and not a barrel of oil now.

Our Government and its diplomats must intensify their efforts to have the signed commitment by the Venezuelan Government to demarcate our maritime border – with no linkage to any other claims, pursued to its natural conclusion: that our demarcation is the legal one as was the case with the Surinamese claim back in 2000.