Latest update June 20th, 2025 12:40 AM
Latest News
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
The Unkindest Cut
Kaieteur News – Building a pre-election coalition is never easy. It takes more than meetings. It takes more than deals. It takes a foundation of trust, a commitment to principle, and a shared vision for the future. Without these, coalitions fall apart before they even begin. David Granger knew this better than most. He had led a coalition government. He had seen the strengths and the failures of such arrangements. That is why he warned that coalitions must be built on policies and programmes, not on positions and power. His words were not just theory—they were born of hard political experience. They were a lesson to anyone attempting to build a united front against the ruling PPP. Forbes Burnham had said plainly that he would never again lead the PNCR into a coalition. He did not need to. He resorted to rigging elections to stay in power. This is why the 2015 Cummingsburg Accord was of such historic significance. Unfortunately, that coalition held together only in form; but never in substance. Granger would have been a witness to the problems associated with coalitions between parties of vastly unequal strengths. The PNCR and the AFC had engaged in negotiations aimed at forming a pre-election coalition. Unfortunately, it does not appear that either party had heeded Granger’s wisdom. Instead of focusing on a common programme of action, the negotiations, it would appear, were mired in talk about seats, portfolios, and who would get what after the election. It appears that little attention paid to what a coalition would do for the people. No bold plans. No policy agreements. Just old-fashioned horse-trading. But the greatest failure of all—the most devastating blow—was not about policies. It was about trust. Trust is the oxygen of any coalition. Without it, nothing survives. And in this case, that trust was shattered, not by those who left the AFC, but by those who poached them. Three senior members of the AFC reportedly have defected to the PNCR. That in itself is not unusual in politics. People change allegiances. People have a right to defect. But what made this different was the context. The AFC and PNCR were months ago in coalition talks. They were supposed to be working together to build a united platform. They were supposed to be partners- in-the-making. And yet, after these talks reached an impasse, the PNCR reached into the leadership of the AFC and pulled out key individuals. Even if the persons made the approaches, the PNCR should have refused. By accepting these high-level defections, the PNCR has weakened the AFC from within. And it was done at time when there was still a flicker of hope that a pre-election coalition could have still been arrived at. That is the unkindest cut of all. No coalition can survive such a move. No party can be expected to continue negotiations after its very leadership has been undermined by a party with which it had hoped to form a pre-election coalition. The PNCR has acted in bad faith. The AFC has every right to feel upset. It had invested time and political capital into talks about coalition in order to pose a credible challenge to the PPP. But instead of partnership, it received a knife in the back. And let us be clear: the knife was not held by the defectors. It was held by the PNCR. They made the choice to poach. They made the choice to breach the unwritten rules of alliance-building. They made the choice to destroy the very trust on which a coalition must stand. Now, any talk of resuming coalition discussions is pure fantasy. The bridge has been burned. The damage is irreversible. What began as a shaky effort at unity has ended in division and mistrust. The AFC cannot—and should not—enter into any further discussions with the PNCR. Not now. Not after what has happened. To do so would be to ignore the most basic lesson of coalition-building: That without trust, there is nothing. The PNCR has shown it cannot be trusted as a coalition partner. It has acted not as a collaborator but as a competitor. It has not sought consensus; it has sought control. And in doing so, it has destroyed any remaining hope of a pre-election alliance. It is not enough to want to remove the PPP from office. That cannot be the sole objective of any political alliance. Because if that is all you have, you will not know what to do once you get there. Power cannot be the destination. It must be the means to a higher end—governance, service, reform. That is what Granger understood. That is what is now lost. (The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.) Read More →
Antigua and Barbuda hosts the OAS at a crucial juncture for the Americas
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News – The 55th Regular Session of the General Assembly of the Organisation of American States (OAS) will be held in one of its smallest member states at a time of global political and economic uncertainty. That uncertainty is reflected across the Americas and within the OAS itself. In this regard, the General Assembly in Antigua and Barbuda, from June 25 to 27, takes on special significance: it must provide the atmosphere and leadership to reinforce the OAS as a relevant instrument for advancing both individual and collective interests in the hemisphere. Adding to the importance of this session is the first official appearance of the Organisation’s new Secretary-General, Albert Ramdin, who assumed office for a five-year term on May 26. He is the first national from the CARICOM group elected to this top post. For 40 years, CARICOM nationals held only the Assistant Secretary-General role, while Latin American countries dominated the leadership. His unanimous election, following a contest with Paraguay’s Foreign Minister, reflects confidence in CARICOM’s contributions within the OAS. CARICOM representatives have worked diligently in OAS councils, over many years, to earn this respect. The Government of Antigua and Barbuda, as host and chair of the assembly, is acutely conscious of its role in providing an environment and guidance suited to current challenges. This assembly takes place amid overlapping political, economic, social, security, and environmental pressures, and against a backdrop of longstanding institutional strains within the OAS. Those strains include chronic budget shortfalls, staffing gaps, and an overload of unfunded mandates, alongside the need to match aspirations with operational realities. Building Inclusivity amid Tensions in the Americas Trade and migration tensions among the organisation’s members, particularly Canada, Mexico, and the United States, remain public and ongoing. Ideological and other differences between Latin American states have surfaced in the OAS during elections for officeholders, such as the Assistant Secretary-General (now Colombia’s Laura Gil) and the commissioners of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to be chosen at this assembly. Amid these tensions, Antigua and Barbuda has advanced the theme of the 55th General Assembly: “Building resilient and inclusive economies in the Americas.” This theme captures pressing concerns across the region, emphasising resilience—strengthening economies to withstand external shocks, whether global market disruptions, climate events, or public health emergencies—and inclusivity, allowing each member and observer state, large or small, to articulate its priorities within a collective framework. It reaffirms that improving the well-being of every citizen in the Americas is a shared goal, and that collaboration, mutual respect, and solidarity are essential. It is in that spirit that Antigua and Barbuda—whose foreign minister, E. Paul Chet Greene, is expected to be elected chair—proposes to guide the assembly. Institutional Context: Chronic Strains and Mandate Overload Even with political will, progress faces an uphill battle due to inadequate funding. For years, the OAS Secretariat has contended with a persistent gap between assessed contributions and the costs of its core programmes. Overreliance on unpredictable voluntary contributions, including support from observer states, further exposes key programmes to abrupt suspensions. As delegates prepare to debate mechanisms for mandate management and to consider the organisation’s budget and funding sources, matching ambitions to resources remains vital for the OAS’s effectiveness and credibility. Governance and Humanitarian Pressures Democratic practices across member states show signs of strain. For example, a June 2025 assassination attempt on Miguel Uribe, a presidential candidate in Colombia, underscores risks to electoral integrity and citizen confidence. However, the most acute emergency grips Haiti, where armed groups now control the majority of Port-au-Prince, blocking basic state functions, precipitating a humanitarian catastrophe, and preventing the restoration of democratic institutions and the election of a representative government. At the General Assembly, it is incumbent upon the OAS and its member states, within the framework of the OAS Charter and their respective means, to continue demonstrating solidarity with the people of Haiti. Discussions in the Margins As important as the formal agenda is, equally vital are the informal discussions among high representatives of member and observer states that will take place outside public sessions. These exchanges on global economic and political realities often shape understanding and trust, informing official deliberations. And the international scene is not encouraging. Global growth projections for 2025 indicate subdued expansion, with the United Nations forecasting approximately 2.4 per cent growth worldwide. Regional estimates indicate growth near 2.5 per cent in South America, about 1.0 per cent in Central America and Mexico, and under 2 per cent in the Caribbean for 2025. Elevated debt burdens limit fiscal space for social investments. Inflationary pressures have resurfaced amid trade tensions. U.S. tariffs, imposed on all countries last April, have raised costs in hemispheric supply chains, intensifying cost-of-living strains even where measures have been paused. Concurrent reductions in US funding—for example, cuts affecting UN organisations, the Pan-American Health Organisation (PAHO), and the OAS—impact health programmes and emergency-response capacity, with knock-on effects on workforce productivity in these organisations and social welfare conditions in Latin American and Caribbean countries. These economic and social pressures underscore why the assembly’s consideration of financing the OAS’s Programme Budget for 2026 mirrors the broader fiscal constraints faced by member governments. The discussion will not be procedural; it will be vital. Spillover effects of conflicts The Russian war against Ukraine, the Israel-Hamas conflict in Gaza, and the high level of civilian deaths in both theatres have spilled over into the concerns of OAS member states as the prospect of global economic and political instability grows. Though not on the formal agenda of the assembly, delegates will hardly be able to avoid informal discussion of these issues in their private conversations. Conclusion: Seizing a Watershed Moment for the OAS Therefore, the General Assembly in Antigua presents an opportunity for member states to reclaim the relevance of the OAS and to deliver results that citizens truly value. Member States face a clear choice: allow another assembly to close amid familiar frustrations, or seize this moment with pragmatic actions to foster resilient, inclusive economies across the Americas for the benefit of all. (The writer is Antigua and Barbuda’s Ambassador to the US. He is also the Dean of the Corps of Ambassadors accredited to the Organisation of American States. The views expressed are entirely his own. Responses and previous commentaries: www.sirronaldsanders.com) Read More →
Opposition Leader
Hard Truth… By GHK Lall Kaieteur News – From Ms. Amanza to Mr. Aubrey: ‘ah done. Ah gone. Bags packed, ticket booked, goodbye.’ It’s the sum of what she said. The sum of what I say is, how much more of this can Opposition Leader, Mr. Aubrey Norton weather? The trickle is enough to make teetotalers tipsy. Mr. Norton has said before that he is not worried, he’s confident. I wonder what he is going to say now, especially since I study Cde Roysdale, his potential moves. Frankly, Mr. Norton’s ship is sailing, but to where and what? Victory over the PPP has been his steady mantra. I now share mine. Disclosures. I haven’t had the pleasure, prefer not to, of meeting either Big Doctor Jagdeo, or the other. But I have had the courtesy of Aubrey Norton’s time. Thoughtful and helpful, getting his measure. Back then, the expectations were high all around. Today, some close people are running all over. It is not looking good; certainly not strengthening as the clock ticks. The timing is off, appearance horrible, result alarming. PPP more and more every day, by a whisker. I may not vote, but still demand a government of merit, clean leadership. Because such is alien to the PPP of today, and getting more remote hourly, a viable opposition is mandatory. Not just an opposition in name, but one of substance. Visible substance; audible, credible substance. This begins, ends, with the Opposition Leader. His strengths, his passions, his inspirations that make others willing to charge into machine gun fire and take a hill for him. Instead of those in the PNC manifesting the willingness to do so under Major Norton, more than a few represent the opposite. That is, a clean pair of heels. High heels before, higher heels today; and before both a PNC stalwart who dug in his heels and took some bullets from the PPP for country, people, and the PNC. Today, he is a salesman for the PPP. In Guyana, few things are considered worse. But such are democracy’s drifts and freedoms. Whatever Mr. Norton may present in the public space, these defections must hurt. They testify to the confidence (or lack thereof) in his leadership. Style could be one. Essence another. Possibilities still another. This is costly for the Opposition Leader. If this is the action, conclusion, and movement, of his people on the inside, it doesn’t leave much for his own people on the outside to go on. Every vote counts. But, today, the PPP stands in my assessment in a Cheshire cat’s position: more votes than cups in which to accommodate them. There is full understanding that the opposition has little by way of jobs, contracts, cash, duty-free concessions, prime lands to offer its disgruntled and ambitious. Moreover, it has no standing to make charges that may be pending disappear in the closet, and held in reserve for any bad boys or girl, who get ideas of going back to the PNC. But this is where a leader has to be at his best, inspire the faltering troops to the glories awaiting. I point Guyanese to Fidel Castro of Cuba. Before him, there was China’s Mao Zedong. What did those emptyhanded leaders have to offer their believers? Forget about Winston Churchill and his verbal ‘blood, sweat, and tears, transcendences. What Fidel and Mao had was that strange inner aura known as charisma. A little bit of the old machismo also helped. A heavy hand, steel-tipped boot had their uses. Unfortunately, Aubrey Norton doesn’t measure well in those departments. He has gone from a feared street dragon to an all-too-cool diplomat. Some have interpreted that as weakness, a fatal one. Whatever it is, the PNC is losing tonnage under his command. Of course, he has not been helped from day one by his own people in his own party, with whom he ran the streets, reached the rafters. How does a leader succeed, when everyone believes that he or she could be a better leader? Or when past leaders were never sold on him, dug holes in his path? I sensed that he was a man ordained to fight a war with one hand tied behind his back, and one foot attached to one of those ancient PNC cannonballs. All this has been to Big Boss Bharrat’s advantage, and he isn’t the kind that allows opportunity to go abegging. Those who say they endorse, have expressed no remorse. What happened to the Colossus that was the PNC? The leadership that was Kim and Vlad and Modi all blended into one? Though he is sure to disagree, all of this has wounded Mr. Norton’s grievously. If not so, then enough to leave the PNC looking like an aged punching bag past its prime. The only issue remaining is who’s next and when? One more: and into whose loving, welcoming arms they are going. (The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.) Read More →
Weekend Cartoon
