𝐒𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐢𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐑𝐞𝐠𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐑𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬: 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐇𝐲𝐩𝐨𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐆𝐮𝐲𝐚𝐧𝐚’𝐬 𝐅𝐨𝐫𝐞𝐢𝐠𝐧 𝐏𝐨𝐬𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠

𝐁𝐘: 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐟𝐟-𝐖𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐫

𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝟓𝟗𝟐 𝐆𝐔𝐀𝐑𝐃𝐈𝐀𝐍

Guyana’s Minister of Local Government, Priya Manickchand, has launched a scathing attack on CARICOM leaders for engaging Venezuelan official Delcy Rodríguez while she sported a brooch depicting the Essequibo as Venezuelan territory. Her outrage, framed around the sanctity of sovereignty and principle, is—on the surface—understandable. But it is also transparently selective, and that very selectivity strips her position of any remaining moral authority.

Minister Manickchand correctly declared that “principle shouldn’t be convenient.” Yet, convenience has become the hallmark of this administration’s foreign policy. For decades, Cuba stood as a pillar of support for Guyana, providing critical medical expertise that our system relied upon. When the United States exerted pressure, Guyana turned its back on Havana, quietly terminating the Cuban Medical Brigade programme. Where was the public outcry regarding sovereignty and loyalty then? Apparently, principle only applies when it aligns with Washington’s current geopolitical push.

This duplicity is echoed in the recent missive from President Irfaan Ali to the CARICOM Chairman, in which he essentially demands that regional partners calibrate their bilateral engagements to suit Guyana’s sensitivities. It is a bold, if not arrogant, demand for a government that has remained notably silent when other CARICOM nations were being penalized by external powers for failing to fall in line with US interests.

To demand unwavering solidarity from one’s neighbours while exercising cold, opportunistic flexibility at home is a contradiction that does not go unnoticed in regional capitals.

CARICOM is a community of sovereign nations, not an extension of Georgetown’s foreign policy apparatus. Small island states, having navigated years of energy dependency through Petro-diplomacy, are being lectured by an administration that chose to align with Trinidad and Tobago—and by extension, Washington—at the expense of regional cohesion.

The hypocrisy is even more glaring when one looks inward. The government insists that the world must respect Guyana’s sovereignty, yet it refuses to practice that same respect within our own borders. The Attorney General and the President have actively shunned the Leader of the Opposition, denying him a seat at the table to be properly apprised of the upcoming ICJ proceedings. If this administration cannot be bothered to build a unified national front at home, it has no business demanding that CARICOM leaders carry that burden for them abroad.

Sovereignty is not merely a slogan to be brandished at regional summits; it is a responsibility upheld through transparency and inclusion. By excluding domestic stakeholders, the government weakens the very cause it seeks to defend.

Venezuela’s provocative use of symbols is an attempt to project authority where it has none, and it certainly warrants objection. But let us be clear: this is not a loyalty test that Guyana is qualified to administer. You cannot outsource your own integrity.

President Ali and Minister Manickchand are currently posturing as defenders of the realm, yet their actions border on the very bullyism they claim to oppose. They demand from our neighbours a standard they refuse to hold themselves to, assuming that CARICOM will act as a subservient instrument of their selective outrage. They are mistaken.

Diplomacy in the Caribbean is a complex balancing act, and if Guyana wishes to command genuine support, it must stop demanding compliance and start leading with consistency.

𝙎𝙤𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙚𝙞𝙜𝙣𝙩𝙮 𝙗𝙚𝙜𝙞𝙣𝙨 𝙖𝙩 𝙝𝙤𝙢𝙚. 𝙄𝙛 𝙮𝙤𝙪 𝙘𝙖𝙣𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙧𝙚𝙥𝙧𝙚𝙨𝙚𝙣𝙩 𝙞𝙩 𝙬𝙞𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙣 𝙮𝙤𝙪𝙧 𝙤𝙬𝙣 𝙗𝙤𝙧𝙙𝙚𝙧𝙨, 𝙙𝙤 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙚𝙭𝙥𝙚𝙘𝙩 𝙤𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙨 𝙩𝙤 𝙙𝙤 𝙞𝙩 𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙮𝙤𝙪 𝙤𝙣 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙬𝙤𝙧𝙡𝙙 𝙨𝙩𝙖𝙜𝙚.

𝙏𝙝𝙚 592 𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣 — 𝙏𝙧𝙪𝙩𝙝 , 𝘼𝙘𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮, 𝙄𝙣𝙩𝙚𝙜𝙧𝙞𝙩𝙮 𝙄𝙣 𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖 𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝘾𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙗𝙗𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙋𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙥𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙨.