Shake-up at Foreign Ministry must be seen as move by the Presidency to exercise greater political control

Dear Editor,

As a former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Guyana (1992-2001) I cannot help but interpret the recent ‘diplomatic shake-up’ at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as anything other than a breakdown in policy formulation and coordination between the Ministry of the Presidency and the Foreign Ministry.

Viewed from the perspective of management of the ship of state, it is perhaps, a manifestation of the President’s exuberance for foreign affairs characterized by defects of coordination and hubris with an electoral agenda in mind.

Having been caught napping, the caretaker/illegal government of President David Granger tried desperately to camouflage damage control as “Re-balancing” when in effect, its actions were essentially the overthrow of certain long-established diplomatic practices and conventions.

The so-called ‘rebalancing’ seems to be more easily prescriptive than achievable.

The amateurish dabbling in the deep recesses of foreign relations by the amateurish Foreign Minister was, for all intents and purposes, the casus belli for the precipitous breakdown in communications between the Foreign Ministry and the Ministry of the Presidency.

And, as was to be expected, some were made to be the fall guys.

The heavy- handed political intervention by the Ministry of the Presidency must have raised the eyebrows of those Senior Foreign Service Officers who will remain at their posts, as to whether they could, under the prevailing circumstances be able to continue playing an honourable and influential role at the capitals to which they have been posted.

It would not be surprising if in the wake of the shakeup, many would now view their future unhappily and their days as being numbered.

The unconventional manner and undue haste by which the services of their colleagues were dispensed with must have left them looking askance, if not in bewilderment at each other

And while some at Takuba Lodge may be rubbing their hands in glee at the dramatic turn of events favourable to them, the backstabbing and covetousness, coupled with the untimely and disruptive nature of government’s actions can have a deleterious effect on foreign service morale and efficiency, and, by extension on Guyana’s diplomatic efforts abroad.

From all appearances, a combination of personal and political considerations, rather than an objective appraisal of the international situation played a major part in the shake-up.

If there are two government agencies that must always be at one at all times in pursuit of matters of state, they are the Ministry of the Presidency and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The recent shake up at Foreign Affairs has demonstrated that this has not been the case under the APNU+AFC caretaker/illegal administration.

Internal friction began since the Ministry was divided into two and the sudden irruption of a Foreign Secretary and a Foreign Minister in a single Foreign Ministry. The facade of harmony was to soon give way to a disharmonious situation.

If it is true what is being peddled about that there is a push by some, known only to the President, but not to key functionaries at the Foreign Ministry, to assume chairmanship of the G77 and China, then it is clear that there was no unified tactical nor strategic approach by the principals in Georgetown and Guyana’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations. As the plot unraveled, it became clear that some at the Foreign Ministry were left out of the loop.

The last occasion Guyana assumed the Chairmanship of then 133 (now 134) member grouping was on January 12, 1999 under a PPP/C administration.

Guyana’s assumption of the Group’s Chairmanship eventuated from a seamless, unified and a highly coordinated approach adopted by the Permanent Representative in New York, the Foreign Ministry and the Office of the President.

In this regard, there was absolutely no room for amateurishness, imprecision nor feckless opportunism.

In addition to coordinating the Group’s year-long activities at the UN, Guyana played the lead role in preparations for the first ever South Summit held in Havana in 2000.

Border issues have always been the core functions of Guyana’s Foreign Ministry. And its staff strength in that area has by far been the greater part of its personnel.

The Ministry’s core functions are addressed though its diplomatic efforts at the bilateral and multilateral levels as well as through its economic diplomacy efforts.

Any attempt to steal a march on the core functions of the Ministry by over-ambitious elements within the Ministry’s highly integrated structure can result in chaos.

The Foreign Ministry’s uncontested right to advise government on border matters in particular and foreign affairs in general cannot be underestimated.

While it is the President’s and cabinet’s prerogative to give general policy direction for the execution of government policy, in the case of the Foreign Ministry, the tasks of the career diplomats is to draft policies and to advise and guide the President and his cabinet on international relations and assist in the formulation of foreign policy.

In matters of policy, a Foreign Ministry’s submissions can be ignored or shrugged aside by the President and his cabinet, but at no time should a trained and professional diplomatist be supplanted or superseded by a politician in the practice of diplomacy.

New aspirants to the privileges and functions peculiar to a Foreign Ministry will step forward providing a clear indication that the Ministry’s functions would become even more chaotic in the coming months.

Moreover, the sweeping ukase abolishing the post of Director General and replacing it with that of a Permanent Secretary must have dealt a severe blow to the Foreign Ministry’s proud and distinctive role that set it apart in many respects from other government agencies and departments.

The post of Director General was established with the personal approval of then President Forbes Burnham who had received for his consideration, the travail preparatoire for a draft Bill calling for the enactment of legislation elevating the Foreign Ministry to a level where all public service rules did not apply and to effect fundamental institutional changes at the Ministry including responsibilities and official designations of home-based staff, their salaries and allowances peculiar to a Foreign Ministry.

The records show that Burnham was not entirely convinced. He instructed that the draft bill be put on hold but not before he approved some of the recommendations contained therein including the establishment, inter alia of the post of Director General as Head of the Ministry.

The shake-up at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, influenced primarily by the Ministry of the Presidency must be seen as a move to exercise greater political control over an institution, who, in the eyes of the public can be a distraction from pressing domestic economic, social and political issues but whose value, depending on a government’s strategic outlook of the international situation, may very well be a jewel in the crown.

Yours faithfully,

Clement J. Rohee

Former Minister of Foreign Affairs