Mr. Carter has left with a voluminous amount of information we he has to sift out, analyze, then come to conclusion. He first came here in 1992 and unless you are a Freedom House mandarin who owns a piece of Guyana through party patronage, then you will agree, Carter must have been bewildered at the ubiquity and intensity of the divisive nature of Guyanese politics
Carter saw Guyana as a model that would propel his democratization project into the international limelight. It didn't happen. Carter's effort to make Guyana a paragon of democratic transition was both a success and a failure. The problem with Carter's methodology is that it cannot be a to-pronged process. Carter himself knows this that is why he is here again. The transition to democracy in post- autocratic regimes has to be seen in holistic terms.
In evaluating the writings of the scholars who form the fulcrum of the Carter Centre's international pace-setting team, it is clear that they do not separate free election from democratic governance and they did not intend to have Guyana go through that narrow route. But Guyana has. So did the Carter Centre fail? The answer is no.
Guyana's failure to sustain democracy cannot be seen as faulty academic judgement by the Carter Centre scholars. The pre- 1992 opposition was highly regarded by the Carter Centre. This was a richhly experienced, poly-class opposition that consisted of church officials, social democrats, esteemed academics, the middle class and the business community. If the academic community here could not have seen the convoluted paths the PPP would have taken, then how could an American-based organization have done so?
There was a lot written about the PPP by those who left it, those who were expelled, those that were alienated, those who hobnobbed with it, those who studied it prior to 1992. There was a systematic body of existing literature that painted a picture of a party that was not too enamoured of democratic ways. But the PPP was an essential part of the long fight and there was more than just a passing moment of its generosity. Who wants to be to be continuously suspicious of your fellow comrade even though you and him/her belonged to different parties?
Given its long years in the wilderness, given its mammoth effort in the fight against the PNC dictatorship, the PPP had to respected and trusted. All the elements in the confrontation since 1968 when rigged elections began, but since the fall of communism, knew that the old style PPP was now a team player. No one in pre-1992 Guyana would have conceivably imagined that the PPP would have turned out to be one of history's most ungrateful political parties
This is where the significance of Carter's present visit lies. Carter is back in Guyana to effect the holistic plan that he thought would have been implemented by the PPP after 1992. Of course, PPP leaders would say that if Carter wasn't invited then how could he have come to Guyana to formulate stage two of the model. Stage one being the holding of a free poll. Stage two being the nurturing, consolidation and deepening of democracy. This holistic plan seems to be working in the Philippines, Brazil and Chile. It has failed in Pakistan and Guyana although in Guyana, the integrity of stage one has not been compromised despite ranting to the contrary by the PNC
Well, I guess they are right. If Carter was not invited, then how can he finesse stage two? If fact, the Carter Centre had given up on stage two. That is why it was pulling out. The Carter Centre saw itself as a failure in Guyana even though it was satisfied that stage one of the holistic plan had remained working and functional. When Carter was invited, he saw the opportunity to introduce stage two in Guyana. Mr. Carter obviously talked to his advisors and the scholars he has around him. He was strongly urged to use the presidential invitation to discuss stage two with the President and his party. This is why he is in Guyana
The ruling party and the government have played down any intention of Carter to tête-à-tête with other forces. The government said Carter is here to examine the possibility and the potential of the Carter Centre staying in Guyana to effect developmental changes. Be that as it may, Jimmy Carter is here to examine another type of possibility and potential - the implementation of stage two of the Carter Centre's model of the transition to democracy in post-authoritarian territories
It follows then that Carter is here to finesse an agreement between a vexed civil society, disconcerted business community and an angry opposition and the one hand, and the government on the other, then it can be easily predicted what will be inside his report. One unmistakable feature will be the overt use of diplomatic language. If you are hoping to see the term "power sharing" in Carter's report, then you will be disappointed. Such a concept militates against sovereign status of the country he is trying to help. Carter will not use terms and concepts that could be seen to be interfering with Guyana's dignity as an independent state
One will find subtle words that are not easily claimed by either opposition or ruling party to be a victory for them. But it is highly questionable that Jimmy Carter, the world's most successful negotiator for a democratic peace, will refrain from commenting on the exigent need for Guyana's fledging democracy to be extended and deepened. This is going to be worded in such a way that will not be insulting to the President or the ruling party, but the need for expanding government to embrace other social and political forces will figure in his report. Mr. Carter may even stay away from the term "inclusive governance" because that again it not a happy word in the diplomatic lexicon. But at the end of the day, Jimmy Carter would have told Guyana and its people that there exists only one path to a peaceful existence and that it a break with the old style use of power. Will the PPP agree?