IMPORTANT COMMENTARY FOR FACEBOOK GUATS BUILD SEA BASE FOR BELIZE COAST GUARD – AN AFFRONT TO BELIZE’S SOVEREIGNTY A Guatemalan construction company has been awarded a contract by an American government agency to build a Forward Operating Base (FOB) on Hunting Caye, one of Belize’s southern-most islands in the Sapodilla Range of islands. These islands are claimed by Guatemala as it continues to assert its claim to Belize. The Base is well under construction. The Government of Belize made no public pronouncement of this unacceptable arrangement. The Prime Minister was recently caught flat-footed in parliament when the Leader of the Opposition challenged this wrong-headed move by the government describing it as a “national security risk”. In his reply the Prime Minister said that he did know of this asserting “that in the normal course this is not something that would be communicated to me.” The Prime Minister either lied or he simply did not want to know? His government has also been lackadaisical in dealing with national security and the increasing number of incursions deep inside the western border region until it happened - a Belizean security officer was slaughtered by a Guatemalan bandit. While there continues to be numerous unanswered questions that the Prime Minister appears to be too anxious to sweep under the rug, there are two very fundamental questions that have to be answered: How could the Prime Minister not know about the award of the contract by a US government agency to a Guatemalan company to build what is fundamentally a military base for the Belize Coast Guard in a security sensitive area of the country which is claimed by Guatemala? Could the United States government or one of its agencies have acted unilaterally in awarding the Coast Guard contract to a Guatemalan company? If it did, it means that it acted extra territorially. THE PRIME MINISTER CANNOT PASS THE BUCK The Prime Minister is the Chairman of the National Security Council (NSC). He is also the Chief Executive of this country. These two facts cannot be separated. The NSC considers and appraises all actions which affect the national security interest of this country. The building of a military (FOB) base in a politically sensitive area like Hunting Caye in the Sapodilla Range of barrier islands in Southern Belize should be high on the list of security considerations for the government, the NSC and the people of Belize. It is inconceivable that this matter was not debated and discussed at the NSC under the Chairmanship and guidance of the Prime Minister. The Sapodilla Range, which includes Hunting Caye, figures prominently in the Maritime Areas Act. This is an area of security interest to both Guatemala and Honduras. This is in accordance with the Law of the Sea Convention of 1982. RISING TENSION BETWEEN BELIZE AND GUATEMALA Under these circumstances, the NSC had to have taken a keen interest in this against the backdrop of the heightening tension between Belize and Guatemala. We are particularly concerned that the people of Belize are suspicious of any activities linking Guatemala to the security of this country, as can be seen from recent events and there are probably a dozen of them. The Prime Minister, the Chairman if the NSC, has said that he was not aware that Guatemalan Contractors (a Guatemalan Company) had been contracted to construct a security installation on Hunting Caye. PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY We are not questioning the Prime Minister’s veracity. In this case – THIS CASE - it would appear that it is not in his interest to lie. However, how could it be explained then, the Prime Minister’s lack of knowledge, or his stated lack of knowledge, of the Guatemalan Company’s involvement in the construction of a military installation of this level of security importance to Belize? The explanation is described as complicity or plausible deniability. It is possible that the Prime Minister was not present to chair the relevant NSC meeting at which this matter was discussed (since he spends more time out of the country than in). Or did the PM delegate the Chairmanship of the NSC to his Deputy and neglected to inform himself of the decisions taken with regard to this very important and sensitive matter? Is it possible that the PM chose not to be informed so that he could deny knowledge and still speak the truth? This is the principle of plausible deniability. Chief executives often use this ploy to hide their complicity in unpopular or politically suspect circumstances. They use this ploy to hide complicity either by choosing not to know or directing not to be informed of the details of certain matters and plausibly denies any knowledge. This has become the Prime Minister’s modus operandi. Because we know this, we have to be skeptical of his public pronouncements - he never knows. DID THE US GOVERNMENT ACT WITH EXTRA TERRITORIALITY? Belize has a natural right to exercise its sovereignty. If any other country derogates from that natural right to exercise their sovereignty, that country, in this case, the United States, would have acted with extra territoriality. We have no quarrel with the USA and their interest in our security affairs. Unlike the Minister of National Security of Belize, we believe that we SHOULD look a gift horse in the mouth having the historical example of the Trojan horse. The United States would, in our view, be acting properly in its bi-lateral relationship with Belize, if it consulted with the Belize government and its security establishment and received approval for both the military installation AND approval to whom the Contract was awarded. It is doubtful that the US government, or any of its agencies, would have acted unilaterally in a matter that concerns the security of another State – except in exceptional circumstance. Afghanistan and Iraq come to mind. Consultation and consensual agreements - these are the hallmarks of proper behaviour between States. DID THE US EMBARK ON AN ADVENTURE? If in fact the United States or its agencies embarked on an adventure which jeopardizes the security and integrity of Belize, and if in fact it was done without the consent of the security establishment of Belize and the Prime Minister, then we must question the failure of the Chief Executive to safeguard the security interests of his people and of Belize. Who should we fear most? The Prime Minister, Guatemala or the United States? Norris Hall 7 October 2014
Posted on: Wed, 08 Oct 2014 03:34:07 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015