“The only way for Venezuela to control Essequibo is military action, but it is unable to do that,” says the former Venezuelan ambassador to Guyana. world

a The old dispute between the two countries The territory called Essequibo – which Venezuela claims it wrongly seized in an arbitration award in 1899, but which actually represents two-thirds of Guyana’s territory – has sparked a deep crisis between the two neighbours.

In 1966, parties committed To search for a practical and satisfactory solution to the dispute, through the so-called Geneva Agreement.

But since the friendly mechanism did not allow for a solution, more than a quarter of a century later, Guyana requested that the case be referred to the International Court of Justice, which would issue a decision on the dispute.

Meanwhile, Guyana has begun granting oil exploration concessions in unchartered waters, to which Venezuela believes it has a right.

On December 3, the government of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro held a referendum on the city of Essequibo. After announcing the positive results, it began promoting a law that would allow the territory to be annexed to Venezuela.

This announcement has caused concern in Guyana. The country’s President Irfaan Ali announced that his defense forces are on high alert and in contact with the US Southern Command.

Maduro also accused North American oil company ExxonMobil, Guyana’s main oil producer, of financing Venezuelan opposition politicians.

In fact, Venezuela’s Attorney General, Tarek William Saab, ordered the arrest of 14 people (including several opposition politicians) accused of treason over “alleged financing and conspiracy linked to ExxonMobil against Venezuela.”

The American company stated that this accusation is absurd and baseless. Many analysts see Maduro’s actions regarding Essequibo as part of an attempt to weaken the Venezuelan opposition ahead of the country’s presidential elections scheduled for 2024.

In this context, BBC News Mundo – the Spanish service of the British Broadcasting Corporation – spoke with Sadio Garafini de Torno. He was Venezuela’s ambassador to Guyana’s capital, Georgetown, between 1980 and 1984.

Garafini has devoted himself to studying the regional conflict over Essequibo for decades, not only as a diplomat, but also as an academic.

The former ambassador holds a doctorate in political science, is a university professor and author of numerous publications on the foreign policy of Venezuela and Guyana. Check out the interview below.

BBC News World: Government Nicolas Maduro It announced that it would establish a Venezuelan state in Essequibo and grant oil concessions in the territories it controls. Guyana. How is this explained?

Sadio Garafini Di Torno: This is ridiculous on an international level, because it’s clear what does that mean?

Maduro appointed a general responsible for the defense of Guyana-Esequipa, but his headquarters is in Tomeremo, a Venezuelan city located south of Bolivar state. He decided that PDVSA [Petróleos de Venezuela S. A.] It will have an investment branch in Guyana-Esequipa.

Well, the question is: how will you do it? Obviously, this means the use of force.

As far as PDVSA is concerned, the company does not even have the funds to invest in “present-day Venezuela” and would like to know if it has the funds to do so in offshore waters and submarines off the coast of Essequibo.

BBC: Why? Venezuela Do you now take this position?

Garafini: And all of this is just a domestic political maneuver in the face of an international issue, to try to show that it is doing something regarding Essequibo’s demand after the referendum – another internal political maneuver to try to hide the opposition’s success. Primary elections.

Internationally, the only way for Guyana to exercise sovereignty over Essequibo the way they say, is that they will draw a new map of Venezuela including Essequibo, which was previously a claimed territory, well, it would have to be military action to exercise sovereignty over a territory.

BBC: Is such military action possible?

Garafini: I believe that the Venezuelan armed forces do not have the capacity to do this, because of the disaster in which they find themselves. Moreover, there are no roads, therefore, they have to pass through the jungle, or descend by sea, or send paratroopers, which means complete helplessness.

In fact, from an international standpoint, what they are doing is irresponsible, because it harms us greatly in the International Court of Justice, where the matter is still ongoing.

What the government must do is prepare to defend Venezuela’s rights in the International Court of Justice.

BBC: How important is Essequibo to… Venezuela?

Garafini: For Venezuela, it is necessary to defend the exit to the Atlantic Ocean, the projection of its exclusive economic zone and its continental platform, not only those resulting from the Essequibo claim, but also the Amacuro delta area. [Estado venezuelano localizado no extremo nordeste do país, em frente ao Oceano Atlântico e ao lado de Essequibo].

Guyana has arbitrarily demarcated the line that supposedly represents the border with Venezuela which is unacceptable, as it limits our prospects in the EEZ and continental shelf of Delta Amacuro State. this is unacceptable.

As regards Essequibo itself, it must be remembered that it represents two-thirds of the territory which Guyana considers to be its own, and which it has controlled and administered since the 1899 arbitration award.

The Geneva Agreement speaks of a practical and satisfactory solution for both.

If we are to reach an agreement on this basis, it is clear that reaching an agreement satisfactory to Guyana will never involve giving up two-thirds of its territory. This must be understood through a good reading of the Geneva Agreement.

What can be achieved through the Geneva Agreement is reasonable regional compensation, which is certainly something that is difficult to determine by mutual agreement between the two parties. Therefore, most likely, third-party intervention will be necessary.

Therefore, I highlight the marine and offshore areas of an oil-rich region and not the region itself, because, according to the Geneva Agreement, it is clear that only part of it can return to Venezuela.

BBC: How were maritime borders demarcated before? Guyana Harms Venezuela?

Garafini: It is surrounded by hundreds of thousands of square kilometers of marine and underwater areas, rich in oil, gas and fishing, in addition to an outlet to the Atlantic Ocean. If this line were accepted, we would have to ask permission to leave the Atlantic, which is clearly unacceptable.

But this has a secondary connection to the Essequibo case. This is relevant because Guyana arbitrarily drew this line from Punta Barima, which is the border of Essequibo Region. But this will have to be discussed eventually.

It is irresponsible for the Maduro government to ignore the International Court of Justice. Now the government says the International Court of Justice is acting at Exxon’s request.

There, at the International Court of Justice, we will need to resolve the issue of demarcation of maritime zones and submarines, after the Essequibo case is resolved.

BBC: What mechanism or strategy do you do? Venezuela Should it be used to assert the rights he claims to have over Essequibo?

Garafini: Now, there is no alternative.

People do not understand that the two Secretary-Generals of the United Nations and the final mediator decided to refer the matter to the International Court of Justice.

If an agreement is not reached between the parties, the Geneva Agreement gives the Secretary-General the ability to determine which peaceful dispute settlement mechanism should be applied. Therefore, there is no escape from the point of view of public international law.

We need to defend ourselves before the International Court of Justice and the government is not doing its job, which is to prepare our arguments to defend our rights.

We have arguments that the 1899 arbitration award was unfair, as the product of a political agreement between the Russian president and the two British members of the court. This is what we must do with the greatest national and international experts.

BBC: The international community seems to support the status quo. a Guyana It states that it has the support of the Organization of American States, the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), the British Commonwealth, the United States of America, and the United Kingdom, among others. Why can’t other voices be heard supporting Venezuela?

Garafini: Guyana has always enjoyed the support of CARICOM and the British Commonwealth of Nations. CARICOM is headquartered in Georgetown and Guyana is a member of the Commonwealth.

But the rest of the international community, the overwhelming majority, does not support Guyana. It supports resolving the problem peacefully in the International Court of Justice, as two United Nations Secretaries-General have already decided, in accordance with the Geneva Agreement.

The Maduro government’s disinformation campaign makes people believe that the Geneva Agreement is one thing and the International Court of Justice is another. But we are in the International Court of Justice because of the Geneva Agreement.

BBC: The strategy is allegedly to avoid the International Court of Justice and try to resolve the dispute with it Guyana Bilateral is the one that fits Venezuela. In this case, wouldn’t it make sense for Maduro to try to avoid going to the International Court of Justice?

Garafini: Of course, but I should have done this sooner.

The Venezuelan government’s grave mistake occurred in December 2013, when Guyana’s then-chancellor, Carolyn Rodriguez-Birkett, stated that after 26 years of mediator-assisted bilateral negotiations and many more years since the Geneva Agreement, it was time to end the conflict. Demarcating the borders of the region, its maritime and submarine areas, and determining the dispute once and for all.

Why? Because between 2010 and 2013, there were great discoveries of wealth in Guyana, great concessions were made, there was the Technic Perdana crisis – the famous seismic oil drilling ship seized by the Venezuelan Navy – and Guyana said “enough is enough.” . He went to speak to the Secretary-General of the United Nations to request a referral to the International Court of Justice.

Venezuela’s very serious mistake was to stubbornly insist to the Secretary-General, saying that we want to continue bilateral negotiations with the help of a mediator.

Since this mechanism did not work, if we put ourselves in the shoes of the Secretary-General, we will understand why he ruled in favor of Guyana and not Venezuela.

What Venezuela should have done is to propose mediation, conciliation or arbitration, that is, resort to other means of resolving disputes peacefully stipulated in the United Nations Charter that do not include the International Court of Justice, which is more appropriate for Guyana.

When there is mediation, the parties seek to reach a fair and workable solution. In the International Court of Justice, the matter is completely legal. There it will be determined whether the 1899 arbitration award is valid or not. Demonstrating this is very expensive and complex.

It’s a topic we always wanted to avoid. When something is adjudicated, judges tend to say the matter is closed.

We have the argument that the Geneva Agreement has been signed and therefore a workable solution must be sought, but this is what we should have been promoting.