By- Sir Ronald Sanders
In the latest round of barbs with which Venezuela has responded to events surrounding its claim to the Essequibo region of Guyana, Guyana’s President, Irfaan Ali, was described as “the Zelensky of the Caribbean.”
This characterization begs the question: If Ali is the “Zelensky of the Caribbean,” then who is the “Putin”?
However, posing and answering that latter question is as unhelpful to resolving the border controversy peacefully as is describing Ali as “Zelensky.”
It is far more constructive to focus on facts and to work toward a peaceful solution to Venezuela’s claims in accordance with the UN Charter and international law.
The most recent incident that inflamed the situation between the two countries occurred on 1 March 2025, when a Venezuelan military vessel approached and accosted Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO) platforms, operated by the US company Exxon, in an area that Guyana considers its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).
It is important to note that, because of the land boundary contention still before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), Guyana and Venezuela have not yet formally delimited their maritime boundaries.
Both countries claim the waters in question. However, under a December 2023 Order of the ICJ, Guyana has administrative control over the disputed territory pending the Court’s final judgment.
Consequently, Guyana is entitled to authorize lawful activities in the EEZ, including those undertaken by the FPSO platforms operated by Exxon.
While the right of navigation through contested waters is recognized under customary international law, that right does not extend to confronting or intimidating entities engaged in legally authorized activity.
Although the Venezuelan patrol boat did not use force, its actions arguably violated the spirit of both the ICJ’s 1 December 2023 Order and Clauses 1 and 6 of the Argyle Agreement, which collectively demand that neither side take steps that might aggravate or extend the dispute.
Hence, instead of exploring the implications of who is a “Zelensky” or a “Putin” in this matter, it is far more constructive for the government and peoples of both countries to maintain their focus on the arbitration of the controversy before the ICJ.
At the same time, they should abide by the terms of “The Joint Declaration of Argyle for Dialogue and Peace” (the Argyle Agreement), which they signed on 14 December 2023.
In adhering to the Argyle Agreement, Venezuela should recall Clause 1, which states that both parties agreed “directly or indirectly” not to threaten or use force under any circumstances, and Clause 6, which states that both parties committed to “refrain from escalating any conflict or disagreement arising from any controversy between them.”
In this regard, the Venezuelan authorities should reflect on whether taking over Ankoko Island (divided between the two countries) and placing military assets on it constitutes a threat of the use of force.
Consideration might also be given to Venezuela’s declared intent to hold local elections on 27 April 2025 in Guyana’s Essequibo region, asserting it as “Guayana-Esequiba,” complete with a parallel governance structure—an action that directly challenges Guyana’s sovereignty.
The leaders of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) countries have publicly described these plans a breach of international norms and of the ICJ’s provisional measures.
Importantly, CARICOM has not forcibly inserted itself into the border issue. Instead, both the governments of Venezuela and Guyana solicit CARICOM’s mediating role, and to the credit of its leaders and the Secretariat’s staff, the organization has tried to play a steadying role.
It is all the more unfortunate, therefore, that the Venezuelan Vice President labelled officials of the CARICOM Secretariat as “third-rank bureaucrats of CARICOM, who act behind the backs of Heads of Government.”
Anyone who knows how the Secretariat operates would confirm that it issues no public statement without the unanimous support of CARICOM governments.
Following the 1 March incident involving the Venezuelan military vessel and the FPSOs, Guyana’s President reported the matter to the Interlocutors of the Argyle Agreement, seeking “appropriate” action.
In response—and while affirming in a 1 March 2025 statement that “The Essequibo is and will remain an inseparable part of Venezuela”—the Venezuelan Foreign Minister added that Venezuela will urgently activate the Argyle Mechanism to pursue peaceful dialogue.
Thus, President Nicolás Maduro requested an immediate meeting with President Ali under the chairmanship of the Argyle Interlocutors. For his part, while stating that he remains “fully committed to dialogue, particularly when it serves to reinforce international law and the peaceful resolution of disputes, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations,” President Ali proposed a preparatory meeting of the two countries’ foreign ministers.
President Ali’s proposal is wise—not only because it allows time to diffuse heightened emotions ignited by recent events, but also because it permits careful preparation for such an important encounter.
Ultimately, the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean have committed themselves to remain a Zone of Peace. By respecting the ICJ’s judgment on the border contention, once it is delivered, and the guiding principles of international law, Guyana and Venezuela can resolve their differences to the benefit of their peoples and regional stability.
A lasting solution lies not in epithets over who is the “Caribbean Zelensky” or “Putin,” but in deference to the legal frameworks upon which the peace and prosperity of all nations depend.
Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at antiguanewsroom@gmail.com
Maduro might have ambitions over Essequibo, but comparing him to Putin is a stretch—Venezuela hasn’t invaded.
The real question is whether Guyana can defend itself if tensions escalate. Who will step in to support them?
If Ali is Zelensky, does that mean the US will start arming Guyana? The region needs stability, not militarization.
The Arming of Guyana by the USA has already begon. Even England has joint. These countries are run by War Mongors. And know that in the end it is all about the OIL. Both that of Guyana and that from Venezuela.
Maduro is using Essequibo to distract from his own domestic failures, just like some leaders in history have done.
If the international community lets Venezuela get away with this, what precedent does that set for future disputes?
Comparing Ali to Zelensky assumes that Guyana is on the brink of war. Let’s not escalate tensions unnecessarily.
https://sovereignlimits.com/boundaries/guyana-suriname-land#:~:text=The%20British%20claimed%20the%20boundary,have%20an%20established%20maritime%20boundary.
. The British claimed the boundary followed the Kutari River to the east, while the Dutch claimed the New River to the west. The disputed territory is controlled by Guyana, but Suriname continues to claim sovereignty up to the New River.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guyana%E2%80%93Suriname_relations#:~:text=In%201967%2C%20the%20Tigri%20Area,the%20Law%20of%20the%20Sea.
In 1967, the Tigri Area conflict about a disputed area started[2] which accumulated in an exchange of gunfire without casualties on 19 August 1969 at Camp Tigri.[3] A maritime boundary dispute was resolved in 2007 under an arbitration by the United Nations International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.[
Guyana doesn’t only have a border dispute with Venezuela, but also with its Dutch speaking neigbour and Caricom Member Surinam. These are the remnant of Colonialism. The colonial master never settled the borders of their colonies and gave the inhabitants independence based on what they claimed to be their borders. And now the inhabitants, some the descendants of slaves and other the descendants of guest laborers, mostly from India, that were brought to the colonies to work on the plantations after slavery was abolished. We know from history that all lands in South America and the Caribbean were inhabit by what we refer to as Indian Land. The brutal colonizers who have executed the biggest human catostrophy in time have killed many of these tribes and drove them away from their lands. We have learned about the Mapuche and the Taíno. The Mapuche were the largest indigenous group in South America, and the Taíno were the largest indigenous group in the Caribbean.
The Incas, South American Indians who, at the time of the Spanish conquest in 1532, ruled an empire that extended along the Pacific coast and Andean highlands from the northern border of modern Ecuador to the Maule River in central Chile. It’s therefore not a baseless claim that the Venezuelans are making. But who would support them? The very same people that stole their lands?
They can go back centuries to show that the lands we are all now here living on in the Caribbean are their lands. Just like every Blackman, no matter which country he comes from is an AFRICAN. Whether we like it or not. The blanckman’s roots are in Africa. Why therefore do black people in America call themselves African-American. But you never hear a withman say I’m a British-American or an Italian- American. And they also differentiate to call those from South and Central America, Hispanic or Latino-America. And those from Asia, Asian-American. Who then are the REAL AMERICANS? Please stand up and take your rightfull place.
The problem I have with us not learning from history is this. We will stand with the very same colonisers to fight against the very persons they have oppressed and killed over centuries. Guyana would fight with Venezuela about this disputed land, but will they also fight the same way with Surinam.
I’m not a diplomat, but when Donald Trump told Zelenski that he had to give up some land in order to get peace, I thought why not tell Guyana the same thing. Why don’t we sit and work out a peace deal, not on the absolute of ALL or NOTHING. May way or the HIGHWAY. Because we all know that in the end the entire issue is about one thing. The control of the OIL. Why not working a joint sharing agreement for let say the next 100 years. China leased Hong Kong to Brittan for 100 years. And now Hong Kong has returned back to China. There are so many ways one can make peace. But if we are hell bend on the ALL or Nothing principle. Then yes the winner takes it ALL. And who will be the winner. I can tell you, Not the Guyanese People. But EXXON Mobile will be the winner.
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/19yEiMagZJ/
Guyana is like a bad roommate.
Moves in next to you, slowly takes your stuff, and then claims it was always theirs!
This is what the people of Surinam think about their neighbor Guyana.