Dear Editor,
The Government of Guyana has embarked on an aggressive campaign to secure support for Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett’s candidacy for Secretary-General of the United Nations. Guyana today possesses considerable oil wealth and undoubtedly has the financial means to lobby capitals across the world. But in the emerging world order, influence alone cannot and should not secure international confidence. The question before the international community is no longer who can marshal the greatest resources, but who best embodies the principles upon which the United Nations was founded—justice, fairness, human dignity, impartiality, and respect for the equal rights of all peoples.
That is where Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett’s candidacy falls short.
The world is undergoing profound geopolitical change. Power is no longer concentrated in a handful of capitals. Nations of the Global South are demanding a rules-based international order where might does not determine right, but where right is measured by justice, equality, and adherence to the UN Charter. The next secretary-general must possess the moral authority to speak truth to power, whether that power resides in Washington, Moscow, Beijing, Tel Aviv, or Tehran. Guyana once understood this.
As a young nation emerging during the Cold War, Guyana earned international respect through its principled policy of non-alignment. Distinguished diplomats such as Dr. Mohamed Shahabuddeen and Rashleigh Jackson demonstrated that a small state could navigate ideological divisions without sacrificing principle. Guyana consistently advocated the peaceful settlement of disputes, decolonisation, human rights, national sovereignty, and the dignity of all peoples. Our voice carried weight because it was respected as independent. That legacy is now at risk.
During the recent Israel-Iran confrontation and the wider crisis in the Middle East, Guyana adopted positions that many viewed as aligning with one side of an increasingly polarised conflict rather than consistently urging restraint, dialogue, and negotiations in the interest of international peace. A nation whose diplomatic tradition was built upon non-alignment and peaceful coexistence should be encouraging negotiations—not appearing to take sides in conflicts that threaten global stability. The United Nations does not require another partisan advocate. It requires a bridge-builder.
If CARICOM truly wishes to present a candidate capable of uniting the international community, it should be looking for leadership of the calibre consistently demonstrated by Barbados Prime Minister Mia Mottley, whose advocacy has focused on equity, climate justice, and the interests of small developing states while maintaining credibility across geopolitical divides.
Instead, Guyana has presented a candidate whose public record raises serious questions about political impartiality.
Ms. Rodrigues-Birkett is Guyana’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations. She represents the State of Guyana—not the governing party. Yet, on repeated occasions during election periods, she has publicly urged support for the PPP/C administration. That is not the conduct expected of an international public servant aspiring to become the world’s chief civil servant.
Those concerns are compounded by unresolved human rights issues at home.
African Guyanese organisations have petitioned United Nations mechanisms over allegations of discrimination, exclusion, and unequal treatment. Rather than engaging these concerns through meaningful dialogue, the Government has too often dismissed them, while the organisations raising these issues have experienced political and economic consequences.
The experience of the International Decade for People of African Descent illustrates this concern. The Decade was proclaimed by the United Nations to advance recognition, justice, and development for people of African descent. Yet IDPADA-G, the organisation established to help advance those objectives in Guyana, was demonised and deprived of government funding instead of being supported in fulfilling the United Nations’ stated objectives.
Likewise, the United Nations Human Rights Committee has repeatedly called for effective investigations into allegations of extrajudicial killings in Guyana. More than two years after those recommendations were reiterated, many continue to question why a comprehensive inquiry has not materialised. A country seeking to lead the United Nations should demonstrate a willingness to confront difficult human rights questions at home rather than allowing them to remain unresolved.
Guyana’s absence from the recent conference in Ghana on reparations for slavery was equally telling. Slavery has been recognised by the United Nations as one of history’s gravest crimes against humanity. Yet, despite Guyana’s significant population of African descent, the government did not accord the issue the level of representation demonstrated by Barbados and other countries that participated prominently in those discussions.
A discernible pattern has emerged in which African Guyanese organisations, African leaders, and institutions perceived to be independent of the PPP/C are marginalised rather than engaged. The Guyana Trades Union Congress (GTUC), Critchlow Labour College, and IDPADA-G stand as examples of institutions that have lost State support or subventions, limiting their ability to serve their constituencies and benefit equitably from the nation’s resources.
Guyana has entered a political era in which access, opportunity, and equitable treatment increasingly depend upon political allegiance or silence in the face of discrimination and exclusion. This marks a sharp departure from Guyana’s earlier political traditions and has become increasingly entrenched since the presidency of Bharrat Jagdeo and under his continued leadership of the governing party.
The result is a political culture increasingly characterised by vindictiveness, division, exclusion, and the denial of fundamental rights, including meaningful participation and self-determination. It is a politics that rewards loyalty over independence and conformity over dissent. Rodrigues-Birkett publicly championed this political approach during the last elections, even as much of the world is moving toward greater institutional independence, inclusion, and respect for universal democratic principles. These are not merely domestic political debates. They go directly to the qualities expected of anyone seeking to become Secretary-General of the United Nations.
Guyana’s Constitution speaks to inclusive democracy. Article 13 calls for the inclusion of citizens and their organisations in the management and decision-making processes of the state. Yet many organisations—including trade unions and African Guyanese representative bodies—have experienced marginalisation when advancing positions contrary to those of the government.
Leadership at the United Nations demands something higher than partisan loyalty. It demands independence of thought, moral courage, and the willingness to defend the rights of all people equally, irrespective of political convenience.
Guyana may possess the financial resources to campaign vigorously for its candidate. But money cannot purchase moral authority. The secretary-general must command the confidence of nations with competing interests because the office itself is expected to remain above politics.
The question, therefore, is not whether Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett is Guyanese. The question is whether her public record reflects the impartiality, independence, and universal commitment to justice that the United Nations now requires in an increasingly divided world.
The emerging world order is demanding leaders who unite rather than divide, who build bridges rather than deepen fault lines, and who place universal principles above partisan loyalties. The office of secretary-general was never intended to reward political allegiance; it exists to uphold the Charter of the United Nations and defend the equal dignity of all humanity.
Those are the standards by which every candidate for secretary-general should be judged – and they are the standards against which Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett’s candidacy must be measured.