Dear Editor,
Aubrey Retemyer descends to the level of a puny apprentice when he commented on the deportee programme that Guyana is now in compliance with (The deportee programme- Sep 20, 2026 Letters).[1] He says that he is in “… disgust and disappointment…” as this “… marks a dark chapter …” in Guyana’s sovereignty, transparency, independence and democracy.
Since print media is dying, and normally space is limited and reading long letters creates a horrible ennui, I will ask of Retemyer the following questions, since his accusation and suspicions were told as though they were actualities.
How come you know the Government had no choice but to accept ‘unconditionally’ the deportees. Please bring the evidence, as this will tell us who has sovereignty, or whether or not “Despite President Irfaan Ali boasting about Guyana’s sovereignty and independence, his administration was allegedly bullied by the US to accept the first batch of four deported Cuban and two Afghan nationals who recently arrived in Guyana.[2]”
Proof again is needed for my second question since you, Retemeyer, say that “…information has come to light that this might not be so.” Again, I say, bring me the evidence.
Your verbose tirade that Guyanese cannot trust this Government, amounts to verbal dung. Saying that the Government is shrouded in secrecy, cover-ups and does not believe that it is accountable to anyone…” self-debunks, as winning the last two elections, is the ultimate proof of trust, as ‘trust is reposed in winners of elections.’
You stated that “Guyanese found out about the Cuban and Afghan arrivals only after they had already landed on local soil, and that these deportees are tinged with criminality, but again, “Where is the evidence?” Anecdotes and hear- says carry no weight.
Now I move to a few remarks that will hopefully instruct the likes of Retemyer.
Firstly, as a result of The Burnham Legacy, people fled Guyana illegally, and the latest count approximates to some 1,236 Guyanese citizens living in the US with finalised, non-detainer judicial orders of deportation. The number climbs higher as overall the Guyanese-American community is estimated to be at several hundred thousand people, who are currently undocumented, primarily due to overstaying temporary tourist, business, or student visas. I cannot put this aside and say that the US is bullying Guyana. Secondly, the matter is not ad hoc concerning these deportees, as it is the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), who is handling the issue.[3] The IMO is highly credible and is the leading intergovernmental organisation dedicated to migration. Its scope spreads over 100 countries with 175 member states. Thirdly, this initial wave of merely six deportees falls under a one-year migration cooperation framework between Washington and Georgetown[4], and yes, Guyana can abort the programme at any time. This is because Guyana retains complete sovereignty and has a total “veto power”, as President Irfaan Ali explicitly stated.[5]
Finally, the shift of turn around, has nothing to do with bullyism as the shift represents a calculated diplomatic compromise, where Guyana has sovereign options to end it, and financing is the responsibility of the US. I apprise the public that only a few days ago, Greenland and Denmark granted Washington a high-profile “win” regarding Arctic defence, while successfully protecting Greenland’s right to govern itself. This position proves expedience and is mutually beneficial.