“You are either with them or against them and they are now making this out to be a race issue. I believe Indian people have to band together now. We have to seek security in our own way and I see myself being singled out because I'm an Indian leader and nothing else.”
—PPP Minister
of Tourism, Mr. Manzoor Nadir, in April 2001, after his house came under attack
by PNC supporters. He was not part of the PPP cabinet at yet.
I am surprised that Mr. Jerome Khan, PNCR MP, would claim
that criminal attacks are not “racially motivated” (Stabroek News,
3/31/2004), citing a recent SN editorial and a front-page news piece. He says;
“Implicit in these statements is that the attacks on
Lusignan, Non Pariel, Annandale etc. are racially motivated and that Black
people carry out attacks on Indians to terrorize and rob them…Juxtaposed
against this editorial is a front page story of Hedda Moore (March 29, 2004), a
very 'black woman' of Golden Grove, whose shop was attacked and who had a gun
pointed to her skull during the robbery. Are we to assume that the robbers were
from Enmore and of Indian stock?”
Yes, one is free to
make hallow assumptions, and then watch them crumble before facts; “Enmore” (or any Indian village) does not
provide refuge to criminals, Indian or Chinese or Amerindian. Surely, Mr. Khan
knows this. When we say that crimes against Indians are influenced heavily by
racism (or anti-Indian views such as the kind Gibson is keen on spreading), we
are making a serious charge; there is no assuming.
So, a
Black family is attacked in Golden Grove. Nobody claimed Blacks or Portuguese
would not be criminalized, especially if they appear to have some money. (After
all, according to the PNC (e.g., Lowe/McAllister, 9/2002), wealth is the reason
for these crimes. I agree that it is a reason. But it is not the only reason.
Actually, the facts often show that money is secondary where it does not go
hand-in-hand with the anti-Indian (race) reason.
Interestingly, Mr.
Khan, it is very possible that the “sophisticated” masterminds who are
directing criminal traffic in Guyana staged this attack, to make is believe
that Blacks are also being violated. After all, this is what Mr. Lowe would
say; having suggested that it’s possible that the PPP staged the Lusignan
attack. (This is not to say that I don’t believe the PPP stages its share of
tricks.)
At first, Mr. Khan sounded very
convinced in his view, but then he switches gears a bit and writes; “There is
no doubt that Indo-Guyanese have felt the brunt of criminal activities
(robbery, rape and murder) over the past few years.” (Not “year” Mr. Khan, but
decades.) Does Mr. Khan think it’s a mere coincidence that year after year,
decade after decade, one race and only one race in Guyana has been suffering
maximum criminal attacks? If anti-Indian feelings are not involved, then why
aren’t other racial groups telling horror stories like us across Guyana and
overseas? Today, we have Indian families who suffered the “kick-down-the-door”
plague then, and are re-suffering attacks now. Thus, race-crime is a
cross-generational reality for Indians as refugee status is to the
Palestinians.
We have to make reference to the eighties
because the eighties have left a residue of racial feelings between Blacks and
Indians that, whenever crimes are being planned, influences the criminal or his
leaders in their choice of who will be robbed or killed. The residue is very
visible for it runs in distinct stains showing two separate racial patterns
over the past 25 years. All one needs to do is to peek into our court logs and
police records. And this is only a fraction of the horror that occurred when I
was a little boy.
Whether it is 1984 or 2004, here is a live scenario; let us put 25
Indians and 25 Blacks to walk around Stabroek (or Bourda) Market on a Saturday,
each wearing one gold chain of the same size and value. Who will likely be
robbed the most? I know Mr. Khan will not dismiss this in traditional political
fashion as being too simplistic. Point is, when equal wealth is displayed to
the criminal, the criminal still pounces on the Indian more than the Black (if
at all). So, it has to be that his “Indian” race makes the ordinary Joe, Abdul
or Jailall a target for crime.
So, here we are again, a quarter century
later, the eighties’ babies now adults, confronting the same issue; it is
interesting that young men I went to school with could come to kill me because
I am Indian. If Indians are not the usual target for criminal and industrial
violence in Guyana because of their skin color, why did Mr. Khan object to
another PNC colleague (Alexander) who publicly stated that Indians like Mr.
Khan’s family have to be violated (or what I call the Alexander “injection”
theory) so O Beautiful Guyana can improve; “I am therefore at wits end to
understand why a senior ranking person would rationalize, when asked about
crime that appears to be directed at persons of East Indian descent, that such
conduct is ‘interactions’ that even though ‘painful’ could lead to some
positive outcomes” (9/2002).
It is a fact that criminals (or victims) are not confined to one
racial group. We expect Indian criminals among us. If poverty equals becoming a
criminal, then more poor Indians ought to be criminals, and the Amerindians
more so, ought to be everywhere with guns and bicycles, according to the PNC
poverty theory. But despite the poverty and the deportees, the Indian community
(like the Portuguese, Chinese, White, Amerindian, and much of the Black) does
not entertain criminals or encourage people to attack their countrymen and
women simply for voting.
It is so obvious that the crime debate in Guyana is inherently
crippled because some people are tiptoeing around its race link. Or they admit
something but not everything, possibly thinking they’ll shape this debate as in
the past at will, or as Simon and Garfunkel sings in the “Boxer’”; “a man sees
what he wants to see and disregards the rest.” This debate will be shaped by
all of us, and everything will be recorded. Here are a few samples that
demonstrate that race is a critical factor in anti-Indian crimes:
1.The Anita Singh story is legitimate evidence of a human being
and Guyanese violated because she is Indian. Further, I believe many criminals
operate under this same anti-Indian principle; it is just that they do not
express it verbally, but physically. The Lusignan attack happened to an
“Indian” family (again, as per the criminals) because Indians allegedly caused
them to lose their $6M.
2. More poor Indians
have been robbed than poor Blacks. Since Blacks and Indians have similar number
of poor people, why rob one set and not all of them if money is the aim and
race not a factor?
3. Few Black businesses were attacked since March 2001; are we to
assume their money to counterfeit? And where we’re dealing with small timers,
the facts show too many Indian small timers attacked and too few Black small
timers.
4. If race does not influence crime, why Indians are the only
people attacked for voting, a constitutional right? What about the Chinese and
Blacks etc. who vote PPP? If the answer is because Indians are “PPP in the
flesh” (Kwayana), then this is admittance of the race factor, for to be PPP
is to be Indian at elections.
Given all of this, surely race must play a serious part in all these things unless we are disciples of the canon if lies and more lies. We cannot simply ignore that in June 2001, the Guyana police issued a statement claiming that “selected targets” (meaning Indians) were being attacked in a “clear pattern of criminal activities designed to create a climate of instability.” Of course, some of us will try to ignore, like the PPP, the master mechanics of the propaganda machine. Here is its Information Minister, Mr. Prem Misir in June 2002: “Currently, there is no reliable and valid evidence to support the notion that race/ethnicity is the cause of the recent killings.”