The deadline for a final agreement on Essequibo was four years, a period that was exhausted in 1970 without a final solution and culminated in the signing of the socalled Port of Spain Protocol, in which Venezuela agreed to a kind of “ceasefire”. of 12 years for claims to the area.
As early as 1982, Caracas again demanded control of the Essequibo, always in compliance with the Geneva Conventions. The Government of Guyana, in turn, maintains that the Paris Report is still valid and that its borders are therefore demarcated to include the Essequibo Territory.
Negotiations between Caracas and Georgetown, organized by the UN SecretaryGeneral, have been taking place since the 1990s, but it was only after the 2015 oil discoveries that countries began to pay more attention to the issue. In 2018, United Nations Secretary António Guterres, citing the lack of agreement between the parties, recommended taking the case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), a law approved by Guyana and contested by Venezuela until today because the legitimacy of the Court in The Hague is not recognized in this matter.
Oil and IGH
The American company Exxon Mobil, which has operated in Guyana since 2008, now dominates the region’s offshore fields and has several concessions with estimated reserves of 11 billion barrels of oil. According to the company’s forecasts, production in the country is expected to exceed 1 million barrels per day in 2027.
Energy activities led Guyana’s GDP to grow by more than 62% in 2022 and is expected to grow by 38% this year, the highest in the world, according to IMF forecasts. With the aim of increasing its oil exploration capacity, the Guyanese government continues to insist on a request to expand its continental shelf, which would close access to the Atlantic to Venezuela.
The maritime drilling in the disputed area and the referral of the case to the International Court of Justice are the sensitive points that displeased Venezuela. For lawyer Jesús David Rojas, Caracas would have rights to the proceeds from the company’s explorations in the area, “such as collecting taxes together or even taxing the assets that Exxon Mobil still owns in Venezuela.”
The lawyer also points out that the controversies arising from the Paris report and the Geneva agreements must be taken into account by the International Court of Justice, since both cannot be considered valid at the same time in order to determine a solution to the dispute. “The collusion with the Paris report virtually nullifies any kind of action that flows from it. On the other hand, Guyana cannot claim the report and at the same time say that it has signed the Geneva Convention because it is recognized.” “There is a dispute,” he says.
Referendum and military conflict
In order to reaffirm its claims not only to Essequibo, but also to the competence of the International Court of Justice and the involvement of the United States in the matter, Venezuela has decided to call a referendum, scheduled for December 3, in which the population will be asked whether it supports the complaints or not Caracas.
Questions that can be answered “yes” or “no” include support for the Geneva Agreement, rejection of the Paris Report and the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, and the creation of a new Venezuelan state called Guayana Esequiba, which will do so would cover the entire disputed area.
After the campaign began, Caracas and Georgetown toughened the tone of their speeches, and some statements from U.S. officials raised fears about a possible escalation of war in the region. On the Venezuelan side, the army’s involvement in the referendum campaign increased political sentiment. Guyana’s government has approved joint military exercises with U.S. troops in the region, declaring that “the time for negotiations with Venezuela is over.”
Upon taking office earlier this month, the new US ambassador to Guyana, Nicole Theriot, said Washington needed to strengthen defense and security ties with the South American country to address “crosscutting threats.” The statements were condemned by Caracas, which accused the neighboring country of fomenting conflict to protect the interests of foreign companies.
However, analysts disagree about the actual possibilities of a conflict. For Atilio Romero, military escalation is “not in Exxon Mobil’s interest.” “The ideal scenario for them would be to negotiate only with the government of Guyana. If that is not possible, then it should be a scenario in which there is an agreement so that the company can easily obtain its oil, because in the end, the problem is not territorial, the problem is the oil, he argues.
Jesús David Rojas is concerned about the statements of the Guyanese authorities and explains that the best scenario would be the resumption of direct negotiations between Caracas and Georgetown. “The Prime Minister of Guyana recently said that he does not need to negotiate with Venezuela, but since 160,000 km² is in dispute, I think the healthy and peaceful way is to negotiate because the other way is war,” he says.