When will we know the full story of 1990

CLYDE A WEATHERHEAD

ON A TELEVISION programme, Remembering 1990, on the night of the 28th anniversary of the 1990 attempted coup, Prof Brinsley Samaroo, a former minister of the NAR government, made yet another startling revelation about the events of July 27-August 1, 1990.

Samaroo, for the first time, claimed that the US ambassador, military and CIA played important roles in support of the Government during that important event in our nation’s history.

This role of the CIA and US was not even disclosed to the 2013 commission of enquiry (CoE) and Samaroo’s revelation has prompted questions as to why this was not presented to the CoE or otherwise to the people of this country.

Former AG of the same NAR government, Anthony Smart, two days later declared that Samaroo’s account was “inaccurate” and “mistaken,” claiming that Samaroo was not aware of the facts as he had returned to the country on July 30 (which Samaroo indicated on the TV programme).

This whole development has prompted several citizens to ask: What else are they sweeping under the carpet? Why wasn’t this told to the CoE? Why are we now hearing this? Will we ever know the Truth?

The entire TV special and Samaroo’s revelations can be seen at: https://www.tv6tnt.com/news/local/remembering-tv-special/article_c71aeb56-9273-11e8-83aa-833c5fdb8ab5.html.

Samaroo’s presentation included a lot of supposition and speculation about the Venezuelan president’s preparedness to “take over” Trinidad to prevent use of this country as a “staging area” for a “Libyan invasion of Venezuela.”

The alleged Libyan invasion talk sounds like a conspiracy theory with all the intrigue of global political machinations.

What it does not explain is why would Libya want to invade Venezuela? Why would Libya, which has never engaged in such aggression against countries in its own part of the globe, want to come halfway around the planet to attack our neighbour?

Such military adventures are the usual stuff of colonial and imperial powers, not countries like Libya. And the historian’s account of this is largely based on his assumptions.

At other points in the programme, Samaroo was not able to clearly link particular events with particular dates even when directly asked.

But, when it came to the US, its army and CIA involvement he was quite specific as to the type of aircraft used to bring in US military and “specialised equipment.” He gave specifics of the location and purpose for which the equipment was used. He gave details about the CIA operatives as numbering four – two male and two female. He even claimed that one female indicated she was previously involved in the Entebbe Airport situation.

And he spoke of specific “advice” given by this female agent on when the hostage release was to be done.

Ever since 1990, there have been many stories about US involvement in the situation. Samaroo’s utterances are either confirmation of those stories or, as Smart suggests, just a tall tale.

The question arises: Why would an accomplished historian risk his reputation with these disclosures?

What is there to hide if the OAS alliance leader and its CIA assisted the NAR Government which was “inexperienced in such situations,” as Samaroo put it?

Why would Smart deny a CIA role when it was saving their butts and not overthrowing their government like it has done in other countries?

In October 2006, Smart said this in a letter to the press: “… although its numbers were depleted by the incarceration of Robinson and most of the Cabinet in the Red House, the NAR government continued to function during the crisis with those members who were not held hostage. It also successfully secured the freedom of the hostages held simultaneously at two separate locations – the Red House and TTT.”

Is Smart now trying to deny the CIA involvement to continue the narrative of the “heroism” of the NAR Government and ministers?

Is the image of the NAR so important that he would suggest that Samaroo was telling tall tales and seek to denigrate a renowned historian for such a narrow self-serving purpose?

Or has Samaroo spilled the beans on something that all the government witnesses at the CoE and since 1990 decided or were told not to let the population know?

The events of the attempted coup are described as the “darkest hour” in our country’s history, as “an assault on our democracy” and such terms.

On this 28th anniversary, our President called for commemoration of the events.

Every administration between 1990 and 2013 refused to conduct any form of enquiry to get at the facts and the truth of what really happened in those historic days of 1990, what were the causes and what we should learn from it.

Even the recommendations in chapter 12 of the report of the commission of enquiry remains labelled “confidential” and hidden from the population.

We the citizens of this country have a right to know the truth about 1990.

For too long, the politicians have denied us that right or only told us their version of events, a version that supports their image of “heroism” and “patriotism.”

Is Prof Samaroo now to be pilloried for letting another facet of that truth out of the bag?

We hope not.