EDITORIAL: Silence fuels unnecessary suspicion

The confusion surrounding the reported denial of United States Ambassador to Namibia John Giordano access to last week's fisheries indaba in Walvis Bay cannot be allowed to linger. Someone needs to explain what happened.

The incident has attracted unusual attention because it reportedly unfolded while President Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah was inside the venue. That alone gives the matter a significance it may not otherwise have had.

However, State House has explained that Nandi-Ndaitwah attended the event as an invited guest and was not responsible for organising it or determining who was granted access. This removes the President from the eye of this storm.

The organisers, however, have no right to remain silent. They are best placed to explain who controlled access to the venue, what happened when the ambassador arrived and why he was apparently not allowed inside. If there was a misunderstanding, say so. If there was a security or accreditation issue, explain it.

The response from the United States Embassy in Windhoek has added another layer of intrigue. Rather than commenting on the incident, the embassy declined to provide an explanation while criticising the local newspaper that first reported it.

That approach does little to settle the matter. To the ordinary observer, an American ambassador apparently being denied entry to a high-profile event attended by Namibia's President can easily be interpreted as a diplomatic snub or even a deterioration in relations between Windhoek and Washington.

And that may be completely wrong. There may be an entirely mundane explanation for what happened. This is why transparency matters.

Not every incident involving diplomats is a diplomatic incident. Not every disagreement at a public event is a government-to-government dispute. But when something unusual happens in circumstances as politically sensitive as these, silence allows perceptions to grow beyond the facts.