Liberia

Mr. President, I wish to join others who have spoken before me in congratulating you on your election to guide the deliberations of the forty-ninth session of the United Nations General Assembly. As you undertake this solemn and challenging responsibility we assure you of the Liberian delegation’s fullest cooperation and support. Let me also convey our gratitude to your erudite predecessor, Ambassador Samuel Insanally of Guyana, for the skilful manner in which he guided the deliberations of the last session. Our able and distinguished Secretary-General, His Excellency Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, deserves special commendation for his unwavering commitment to the principles of the United Nations and his untiring efforts in the promotion of world peace, international security and human dignity. We are particularly pleased at his keen interest and involvement in the search for durable peace in Liberia. As we approach the midpoint of the last decade in this millennium we are encouraged that our world continues to make steady progress in the transition from years of ideological confrontation to convergence on global interdependence. A manifestation of this changing situation is the growing utilization of a consensual approach to addressing such burning issues on the international agenda as human rights, population and the environment. In this regard we welcome the outcome of the International Conference on Population and Development held at Cairo and look forward to the World Summit for Social Development, to be convened in Copenhagen, Denmark, in 1995, which will consider the core issues of alleviating and reducing poverty, expanding productive employment and enhancing social integration. General Assembly 22nd meeting The peaceful transition from apartheid to majority rule in South Africa has been of monumental significance to Africa. We heartily welcome the new Republic of South Africa into the fold of the world body and look forward to the positive contributions it can and will surely make to the achievement of the noble goals of the United Nations. These positive developments in the international system are, however, often overshadowed by flashpoints of ethnic conflicts around the world. The situations in Bosnia, Rwanda and Somalia, and in my own country, Liberia, among others, appear to be intractable. The brutality and destruction unleashed by these conflicts often tend to overwhelm the international community and make peace- keeping a major preoccupation of the United Nations and, to an increasing degree, of regional organizations as well. Economic and human resources that could otherwise be applied to improving the human condition are being expended on peace-keeping activities. Some of these intra-State conflicts are so complex that policy makers are forced to debate the pros and cons of peace-keeping or peacemaking when the main issue should be that of saving lives, especially in those situations where a legitimate governing authority is absent. The result is that the international community sometimes reacts with what may amount to short-cut solutions. Often attempts at resolving some of these conflicts unwittingly overlook the intransigence and recalcitrance of warlords who were the ones primarily responsible for bringing untold suffering and deprivation to their own people. These conflicts also create lucrative opportunities for arms dealers and international supporters of warlords. A disturbing phenomenon associated with these conflicts is that of the child soldier. Children are recruited, indoctrinated and trained in the art of murder, mayhem and genocide, thus depriving a country of an entire generation of its human resources. This is particularly true for my own country, Liberia, where the great majority of the 60,000 combatants are children who have yet to complete their primary education. The forced conscription of our children — the building-blocks of our future — must be stopped, since it violates the Convention of the Rights of the Child. Therefore we should not yield to any action that has the effect of sanctioning the acquisition of power through the use of force or promoting solutions aimed at appeasing warlords at the expense of the larger unarmed population. The world has witnessed the rise, during the last four years, of a powerful movement for democracy and democratization. This movement has swept asunder some of the strongest totalitarian regimes in its wake, from Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union to Latin America, Africa and Asia. The international community must therefore demonstrate its resolve to support this movement so that the democratic aspirations of all peoples are realized throughout the world. It would be an indictment of the present world leadership for it to simply watch countries become involved in these conflicts, which may have been ignited initially by the spark of democratization. It is against this background that we wish to briefly review the Liberian peace process. At the outset, I should like to register the heartfelt gratitude of the Liberian people to the gallant men of ECOMOG — the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) Military Observer Group — who foiled the attempted coup on 15 September 1994. Since 1990, their selfless sacrifice has provided a security blanket in parts of Liberia, thus enabling us to work towards the attainment of peace in our country. It will be recalled that in December 1989 the Liberian situation exploded into an armed conflict, ostensibly to rid the country of military dictatorship. By mid-1990, however, the conflict had degenerated into a three-way struggle for power. The State machinery had disintegrated. None of the armed factions engaged in the struggle appeared capable of winning a decisive victory and establishing legitimate authority. In the wake of this deadly stalemate, ECOWAS intervened with a two- pronged peace plan: A peace-monitoring force would be dispatched to Liberia to provide security for the country, while the Liberians themselves would re-establish an internal civil administration to prepare the country for democratic elections. The ECOWAS peace-monitoring group, ECOMOG, arrived in Liberia in August 1990. An All-Liberia Conference was convened in Banjul, the Gambia, in the same month, and elected the Interim Government of National Unity (IGNU). Upon the insistence of the National Patriotic Front of Liberia (NPFL), a second, All- Liberia Conference was convened in Monrovia in 1991, which endorsed the Interim Government. Unfortunately, 2 General Assembly 22nd meeting the NPFL, which insisted on the Conference as a precondition for peace, walked out during the deliberations. Several other meetings of the warring factions were held in Banjul, Freetown, Dakar, Bamako, Lomé, Yamoussoukro and Geneva, in search of peace with the armed factions. With remarkable success, the ECOWAS peace plan, with an interim civilian administration for Liberia and with ECOMOG, restored some degree of stability and provided a semblance of law and order in the country for a period of two years. On 15 October 1992, the NPFL launched an unprovoked attack on ECOMOG and the people of Monrovia in what was termed “Operation Octopus”. The refusal of the NPFL to fully comply with the Yamoussoukro Accord gave rise to a new armed group, the United Liberation Movement of Liberia for Democracy (ULIMO), which claimed its sole purpose was to free the Liberian people from the NPFL. With hostilities raging among the armed factions, the United Nations, in concert with ECOWAS and the OAU, decided to convene a peace conference of the parties to the conflict in Geneva in June 1993. The meeting was attended by the NPFL, ULIMO and IGNU. The IGNU delegation included the Armed Forces of Liberia (AFL). The United Nations Secretary-General’s Special Representative chaired the meeting, which was also attended by the OAU Eminent Person, the Executive Secretary of ECOWAS and the Field Commander of ECOMOG. The framework agreed upon in Geneva was formally concluded and signed by the parties in Cotonou, Republic of Benin, on 25 July 1993. The overriding principle of the Cotonou Agreement was to achieve disarmament and demobilization of the warring factions, which agreed that they would give up their arms in exchange for participating in the formation of a new government. The Cotonou Agreement provided for the establishment of the Liberian National Transitional Government, headed by a five-man Executive Council of State, a 35-member Transitional Legislative Assembly and the reconstitution of the Supreme Court and the Ad Hoc Elections Commission. Each of these organs was to be composed of nominees representing the parties to the Agreement. The Cabinet positions were apportioned in consultation with the parties. The Liberian National Transitional Government was given the mandate to extend its authority throughout the country, to repatriate and resettle refugees from abroad, and to conduct free and fair elections within six months. Disarmament was to be carried out concomitantly with the seating of the Liberian National Transitional Government, and the armed factions agreed to cooperate with the expanded ECOMOG to disarm under the supervision of the United Nations Observer Mission in Liberia. The Liberian National Transitional Government was inducted into office on 7 March 1994, and the Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General gave assurances that disarmament would commence simultaneously. He also assured the Liberian people that the armed factions would comply fully with the provisions of the Cotonou Agreement. After the seating of the Liberian National Transitional Government the military aspects of the peace process did not keep pace with the political aspects as contemplated by the Agreement. Moreover, it took six months for the additional troops from Tanzania and Uganda to arrive in Liberia. The expanded ECOMOG troops were never deployed and the factions did not disarm. They continue to believe in the attainment of political power by force of arms or, more precisely, through the barrel of the gun. Consequently, there has been a mushrooming of armed groups. There are now two factions of ULIMO and two factions of NPFL. There is also the Liberian Peace Council (LPC) and the Lofa Defence Force (LDF). Each of the breakaway factions of ULIMO and the NPFL, together with the LPC and LDF, have joined in a coalition of forces to fight the branch of NPFL led by Mr. Charles Taylor. As I speak, the battle in central Liberia rages on. A consequence of this situation is the mass exodus of frightened citizens who have had to seek refuge and havens in neighbouring countries and a heightening of the humanitarian needs of the country. I come now to the Liberian National Conference. Realizing the current morass in the country and the uncooperative attitude of the warring factions towards the Liberian National Transitional Government, a citizens’ consultative meeting was convened in Monrovia from 29 to 30 July 1994. At that meeting the people of Liberia determined that for the last four years the destiny of the country had been largely dictated by the warring factions and that they, the citizens, were being marginalized. They also concluded that the stalemate in the peace 3 General Assembly 22nd meeting process was the result of the intransigence of the warring factions with respect to disarmament and their failure to cooperate with the Liberian National Transitional Government, ECOMOG and UNOMIL in carrying out their respective responsibilities and duties under the Cotonou Agreement. The people of Liberia therefore decided that they must, and would, become involved in breaking the stalemate in the peace process. They have therefore convened since 24 August 1994 the Liberian National Conference (LNC), with representatives coming from all walks of life, including the 13 political subdivisions of the country, political parties, interest groups, professional organizations, social and religious organizations, trade and labour unions, student and youth groups and women’s organizations. The Conference organizers endeavoured to involve and encourage the participation of the warring factions. The Conference was addressed by the Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General, Mr. Trevor Gordon- Somers; the former United States President, Jimmy Carter; and the OAU Eminent Person, the Rev. Dr. Canaan Banana. General Arnold Quainoo, ECOMOG’s first field commander and Special Representative of the ECOWAS Chairman, and the Executive Secretary of ECOWAS, Dr. Edouard Benjamin, also addressed the Conference and expressed support for it. The Conference agenda included disarmament and demobilization, governance and elections. The consensus of the Conference was that the fundamental problem of the Liberian conflict is not governance, but, rather, the refusal of the armed groups to disarm and demobilize. The Conference therefore called for strong and effective sanctions to be applied against armed groups and warring factions which fail to cooperate in the disarmament process. With respect to governance, the Conference indicated that the mandate of the Liberian National Transitional Government should be extended and the Council of State strengthened so as to take the country through to free and fair democratic elections. We also see the Liberian National Conference as the embodiment of the democratic aspirations of the Liberian people and their opposition to the acquisition of power by force. Too much time, energy and resources and too many lives have been lost by Liberians and other West Africans to settle now for a less than honourable, just and lasting solution. I turn next to the Akosombo Agreement. The Liberian National Conference had gained momentum and was at the height of the debate on the fundamental problems of disarmament, governance and elections, when His Excellency, President Jerry Rawlings of Ghana, Chairman of ECOWAS, along with the Special Representative of the Secretary-General, undertook new initiatives to resolve the impasse in the peace process. A meeting of leaders of two warring factions, Mr. Charles Taylor of the NPFL and Lieutenant-General Alhaji S.G. Kromah, of ULIMO, together with the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of Liberia, Lieutenant-General J. Hezekiah Bowen, was held at Akosombo, Ghana. The OAU Eminent Person, Dr. Canaan Banana, also attended the meeting. Except for General Bowen, the Liberian National Transitional Government delegation was excluded from the deliberations at Akosombo. On 12 September 1994, General Bowen, Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of Liberia (AFL), without authority signed the Akosombo Accord, along with the two warring leaders: Charles Taylor and Alhaji Kromah. The Agreement did not adequately address the issue of disarmament but instead called for the restructuring of the Council of State of the Liberian National Transitional Government (LNTG). The two armed factions would each nominate a representative; General Bowen — selected without consultation — would represent the AFL, the constitutional army of Liberia; the ongoing Liberia National Conference would nominate one civilian; and the National Patriotic Front of Liberia (NPFL) and the United Liberation Movement for Democracy in Liberia (ULIMO) would consult to nominate the fifth member of the Council. The restructured LNTG would have a life-span of 16 months, with general elections slated for October 1995 and installation of the newly elected government in January 1996. The LNTG delegation registered its reservations about the Agreement with the Ghanian Government before returning to Liberia. In Liberia, the Akosombo Accord caused an outcry and widespread indignation. It was viewed as yet another attempt to appease the armed factional leaders whose uncompromising stance has been responsible for prolonging the conflict, causing the death of so many Liberians and bringing so much destruction and suffering upon the people. The Government of Liberia has therefore rejected the Akosombo Accord for a number of reasons. First, the Accord endeavoured to reduce the armed forces of Liberia, the constitutional army, to a warring faction. 4 General Assembly 22nd meeting Secondly, it failed to address adequately the political problems — disarmament and demobilization of the warring factions — that have been the single most important stumbling-block to the peace process. Thirdly, the premises underpinning the Akosombo Accord were fundamentally flawed. It ascribed power and influence to armed leaders whose standing, credibility and control within their own respective factions are questionable. There was also a failure to recognize the changing military positions of the factional leaders on the ground. For example, Mr. Charles Taylor of the NPFL has been unable to return to, or regain, his headquarters at Gbarnga since leaving the meeting in Ghana, because his forces have been driven out by rival factions. A few days after General Hezekiah Bowen returned from Ghana, there was an attempted coup and mutiny in his army ranks, and he had to seek refuge at the headquarters of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) Military Observer Group (ECOMOG). General Alhaji Kromah’s ULIMO remains split. We are pleased to note that as an indication of his sincerity and commitment towards finding a just and lasting solution to the Liberian crisis, the President of Ghana and current Chairman of ECOWAS, His Excellency Jerry Rawlings, was quick to respond to the concerns raised by the Liberian people to the Akosombo Accord. Within days of its signing, he dispatched a delegation to Liberia to hold consultations on the Agreement. He has since convened a broader-based consultative meeting in Accra. Consultations on the Agreement continue in this regard. The Liberian peace process is now at a critical stage. The reaction to the Akosombo Accord and the renewed outbreak of hostilities in central Liberia among the armed factions may lead some to conclude that Liberians are simply not ready for peace, but this is not so. We are ready for peace. We believe peace could finally be within easy reach, given the right mix of initiatives. Recent events in the country, including the failed coup attempt by dissident elements of the Armed Forces of Liberia and renewed hostilities among the warring factions, reinforce the need for effective action towards disarmament and demobilization. I would be amiss if I did not say how grateful the people of Liberia are to the United Nations, ECOWAS, the Organization of African Unity (OAU), non-governmental organizations, relief agencies and the entire international community, who have made untold sacrifices and contributed towards the search for peace in Liberia. In this light, we wish to appeal to the world community to give greater support to the work of ECOMOG by providing additional logistics and resources to enable it effectively to execute its mandate under the Cotonou Agreement. Haiti provides a hopeful example of what can be accomplished when the international community stays the course in helping to find a peaceful solution to intra-State conflicts. Indeed, while the same set of variables that influenced tougher United Nations action in Haiti may not obtain in Liberia, the people of Liberia are crying out to the world, especially to those countries that are better endowed and constantly hail the benefits of democracy, to take the high moral ground and lend their potent voices and wherewithal to ending the human misery and suffering in Liberia. I am therefore confident that the United Nations, which has striven to implement the provisions of its Charter for about half a century, can still muster the courage and will to respond to the requisites of peace, democracy and development for the truly global era that is dawning as we approach the twenty-first century.