PRESS CONFERENCE BY LIBERIA’S FOREIGN MINISTER

PRESS CONFERENCE BY LIBERIA’S FOREIGN MINISTER

Liberia’s Foreign Minister yesterday protested the imposition of Security Council sanctions on his country, saying at a Headquarters press conference that his country had been “indicted on secret evidence”.

Monie R. Captan told correspondents that the sanctions, which went into effect yesterday and include a ban on the export of Liberian diamonds and travel restrictions on high officials, were imposed without any verifiable evidence of non-compliance with Council resolutions and would have come into effect regardless of any actions taken by his Government.

The Security Council, in resolution 1343 adopted on 7 March, demanded that Liberia immediately cease support for the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) of Sierra Leone and other armed groups in the region –- by, among others, expelling RUF members from Liberia and ending financial and military support for them -- and warned that the sanctions would come into effect yesterday unless it determined that Liberia was complying with its demands.

Mr. Captan said that his Government was disappointed with the outcome of the closed-door informal consultations that took place among members of the Security Council on Friday, 4 May, when the Council considered the Secretary-General’s report on Liberia’s compliance.  The Council had resorted to unverifiable reports, because it had failed to establish an independent, transparent and credible verification mechanism to assess the comprehensive measures taken by Liberia to comply with the demands of the Council.

The Foreign Minister said that his Government had requested the establishment of a verification mechanism in a letter addressed to the Secretary-General on 21 March 2001.  The establishment of such a mechanism would have demonstrated the willingness of the Council to constructively engage with the Liberian Government.  The report of the Secretary-General had underscored the very deficiency identified by the Government of Liberia.

Furthermore, the demands of resolution 1343 were so ambiguous that establishing a criterion to determine compliance was extremely difficult, if not impractical, he said.  The sixty-day compliance period, for example, had been intended to appease the Economic Community of Western African States (ECOWAS), so as to garner regional support for its punitive actions against Liberia.  The expressed “cooperation” between the Council and ECOWAS on the matter lacked credibility.

He rejected the argument that the resolution imposed “smart sanctions”.  Historically, diamond mining had represented the only means of livelihood for a sizeable section of the Liberian population in a country with over 80 per cent of the population in absolute poverty.  Undoubtedly, foreign investment, as well as development and humanitarian assistance, would be discouraged and the task of rehabilitating shattered Liberian lives would be frustrated.

The Government of Liberia, he said, was also concerned that the resolution, which also imposed an arms embargo, ignored the ongoing war by armed dissidents

who had continued to openly make incursions into Liberia’s Lofa County from Guinea.  The huge quantity of lethal arms and ammunition provided to the British-

trained Sierra Leonean army by the United Kingdom was now being supplied to the Liberian dissident forces to sustain the war in Lofa County.  Liberia called upon the Secretary-General to dispatch a United Nations fact-finding mission to Liberia to verify those acts of aggression.

Mr. Captan said that sanctions sponsored and implemented at the insistence of powerful countries against small and impoverished African countries without conclusive evidence of wrongdoing was something all African countries should fear.  His Government would continue to insist on the fairness and transparency of the Security Council in its dealings with Liberia.

Did the Minister have a response to the accusation in the Secretary-General’s report that Liberia had not provided specific information on the expulsion of RUF leaders? a correspondent asked.

He replied that Liberia had adopted a policy of total disengagement from the Sierra Leonean peace process about a month before the adoption of the resolution by the Council.  In keeping with that policy, it had issued an expulsion order to all RUF members from Liberia.  It was a voluntary expulsion that provided them with a 72-hour period to leave the country.  They did leave within that period. There were no RUF members within Liberian territory at the time of the adoption of the resolution.

He added that if the Security Council felt that RUF members were still residing in Liberia, they should tell his Government who they were and where they were and then they would at least be confronted with evidence.  For the Council to simply say that they were not convinced was unfair and subjective.

In response to a question concerning the location of Sam Bockarie, he said that Liberia had expelled him long before the United Nations had demanded it.  Liberia would not benefit from maintaining him in the country.  His Government’s responsibility was to have him leave its territory.  Where he went was of no concern to the Liberian Government.

Mr. Captan said that Liberia was “absolutely not” providing financial assistance to the RUF.  The Security Council owed it to the Liberian Government and the press to come up with facts and concrete evidence of the allegations.  Liberia must be able to scrutinize the facts.

Didn’t the accusations have to do with the long-term connection between President Charles Taylor and rebel groups like the RUF? a corespondent asked. 

The resolution was very clear, he said.  If Liberia did not do certain things within 60 days, the sanctions would be triggered.  The Security Council had a responsibility to show to the international community the things that Liberia did not do.  It had presented a report to the Council of all of the measures that

had been taken by the Liberian Government.  No one had come back to his Government and said that they had reviewed all of the measures and were not satisfied.  The

Council had not been specific as to how Liberia had failed to comply.

The Liberia Government, he said, at this point, was disengaged from the Sierra Leonean peace process.  The Council had called upon President Taylor to use his good offices to facilitate the peace process in Sierra Leone.  If he even attempted to do that, it would be a further basis for indicting him for

maintaining contact with the RUF.  The ambiguity of the resolution was, therefore, clear.

While he was here at the United Nations, he said he would be meeting with the Secretary-General, the permanent members of the Security Council and the Chairman of the Sanctions Committee.  The sanctions regime would have to be discussed, as it would have to be implemented in cooperation with the Liberian Government.  He would also bring up the situation in northern Liberia where attacks were occurring from across Guinean territory.  The regional dimensions of the conflict would have to be discussed.

A correspondent asked if the Minister thought that there was a “witch hunt” going on at the United Nations with all of the recent panels on diamonds and weapons concerning western and central African countries.

Liberia, he said, believed that the panels had not done a thorough job.  One of the basic elements of an investigation was to be able to present evidence to the person who was being investigated for comments.  With regard to the Liberian situation, one of the panel members was a man named Ian Smillie, who had co-authored an article on Liberia, a year before he became a panel expert on Liberia, in which he indicted the Liberian Government on charges of diamond and gun-running.  He brought a prejudiced position to the panel of experts, which was problematic.

He added that now there was a new panel of experts on Liberia.  The expert on diamonds happened to be a British national.  Britain was the sponsor of the resolution and had direct commercial interest in the diamond industries.  The Secretary-General could have done a better job of selecting  -- perhaps getting someone a bit more neutral.

Hadn’t Liberia, on its own, already suspended the diamond trade while it was trying to design an international certification regime? a correspondent asked.

Yes, he said, that was true.  The reason that Liberia had imposed a ban on diamonds was to show the international community that it was serious about reforms in the certification system.  The Government had been trying to engage the Security Council in designing a verification mechanism, but they had not even responded.  It seemed that the Council was only interested in engaging in punitive measures against the Liberian Government.

The United Nations’ attempt to verify Liberia’s compliance with the resolution was a one-day visit of a committee, he said.  How was it possible that a committee could visit Liberia in one day and ascertain Liberia’s compliance?   The Council was not accountable to anyone.  It seemed to exercise absolute power. The Council was established as an organ of the United Nations by Member States and there had to be some element of accountability.

In response to a question on the stand of Tunisia and Mali in relation to the sanctions, he said that people were well aware of the types of pressures that were brought upon small countries that stood up to more powerful countries.

* *** *