PRESS CONFERENCE BY LIBERIA

Liberia's relationship with the Sierra Leonean rebel movement, the Revolutionary United Force (RUF), was one that went back to his own country's civil war, and one that was both documented and known, Monie Captan, Foreign Minister of Liberia, told correspondents at a headquarters press conference today.

"What we have rejected, however, is that that relationship, following our general election, has been translated into one where active support has been given to the RUF to continue its war efforts in Sierra Leone", Mr. Captan stated.

Mr. Captan went on to say that after Liberian elections, President Charles Taylor continued to encourage the conflicting parties in Sierra Leone to move towards a peaceful settlement of their dispute that would eventually lead to the election of a legitimate government.  So all of President Taylor's engagements had been to use his influence, based on the past relationship, to encourage the RUF to make that move.  "We recognized that this was an outstanding matter for our own country's reconstruction since we could not ascertain a good future with war continuing in a neighbouring State", Mr. Captan said.

A correspondent said that some diplomats had looked at the measures taken by Liberia in the last few days to answer some of the concerns and charges in the report of the panel of experts on Sierra Leone (document S/2001/1195).  They had had a difficult time reconciling those measures taken with the denial by the Liberian Government that anything illegal or illicit was going on.  If the Government was denying any illicit involvement in Sierra Leone, how then was one to view the measures taken?

Responding to that question, Mr. Captan said he could not see the inconsistency between the two actions.  "Let us look at some of the measures, the grounding of our aircraft for instance -- if you look at the panels of experts report, none of the aircraft that they claimed had violated the sanctions and delivered arms to Sierra Leone were Liberian registered", he said. 

There was therefore no relationship between the violation of the sanctions and Liberian registered aircraft, continued Mr. Captan.  "But we acknowledge the fact that we have had a seven year civil war and we do not have records of some of the aircraft flying our flags", he said.  "We need to find out which ones they are."  That was why the grounding of the aircraft was total.  “It was a total grounding of all of them -– we made no exceptions because we did not know which ones were out there”. 

Many of the aircraft were registered during the civil war, and some during the transitional Government, Mr. Captan went on to say.  As a matter of fact, it was the present Government that hired a British company to look into the problem of the Liberian aircraft registry. He could therefore see no inconsistency because of the denial mentioned.  

Addressing another measure, Mr. Captan said, "we have admitted that the reason we are proposing the regime related to diamond monitoring and regulation, is because Liberian diamonds are being smuggled as well".  Liberia was losing legitimate revenues from its own natural resources.  He stressed that diamond

smuggling was endemic in West Africa and not unique to just Sierra Leone and Liberia.  Therefore, any regime that would improve the situation was something that his country would support wholeheartedly.  "I don't think the measures are in any way an acquiescence that there is Liberian Government involvement in the sale of diamonds.”

Mr. Captan said the other proposal that was made by his Government was for the deployment of international monitors at Liberian airports.  "If we are involved in the violation of sanctions, why would we want verification and monitoring"? he asked.  The whole purpose of inviting the United Nations to have a monitoring presence is for the question of verification and monitoring so that "we can go beyond these unsubstantiated charges that are being made against the Liberian Government", he said.

A correspondent wanted to know what the Foreign Minister thought some of the effects of the proposed sanctions against his country and Sierra Leone would be?  Mr. Captan said Liberia's timber industry supported approximately 30 per cent of the national budget.  That budget was only $100 million per year.  It paid for the salaries of civil servants, the upkeep of hospitals, schools, clinics, sanitation programmes and everything that a Government needed to operate.

Mr. Captan said if one took 30 per cent out of that budget, a major deficit would be created.  “This means that we would have to slash most programmes that are funded by the budget –- health, education and social welfare.”  All of this was happening at a time where the international community was not giving any meaningful assistance to Liberia.  At the European Union, even programmes intended for poverty reduction had been held in abeyance because of the influence of some powerful countries. 

Mr. Captan said that basically what was taking place was an attempt to strangulate the entire Liberian population, despite the disclaimers by some people that the sanctions would have no impact on that population.  "I do not agree with that at all", he said. 

Regarding diamonds, Mr. Captan said one had to ask who mined them?  It was a small petty mining activity carried out by artisans.  Families and small miners were engaged in it.  An embargo on diamonds would put those people out of business and not the Government.  The Government received royalties from diamonds that were exported.  But the persons who received an income from the mining were the miners.  They were then the ones who were being targeted.

Mr. Captan went on to say that the countries which were trying to appease the humanitarian community were the ones saying "you don't have to worry, the sanctions will have no impact on the people".  But it did, he said, and "we should put them to the challenge".  If they claimed that sanctions would have no impact, they should submit to a process allowing an impact study to be conducted by an independent group before the imposition of any punitive measures. 

Responding to a question on the peace negotiations in Sierra Leone,

Mr. Captan warned that if the attitude of the international community was not based on cooperation but punitive measures, there would be a withdrawal by the Liberian Government from all of the processes.  That would not be a positive development.  But Liberia could not remain actively engaged in a peace process when the international community viewed it as having no credibility.  "We are told disengage but use your influence.  How do you gain influence?  You gain it through a certain level of engagement", he said.  Disengagement meant the loss of that

influence.  "If you want us to cut off all links, which we have done, then don't ask us to use our influence, because there is none after that", he said.

Responding to a question about a statement made today by the United States about how many profits from the Liberian timber industry went to the people of the country, Mr. Captan asked what was the basis for Ambassador James Cunningham's (United States) assertion?  "Did he give you any examples or cases where there was corruption in the expenditure of that revenue?  He would expect that if that was going to be established in the report, then there should be no doubt about it or questions.  It should be clearly stated in the report. 

Mr. Captan went on to say that report of the panel stated in the very first paragraph that RUF revenues from diamonds were more than sufficient to maintain their war efforts.  Why would it then be necessary to go to Liberian timber revenue and take that money to buy arms for Sierra Leone? he asked.  How did one reconcile the two?  "I think they did a botched up job with the report to meet this deadline to have something with which to indict the Liberian Government.  The resolution before the Council was on Liberia.  Other countries had violated the sanctions, but only his had been selected –- singled out for punitive action. 

Mr. Captan said his expectation was that the Council's response to the Panel's report would have been comprehensive and would have dealt with all of the countries, including those who produced arms and those who permitted arms to transit their territory and conflict diamonds to be sold.  "You cannot just take one country and single it out", he said.  Listening to some of the statements this morning it was obvious that they were out to get Liberia. There was a mindset created in the international community that would be very difficult to break. 

"All we are asking for is that the United Nations treat Liberia in an objective and fair manner", he said.  "We have made several undertakings -- give us the opportunity to live up those undertakings or not.  But we must have an opportunity to prove ourselves.  You cannot come with one final blow to bury a small country and say that you have solved the problems in Sierra Leone", he said.  He asked if anyone thought for one moment that the passage of the resolution would end the war in Sierra Leone?  "If any of us think that then we are very naive", he said.

* *** *