Liberia, 1994

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.