These, the fleeing refugees, must be at the centre of sustaible  peace

Thorough Disarmament vs. The Prevailing Rosy Reports

(Corrected)

 By J. Yanqui Zaza

  May 21, 2004              

The killing of a civilian at the hands of rioting by rebels on May 17, 2004 has added a different picture on disarmament, than UNMIL’s rosy reports. This incident, in which fighters still loyal to indicted war criminal Charles Taylor went on rampage at will for several hours, should cause Liberians to think about interpreting the conflicting news on disarmament. Better now and 1990s, when the world was told Africans have worked miracles by ending the Liberian conflict via the disarmament of all fighters, could strike the country again.

UN Special representative Jacques Klein and UN military chief Daniel Opande, say on the one hand that they have disarmed 26,000 fighters and that Liberia is 85% free for civic administration and humanitarian work. This is commendable. But on the other hand, besides the rioting by rebels, presumably disarmed, rebels of LURD and MODEL are reported to be concealing heavy weapons. The rebels’ activities in conflict with rosy reports compels one to wonder whether UN Ambassador, Jacques Klein and General Daniel Opande, UN military chief to Liberia are consciously and knowingly deceiving Liberians as ECOWAS did in 1997. UN and ECOWAS representatives said in 1997 that the Republic of Liberia had completely and thoroughly been disarmed; Liberians and Liberia were ready to live in total and absolute peace and stability.” You know the rest of the story and what the rebels did and didn't do. 

Again, Liberians are silent now as they were in 1997. Then, Liberians, apparently having been warned to accept either partial disarmament or risk having to experience the repeat of the April 6-14, 1996 military assaults on Monrovia, chose the former. Unwillingly, they joined the chorus and accepted the  false premise that partial disarmament was reasonable because rebels would be no threat to peace and stability once elections were held. They couldn’t predict with certainty post elections’ events, but remembered the events of 1996.  Residents, in 1996, ran from their homes to ECOWAS’ headquarters after peacekeepers aided and abetted armed thugs in killing over 3000 plus residents with impunity. Rebels of both NPFL and ULIMO-K, who attacked Monrovia on April 6-15, 1996, did not only killed thousands of civilians and destroyed infrastructure, but most importantly dismantled the myth that residents of Monrovia were safe and invulnerable as compared to residents of other cities in Liberia.

Bad news on disarmament vanished a few months to elections in 1997.  Everyone, including the press, joined in spreading the rosy news on disarmament despite ugly realities attaining. No one questioned, not even the politicians, the Nigerian General Victor Marlu when he said, “”95%” of the fighters were disarmed. No one saw the disarmed fighters, only a few dysfunctional weapons gathered afterwards and burnt as PR stunt for Charles Taylor the new president.  Vote seekers campaigned for elections amid reliable reports indicating that warring factions had hidden deadly weapons in and outside of Monrovia.  Everyone, including the press joined in spreading the rosy news on disarmament despite ugly realities.. Charles Taylor’s threat to resume his military campaign and his promise to kill the late Henry Andrews, the then chairman of the Elections Commission, did not dampen the rosy news.  UN officials didn’t adjust the programs even though they knew that warlords did control and command each warring faction. Neither did they investigate Charles Taylor’s implied public statements that he had sufficient and adequate military weapons in resuming war if he didn’t win the 1997 elections. Rather, UN military officers as well as the press rumoured that Taylor’s utterance was just a bluff, and tactics for more government positions.

Aware of the consequences for accepting partial disarmament, UNIMIL is still reporting optimistic assessment without any caution. UN's reports show the number of fighters disarmed quadrupling since disarmament programs resumed on April 15, 2004. UNIMIL reported disarming 250 fighters on 4/15/04, added 6,000 by 4/28/04, and 8,000 by 5/12/04, totalling 16,000 in less than 30 days. Instead of an inquiry, the press has joined the campaign in reporting good news. Interestingly, UN representatives' reports don't include information on where, when, and how UNIMIL provided former fighters with after school services, vocational schools, and locations of the home communities. More so UN representatives are not reporting why leaders of warring factions are encouraging their fighters to abandon the disarmament programs. Neither have they commented on the news reports stating that a leader of the NPFL fighters stated that he controls over 12,000-armed fighters, combatants whom UN representatives claimed to have disarmed and demobilized.

A troubling and unanswered question is, who is being disarmed? The UNMIL says half of those disarmed have no weapons. Is it then that any little town criminal wanting US300 (a lot of money in Liberia nowadays) is accepted as a rebel and listed as disarmed to push the figures up if the UN estimated 60,000 fighters are to be accounted for on the payroll. But disarmed of what, since he/she carries no weapons?  The press has joined the campaign in reporting good news. Interestingly, UN representatives' reports don't include information on where, when, and how the former fighters would be provided vocational schools, after training and re-locations of the home communities. More so, UN representatives are not reporting why leaders of warring factions are encouraging their fighters to abandon the disarmament programs. Neither have they commented on the news reports stating that a leader of the NPFL fighters stated that he controls over 12,000-armed fighters, combatants whom UN representatives claimed to have disarmed and demobilized.

It is sad and regrettable that one person was killed, however, one hopes that the recent incident becomes a blessing in disguise. It could be a blessing because the rampaging should shatter the belief that disarmament programs are being executed effectively because fighters are bringing in weapons and are not roaming the streets of Monrovia. It could also encourage UN representatives to revisit programs on disarmament since former rebels of the deposed dictator who were presumed to have been disarmed are in fact armed and can be mobilized for military operations.

Liberians, especially so civilian officers of the interim government should cut down spending on travelling and luxury cars and allocate the funds on disarmament. The interim government demonstrating fiscal discipline along with honest report on disarmament would provide reasons while donors should continue to send aid to Liberia. Folks, besides the ethnic dimension, fighters of NPFL or fighters of LURD and MODEL have genuine fear and do not trust each other. Having used arms against each other during the last twenty plus years, building confidence between these archrivals requires commensurate incentives and an even-handed approach to disarmament. If it turns out that fighters of the NPFL have not disarmed and, or fighters of LURD and MODEL are concealing weapons, UN representatives would have to adjust their approach.

UN Ambassador Jacques Klein’s plan, discharging disarmed and demobilized combatants to their home communities, is a good beginning, but the plan should include providing productive activities for the former combatants. Further, allowing former combatants to spend (21) twenty-one days at cantonment instead of the new program (7) seven days is necessary for re-educating and rehabilitating. Again, if UN representatives do not provide realistic and sustainable programs for the fighters, they would have compelled the former fighters to wait for a new overnight liberator(s). Let’s remember that these fighters joined the warring factions as part of a way of providing for and defending their lives. Rebels might welcome a warlord if representatives abandon these unskilled, unemployed, and former fighters to fetch for themselves in a society that has become expensive, mean, and less caring.