Press Statement by John W. Blaney III
To Liberian Press
March 20, 2003
Good morning ladies and gentlemen of the press. Thank you for coming today.
Results of the International Contact Group on Liberia
As many of you know, in addition to having the honor of being the U.S. Ambassador to Liberia, I also sit as a representative of the United States on the International Contact Group on Liberia (ICGL). In that regard, I cannot speak for the ICGL, but since I and the Secretary-General's Representative, Mr. Moosa, are the only persons presently in Liberia who attended the formal sessions of the Contact Group, I wanted to provided you with information about its meeting of February 28th in New York City, which was held at the United Nations.
I found the spirit of ICGL members to be constructive and businesslike. The Contact Group membership, including the United States, is seeking to offer a way forward for Liberia that, if taken, will lead to a much better future. We members want to help Liberia and her people. The Contact Group recognizes that Liberia's interrelated problems need to be addressed comprehensively, a point made repeatedly by the ICGL earlier and at this session.
The ICGL was very clear on where to start on achieving a better future for Liberia. First, on the war, the Contact Group is urging both the Government of Liberia and the LURD to enter immediately and without any preconditions into negotiations on a cease-fire. The Contact Group also welcomed Mali as a mediator on behalf of ECOWAS. The Group is hopeful that the upcoming meeting in Mali will make progress.
However, to be clear, the ICGL wants to see the Government and the LURD negotiate a cease-fire. For the Government or the LURD to insist on the inclusion of many other parties in cease-fire negotiations would be exactly the kind of precondition to cease-fire negotiations that the Contact Group has warned against.
Let me speak even more plainly on behalf of the United States. We too support the Mali meeting, and hope that whatever approach the Government of Mali takes will be a productive one. Certainly, national reconciliation is a very important topic as President Taylor and others have said. However, our view is that achieving a cease-fire in Liberia necessitates direct negotiations between the two parties to the conflict; that is, the Liberian Government and LURD, with just a few facilitators involved, such as Inter-Religious Council of Liberia with, of course, the Government of Mali chairing these negotiations. Too many cooks, as well sometimes say, can spoil the stew.
Liberia needs peace and a cease-fire now, not a peace postponed until all other problems can be resolved. The United States strongly urges that such direst GOL-LURD negotiations take place very soon, either inside or outside the context of the Mali meeting. Again, while we hope that the multi-party Mali meeting is successful, it is no substitute for direct negotiations that are centered on the two parties to the conflict. This war needs to be stopped.
For its part, LURD must also come to the table without preconditions and ready to end the violence. The Contact Group has been very clear that it expects LURD to move quickly away from violence and become part to the political process. The United States condemns the idea of this war continuing year after year, with neither side likely to win it.
Furthermore, as was made clear at a recent Washington meeting of the Movement for Democratic Change in Liberia, expecting LURD itself, there is virtually no support from Liberian opposition groups for pursuing violent means to try and transform Liberia's system of governance. Yes, Liberia's system of governance badly needs reform, but Liberia's history has shown that more violence is not the answer. In short, LURD must be prepared to negotiate in good faith and to commit to a cease-fire.
A second important outcome and request of the contact Group was that the Secretary-General of the United Nations send a needs assessment team to Liberia, and importantly, that the Government of Liberia welcome that team and cooperate with it. The Contact Group has concluded that conditions for a free and fair election do not exist at this time in Liberia, so this matter is of great importance.
As you know, for some time the United States has expressed repeatedly its deep concerns about election preparations. Those concerns remain, and as I said in January, the United States will not recognize the results of any fraudulent election. For example, major inequities and organizational problems exist, and harassment of opposition leaders and cadre is obvious.
Hence the Secretary-General sending an assessment team offers a last opportunity for Liberia to move quickly and convincingly towards genuinely free and fair elections. The U.S. urges that the Government of Liberia welcomes and cooperate fully with this Valuable Contact Group initiative. Finally, I wanted to note that the ICGL has authorized the formation of a local Contact Group here in Liberia. It will be made up of those Contact Group members who are represented here in Liberia. The Co-Chairs will be Ghana and the EU representative, as is the case with the parent organization.
Human and Political Rights
I would again like to underline the fundamental importance of improving respect for human and political rights in Liberia. The situation here remains highly inadequate, and in several respects is getting worse.
State-sponsored military forces and LURD continue to violate human rights of the Liberian people. There has been a deplorable increase in forced military recruiting in IDP and refugee camps, in cities and elsewhere. This includes abducting and impressing children into their ranks, thereby exploiting and endangering them as well as causing enormous pain and hardship to their families. This must stop at once.
Meanwhile, we have already issued a joint press release with the EC Commission on the tragic murders of the ADRA workers and the absolute necessity to protect assistance providers. It is essential for the Government of Liberia to rapidly and aggressively investigate these murders, and bring to justice those responsible. That investigation should include suspects who live in Liberia.
The Government of Liberia also continues to hold prisoners unjustly. It has not yet honored its agreement with the United States on the release of some of them. Instead, a pattern has emerged of falsely accusing and arresting those who fall into disfavor with somehow being connected with LURD. This practice should be discarded in favor of genuine justice and the rule of law. People such as drivers, journalists and human rights advocates continues to suffer in jail needlessly, and at great cost to the international reputation of Liberia. The United States calls again upon the Government of Liberia to release these individuals. Many would welcome such an action.
U.S.-Liberian Relations
The United States would like to commend the Government of Liberia, including its legislature, for ratifying recently several international anti-terrorism conventions. We think those conventions are very important and we were pleased to see Liberia take this action.
Unfortunately, the broader relationship has suffered on other fronts since my last press conference in January. We have listened patiently to quite a lot of phantasmagoric accusation about the United States, including alleged concerns about our imagined activities, by individuals who seldom bother with facts or the truth. Unfortunately, this kind of contrived disinformation is not just bizarre and ridiculous. It can sometimes get in the way of productive statecraft. Also troubling was the Government of Liberia's recent imposition of a new 30-mile limit on the movements of U.S. diplomats in Liberia, including myself. The alleged reason for doing so was a travel advisory on Liberia that we wrote principally for Americans.
The United States considers such a restriction to be unfriendly and uncalled for action. We have tried to work quietly with the government to have this limitation lifted for over a month, but with no results. Consequently, we are now imposing similar restrictions on all Liberian diplomatic missions in the United States.
As the Government of Liberia is aware, the consequences of maintaining these restrictions are many and serious. For example, the government has made it impossible for us to provide consular services to some American citizens in Liberia. Our ability to assess and provide humanitarian assistance to Liberians in the camps will drop, and so will our ability to assess and monitor development assistance projects. The government's action endangers millions of dollars in development aid to hundreds of thousands of Liberians. Furthermore, many of our cultural exchange programs and activities will have to be cancelled.
In other words, due to the Government of Liberia's actions, funding for many development projects and other activities may soon have to be directed away from Liberia and used in other countries where U.S. diplomats do not face such restrictions. Finally, let me mention as well that this pattern of harassment of the American Mission is not just about the imposition of travel restrictions. The NGO representatives we have selected to help hundreds of thousands of Liberians in developing their communities are being harassed and threatened. The employees of our contract civilian security firm are also being harassed, threatened and even arrested as a form of intimidation.
As Ambassador, I am committed to try and improve the relationship with Liberia, and am dedicated to helping Liberia towards a better future. However, I am also responsible for the safety and well being of the American community in Liberia and the many fine Liberians that work along with us to achieve that better future.
I will not tolerate such security-related harassment or artificial restrictions on movement for long. If it continues, I will be forced by Liberia's government to start curtailing a wide range of U.S. development assistance projects, services, and other programs in Liberia. I am hopeful, however, that the Government of Liberia and local government representatives will act quickly to rectify this situation and protect Liberia's reputation as a good host for people who are here to help this country.
March 20, 2003
Q. Mr. Ambassador you just mentioned that efforts are being made to bring LURD and Government to the negotiation
table. What specific measures or punitive action are you going to take should one of the parties go to the
conference and decides not to adhere to what the international community says?
A. First of all we expect a serious peace process. I think I have mentioned that before. We are not interested
in some sort of confab or jamboree. We are interested in a serious peace negotiation. That means for us, the
United States, a direct negotiation between the Government and LURD. Not some big auditorium approach.
We believe, not because we are trying to side with either party, but rather, and I think you know this from
many of your own experiences, that you just don't get results real easily when you have a lot of parties in a
room on something as sensitive as this.
Now, part of our jobs as friends of Liberia is to try to make this happen. It hasn't happened before. There is,
you know, animosity, strong emotions, and reasons on both sides. We think we owe it to Liberia to try to
encourage strongly both sides, both warring parties, to sit down and talk about this and stop harming the
Liberian people. And if either side resists what the ICG wants to do, which is for them to go without a
precondition, for example the precondition of having a bunch of people, other parties in the room that is a
precondition. That is unacceptable to the Contact Group. It is unacceptable to the United States. So if that
happens we will have to discuss with whichever party resists this and try to get them to change their minds.
Because you know, if you are for peace, real peace or you are not. And if you are for peace you should be sitting
down with the other party who got an army and working this out.
Q. Recently, you issue a travel guide cautioning Americans against traveling in rural Liberia because of the
fragile security situation. And now you have been traveling in rural Liberia. Are you saying that the US
Ambassador is safe, safer, than the ordinary Americans are who are out?
A. Yes. One of the things that I have found out in life when I travel throughout the world, and I think you
probably have experienced the same thing, is that strangers in a strange country much less knowledgeable about
what is going on, and what they can do safely and what they can't do. Also we have the protection of .. we have
many friends in Liberia, whom we are grateful for . We have friends in the Government and authorities who look
after our wellbeing. Now, somebody who is venturing into Liberia as a tourist for example, they don't know
anybody. They don't know where they can go in town; where is safe, where might be a question. You know, where
the fighting is, and where it's not.. So yes, there is a big distinction between what people whom live in
Liberia know they can do and do it safely. The other thing is my people are here to do a job, and they
understand and appreciate their duty and responsibilities to the United States and the Liberian people. All this
information about Liberia and security is unavailable to your average tourists who do not know about Liberia.
So yes there is a big difference.
Q. Mr. Ambassador, you said you would like to see a full investigation into the killing of the relief ADRA
workers. You also said you know the suspects are living in Liberia. Does this in any way in your view
presuppose that the doers are here in Liberia?
A. We want to see a full and complete investigation by Liberian authorities as I said. We will not want o
prejudice this investigation. I will tell you that the information that we have suggest that the earlier reports
about them being LURD or outside people, the information that we have suggest otherwise that they are from
Liberia, and ought to be identified quickly by the local authorities and by the government.
Q. Mr. Ambassador, You said that no party should go to the conference with pre-condition. Now President
Taylor is saying here that they are going to the conference with no pre-condition, but that he will not go
outside of the constitution. Don't you see that to be a pre-condition? My second question has to do with. we
are talking about peace. No party should go to the conference with precondition, but at the same time, LURD is
attacking. How do you see that?
A. Well, I am not sure that I know what he means about. You have to ask him about what he means about outside
the constitution. I don't think there is anything in the Liberian constitution that says that he can't sit down
with the LURD himself, and talk about peace. I think that you know the LURD fighting in the field is not a
pre-condition to having peace negotiations either or we suggest that they stop that too. What we want is for
the Government and for the LURD to go into a room with facilitators and hatch this stuff out. And the objective
would be a cease-fire as soon as possible.
Q. Mr. Ambassador, you spoke about the Government imposing a restriction on your travel and how this would
influence your capability to help with development projects. Now, I know that you had personal contact with
President Taylor when you came. Have you met with him since he came up with this restriction personally to
discuss the matter with him and to see how best you could resolve it? My second question is, you talked about
the release of prisoners, the rest of the prisoners that are in jail. President Taylor recently said most of the
prisoners who were released based on reconciliation are now fighting along side the LURD. How do you reconcile
this?
A. I don't think the prisoners who I have referred and named directly to him are the ones. I think he is
referring to people he released years ago. The ones that I have asked him about, he has released one of those.
And that was Hassan Bility. And then he also released a number of people I believe around Christmas that
actually has nothing to do with me. That was not part of any request of the United States. And insofar as our
meeting go together, I have not met with President Taylor. He has not found the time yet in his calendar to meet
with me since I returned from the United States on that topic or any other topic.
Q. Mr. Ambassador, I want to take you to the elections. You have always said the United States is not going to
support any fraudulent elections. And you just said the conditions are not, you know, suitable for any free and
fair elections. The Government has always said the elections will be held October come what may. Do you think
the elections will go ahead? If no, what could be the remedy? What could be the option? There have been some
people who have suggested postponement.
A. Yes. There has been a lot of talk in the papers by others, not by the United States about a postponement.
We have not taken a position on that. I would just point out also that the judgement that conditions do not,
are not correct, for fair and free elections is no longer the United States' judgement alone. This is the
world's judgment now. The Contact Group and all of its members, you know, formally believe that this country is
not. that conditions do exist for free and fair elections. So you are hearing from the international community
now, not just the United States. And our view has always been sort of the optimistic one, which is, you recall,
I even received some criticism in January for raising some of the problems about the elections so early.
Now the reason I did that then was because I thought it was a friendly thing to do. That's what friends do.
You let folks know that there is a problem well in advance so that there is time to fix the problem. And we are
still at that point. I guess ten months away from October. They could have, the Government could have invited
over the Electoral Systems unit of the United States [United Nations]. Which is what I explicitly suggested.
Now we are a little further down the road, and I think your point about, you know, about time running out is
valid. We are worrying about time running out, but our position is that the Contact Group has given, has put
forward two tests very clearly for Liberia. The first one, first test is to have a negotiation without
precondition between the Government of Liberia and LURD soon and direct. That is the first test for a cease-fire.
The second test for the Contact Group is that the Secretary-General sends a Needs Assessment Team that will look
at the election situation and make recommendations on how to fix it. And that the government welcome and
cooperate fully with that team.
Now I think what the Contact Group is waiting to see on other questions that they also addressed. For instance
issues, the obvious issues like cease-fire, monitoring and stabilization force, restructuring the military.
All these other issues that you do read in the papers. Because the Contact Group does view the problem as one
that has to be dealt with comprehensively. They are waiting to see whether Liberia passes these two tests.
Because, you know, nobody is interested, and I mean not anybody is interested in sending a force here to hold
the situation stable while there is a crooked election conducted. It is not going to happen. Is that clear?
Thank you all very much. I am glad to be back. I am enjoying my staying here in Liberia very much. And I wish you all well. Thank you very much. END.
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
