There is a shared feeling among the business community that Liberia is a scapegoat pointed out by the international community. Do you share this view and if so, to what extent?
Liberia has been singled out and targeted by certain governments that have tried to indict Liberia but have been unable because they have failed to provide any evidence to indict this country for the charges they have brought against Liberia. And so they have tried to lean more towards a propaganda campaign in the international press. That has been the direction in the absence of substantial, concrete evidence to indict this government and that has been the avenue that they have sought. Now everyone knows that Liberia is a very small country…it's not a country that attracts international attention, how can you explain the proliferation of articles about a small country like Liberia in the New York Times, the Washington Post, the London Times, what is it about this small Liberia that warrants so much international publicity. It is not to serve the interest of the policy of some countries.
How do you foresee the evolution of the situation as far as the sanctions are concerned?
I think there is a dialogue going on. One of the myths that I would like to dispel is that Liberia has not been cooperating with the international community or the UN. That is absolutely false. We have made so many proposals to the UN to resolve questions that they have raised. Let me give you some tangible examples. We have been accused of providing support to the rebels in neighboring Sierra Leone. We have said to the UN, you have a peacekeeping force in Sierra Leone, deploy peacekeepers along the border of Liberia and Sierra Leone. If you put peacekeepers at the border of Liberia and Sierra Leone, you will be able to monitor the flow of any transactions across the border. They've rejected that. We said okay, you said we are bringing in arms into our country. We have only one international airport…why don't you put some observers at our airport so that they can observe what is coming and what is leaving. And our airport is so small…it's not something that one can hide activities at the airport. They have rejected that proposal. We have said to them, assist us in developing a mechanism at our ports of entry to monitor the flow of diamonds leaving Liberia because we don't have the technical capacity to do so. They've rejected that. The point that I am trying to make is that we have offered to do so many things to show our cooperation with the UN that have been rejected…and why? I think it is because the proposals that we have made are proposals that have the potential of verifying the allegations against Liberia. And if the UN were to participate in activities in Liberia that could verify the allegations, then that would lead to an exoneration of Liberia from the charges that have been made which no one wants to do. So, how do you get out of a situation like that? Nevertheless, we are a practical country, we understand international politics, we know how the world runs and so we are talking to the big countries and trying to develop a relationship with them in which we can address the concerns of those big countries minus the prejudice that have been harbored by individuals, and I do believe we are making progress in that direction and don't think that some of the sanctions that are been proposed are sanctions that we have major problems with. If it is a prohibition on the export of Liberian diamonds, we are prepared to work with the UN to ensure that there is a prohibition on the export of Liberian diamonds to permit the establishment of a certification regime that will be able to certify that diamonds leaving Liberia are not conflict diamonds. We are prepared to cooperate on that. But, we have said to the international community over and over that we are not involved in the smuggling of Sierra Leonean diamonds. Now, if we are prepared to cooperate and say let's ban the export of diamonds from Liberia, we are saying that because we know we are not involved and we have nothing to lose in agreeing to that prohibition. If Liberia was sending diamonds to Antwerp and other commercial centers around the world, the UN should be able to prove that our government is benefiting from it. They've not been able to identify one transaction in Antwerp that is attributed to cash being paid to this government or anyone in this government for diamonds. How do you sell $100million worth of diamonds and there's no money trail. Can you go into the heart, the capital of the EU, sell over a $150million worth of diamonds and no one can show you any financial records, transactions, bank records, transfers, nothing? It raises a lot of doubts, and the Panel of Experts did not answer those questions. So, one must question the credibility of the report that has surfaced from the panel of experts. I don't think they've done an adequate job. I believe that if we accept the report that has emerged from the panel of experts as it is, then we may have missed that point, because I don't think the problem of the smuggling of diamonds has been addressed. I don't think we've addressed the problem. And I believe that the international community needs to look deeper into that problem.
To what extent building a better relationship with the United-Sates can significantly benefit the economic recovery of Liberia?
I must say that a lot hinges on the new administration in the United States. President Taylor was leader of the NPFL, a warring faction in Liberia. When President Clinton was elected President of the United States, most of the U.S. officials that have dealt with Liberia, had dealt with Liberia during the period when President Taylor was head of a warring faction and also subsequently elected constitutional president. I believe most U.S. officials have not been able to make a mental transition of treating President Taylor as a constitutionally elected President. They still want to see him in the context as a head of a warring faction during the war. And I believe that prejudice has impaired the Clinton's administration's ability to build a partnership with Liberia. We are optimistic that a Bush administration would like to start a new chapter in American-Liberian relations. We believe they've come to office without the prejudices of the past and that we are prepared to show our commitment to working with this new administration that we can move forward. I think we have to go beyond the personal demonization of one man by few people that have scored to settle with him. It is a fact and we know that certain officials under the Clinton administration supported certain candidates during our elections. And those candidates did not win our elections. We believe that we have to move forward. The people of Liberia have selected the president that they want, I believe that the American democratic tradition should respect that and if there is dissatisfaction with who is the president of Liberia, that matter should be settled at the ballot box.
On the other side of the Atlantic, how supportive would you say the European Union has been to the Liberian cause?
Extremely supportive. One thing that the EU has been successfully doing that the United States government had been unsuccessfully doing under the Clinton administration is to make the distinction between politics and humanitarian assistance. The EU has paid more attention to dealing with the humanitarian concerns of Liberia, treating Liberians as Liberians, rather than having a political card over their engagement in Liberia. They've been able to separate the two. The EU has maintained most of their programs because what is the objective of the EU programs? The majority of the EU programs are geared towards poverty reduction. Poverty reduction benefits whom? The poor people. The US government doesn't see that. They have attacked even those programs whose objectives are aimed at poverty reduction. They've attacked those programs that are supposed to benefit the poor as a way of showing political dissatisfaction with a government. And I believe that the failure to make this type of distinction is something that is unfortunate…it s sad. And I hope that the sense of morality, the sense of humanism that is out there will prevail upon some of the developed countries, some of the wealthy countries to actually commit themselves towards a sustained program to assist the Third World countries from a humanitarian perspective.
Coming to West Africa, how would you rate your relationship with Nigeria?
I think our relationship with Nigeria is a very positive one. It is a healthy relationship. We have good relations. Nigeria is, for all of us in West Africa, a big brother. They are our regional power. In one way or another, we have to go to Nigeria for help. We recognize the important role that Nigeria plays in our sub-region. We believe that Nigeria can be the catalyst for a lot of important achievements in West Africa, including our present efforts towards regional integration and collective security in the sub-region. So it is a good relationship and it is one that we think is important.
How do you foresee the resolution of the situation in Guinea?
The problem between Liberia and Guinea is a very complex one. It is a problem that goes back to the question of former combatants. During the disarmament program in Liberia, tens of thousands of combatants were disarmed, demobilized and they were supposed to go through a program of reintegration, which was sort of adjusting them back into civil society. The International community provided assistance for the disarmament and demobilization programs, but they ran short of provided any assistance for reintegration programs that would take former combatants and put them back into society. They did not do that, and so we have thousands of former combatants loitering around the country. Many of them went to Guinea because it was a country that supported some of the warring factions during our civil war; for them it was a safe haven, it was a refuge. They went back. Not satisfied being there as refugees, they decided to engage themselves in dissident activities against Liberia, and the Guinean government started to support these dissident activities. And what we had was a situation where Liberian dissidents in Guinea who had initially been supported by Guinea using Guinean territory to wage wars against our borders. It is a very complicated issue, because if you go to the region from where these attacks have occurred, there are similar ethnic groups on both sides of the border. Let's take for instance the Mandingo ethnic group. There are Mandingoes in Liberia and in Guinea. How do you tell the difference between the two of them…they have the same customs, they speak the same language, but because of a colonial boundary, their citizenship identity is different. | So, when one of them creates a problem on the other side of the border it becomes a problem. Then the second question that evolves is how do you make the distinction between a genuine refugee and a rebel? Because if you are going to keep these massive refugees along border areas where rebel activities are occurring, someone is going to attack one country and run into the other and say I am a refugee and enjoy the protection of the international community. So I believe that resolving the problems of former combatants that have not been properly reintegrated into the civil society is an important element in resolving this problem within not only Liberia and Guinea, but also Sierra Leone and the sub-region. We need to address the question of how do we pursue real, tangible programs for reintegration for former combatants, how do we resolve this refugee problem. It is an unhealthy thing to keep large camps of refugees especially along border areas. That problem has to be resolved. Until we can resolve those two problems, the elements that give rise to mistrust and suspicion across the borders will continue to prevail.
Could you elaborate on the recent developments in Ivory Coast?
The issue of Cote d'Ivoire is a difficult problem and one that has its root in its history. Cote D'Ivoire is really a commercial capital of all of West Africa. All of our economies are one way the other, linked to the economy of Cote d'Ivoire. Cote d'Ivoire pursued a policy that was liberal in terms of welcoming foreigners during the administration of Boigny. Some of his cabinet ministers were French citizens. That's how liberal Cote d'Ivoire was. And so you had almost citizens from all of West Africa. After years and years of being there and have generations, they started to identified themselves as Ivorians. And today, whether there is a struggle for some national identity that is based on what is truly Ivorian, I don't know. But I think it is this problem that is now creating that type of destabilization taking place in the Ivory Coast, and it is unfortunate. I've talked to a lot of close Ivorian friends, and they've said to me it is one thing to welcome other West Africans to the Ivory Coast and it is another thing to allow them to be an integral part of the political process even to the extend where they can contest for the highest political seat. And if you notice the trend of events in Cote d'Ivoire, Mr. Ouattara had problems with Bedie. He had problem with Guei. He has problems with Gbagbo. And I believe that any other prominent Ivorian citizen that becomes a President would continue to have the same problem. It is a question of to what extent can they accept Ouattara? That's a question only Ivorians can answer. One of us can answer it for them. They determine who they consider as a citizen. It is their constitution; we cannot determine that for them. And Ivory Coast will have to reconcile this problem with other West Africans because if it is to remain the important commercial that it is supposed to be then it has to address this problem. And I tell you, a lot of the wealth in Ivory Coast is owned by foreigners, and if they begin a process if disinvestments, Cote d'Ivoire could have serious problems, and I believe they are on the fringe of an economic crisis if they don't start to address these issues.
Since the war, relations with Asian countries have taken a new dimension. To what extent have relations with Taiwan been instrumental in extending Liberia's partnership with Asian economies?
Actually, not as much as we had wanted to see it. We have been interested in the private sector looking at Liberia and Africa looking at investment opportunities. We have told the Taiwanese people that we hope that they can see Africa as a market. An important market. But it would require that they invest in developing this market. But we have not seen the type of interest developed. Maybe it is because of distance. Maybe it is because there is not sufficient information available to the private sector in terms of what business they can do with Africa, or maybe there are some political constraints that are there. But I believe we still have a long way to go in expanding this trade relationship between Africa and the Far East.
Where do you foresee further cooperation with Taiwan for instance?
I think we both have strategic interests. But Liberia has always been one of those countries that have supported a peaceful reunification of the two Chinas and we hope that can happen. We think that it would be the best thing that can happen for China that it can be reunified again. We only hope that the Chinese people can one day all be together and enjoy their country as one people one country.
Under your leadership, where would you like to take the ministry of Foreign Affairs, what would you like to achieve?
I would like to see the Ministry of Foreign Affairs converted from the tradition organ of diplomacy, into more relevant fields that would bring us up to date with the new millennium. We have to do more work as a Foreign Ministry to promote trade relations, investment, forging strategic partnership in terms of development assistance, joint ventures…I think the economic sector needs to be emphasized more in our external relations. We spend too much time only on political issues as the focus of our diplomatic activities, and I believe that the external relations of Liberia needs to be strengthened on the part of the economic side of it…which mean that our diplomats have to be more sensitive to the economic side of things…we need some economists outside as diplomats. We need to go beyond tradition, the old school of thought of how diplomacy is practiced. I don't think that is going to serve us well. There are more economic issues now than political issues out there to be tackled. And I believe that should be the thrust. I like to see us making the transition as an institution where we become more relevant in addressing some of the economic concerns of Liberians.
What would be your message to our half a million readers, potential investors looking at Liberia?
One of the paradoxes that investors have to deal with is the question of secured investment on the one hand, and the other hand taking a risk to make a better profit to establish a presence in the market. Liberia is still untapped. We have a very small population, about three million. We have so many resources… If you were to take our resources and correlate it with our population, you would see that this is a very wealthy country. And it is still an untapped market. Liberia still has the single largest tropical rain forest in West Africa. We have tremendous deposits of iron ore, diamond gold; the potential for hydro that would supply the whole West Africa under a power grid it there. The potential for tourism is there, even for a general duty-free transit area for West Africa. I think that everyone needs to identify a market, carve it out, secure it and dominate it. But it is something that you have to do creatively. How many markets can you go out now and try to do that? They are not many. But that also include a certain level of risk taking. You are not going to control anything out there; you are not going to carve out anything special, if you don't take a risk. Everyone can take their money and put it into the secure economies, but you are just one of everyone else. And what are the returns? Are they going to be attractive enough? Are they going to be sufficient? If investors are out there, they need to be able to take the risk that is required. And sometimes the risks we talk about are not major risks. People many times make decisions with regards to investment purely out of one bad experience or just the absence of any contact or communication. An investor would come to Africa, he would have a bad experience with maybe a police officer or some custom officer, and immediately he's written off an incredible potential that was there. In every region of the world you have to know the way, the culture and adapt to it if you want to be successful in business. No American is going to go to the Far East and engage in business using purely American ways of doing business. He adapts. But people need to do the same for Africa. If you're going to come here and do business you have to learn to adapt to the culture, to the way of doing business if you want to be successful. And this is why, maybe, the Lebanese and Indians have been more successful in Africa than many other nationalities. I think they learnt to adapt. I think it is a more successful way than to come and set standards that are alien to the economies of our countries and expect to be successful. All businesses, I think it is a question of adaptation. I think that's what makes it successful. I think Liberia has a lot of potential and a lot to offer…and it is up to the investor. |
MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS 