|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Africa
Britains favoured candidate wins Sierra Leone elections
By Trevor Johnson
28 May 2002
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email the
author
The incumbent president, Ahmad Tejan Kabbah of the Sierra Leone
Peoples Party (SLPP), won the May 14 elections in Sierra
Leone with 70.6 percent of the vote. Kabbah was well ahead of
his nearest rival, Ernest Koroma of the All Peoples Congress
(APC), who got 22.35 percent of the vote and so avoided the need
for a run-off. Employed for many years as a United Nations official,
Kabbah has the support of Britain, the former colonial power,
and the United States.
Britain has a number of civil service advisers in key positions
in the Kabbah government as well as several hundred troops engaged
in training the Sierra Leone army and thus plays a major role
in running the country.
According to reports the elections took place without widespread
vote rigging or intimidation. The majority of people in Sierra
Leone clearly voted for Kabbah because of his association with
the British and UN peacekeeping intervention in the country, in
the hope that his administration will bring peace and reconstruction
after a decade of war. In recent years the murderous forces of
the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) had threatened to extend
their control over much of the countryside and to the capital,
Freetown, subjecting the population to a brutal regime. Over 200,000
were killed, over a million turned into refugees (nearly half
the countrys 4.5 million population had been displaced in
2000, but many have now returned), and thousands suffered amputations
and rapes.
Although the RUF created a political party, the RUFP, to stand
in the election, they appear to have put little effort into winning
votes. Alimamy Bangura, the current secretary, won only 1.7 percent
of the votes in the presidential election reflecting their discredited
standing. In the early 1990s the RUF won some popular support,
especially among unemployed youth and students. They then resorted
to looting the rural areas and maintained their influence by terrorising
the population. Thanks to their control of the wealth obtained
from control of Sierra Leones diamond fields, President
Charles Taylor from neighboring Liberia gave them his backing.
Sierra Leone is portrayed as a Western success story, especially
for Britain and Prime Minister Tony Blair. British troops intervened
in the country in May 2000 and this was followed by a build-up
of over 17,000 UN troops. After initial clashes with the superior
firepower of the British special forces, and with their leader,
Foday Sankoh, in jail, the RUF agreed to a cease fire and eventually
agreed to disarm. The UN polices much of the country. The 40,000
strong British-trained armymainly made up of former rebels
and ethnic-based militiasis confined to operations on the
borders with Liberia and Guinea.
Despite the apparent successes, however, the fundamental issues
that gave rise to the collapse of the state and the civil war
are still very much in evidence. There is widespread grinding
poverty and no future for the thousands of youth and children
who were recruited by the militias. Many of the former RUF fighters
are now unemployed. Average annual per capita income is $130;
having dropped by more than a third in the two decades since the
fighting began. Life expectancy at birth was 25.9 years in June
2000 according to a report by the World Health Organisation. In
a report issued by the UN last year, Sierra Leone was deemed to
be the worst place to live in the world.
A BBC election report highlighted that poverty is indeed
everywhere you lookchildren scavenging in rubbish heaps;
women queuing for water at the only working tap in the neighbourhood;
old men with dignity but little else, dressed in ragged clothes.
In contrast, the report also points out, Freetown must have
the highest concentration of flashy four-wheel drives in the world,
and there is plenty of flashy housing going up too, especially
in the hillside outer suburbs of the city.
Alongside desperate poverty there is also the growth of an
affluent and corrupt elite, based mainly on wealth from trading
diamonds and minerals. As the BBC report explains: During
the 1970s and 80s the old-guard politicians systematically looted
the countrys resourcesin partnership with Lebanese,
British and other foreign businessmen. The same process
is happening today.
The same old-guard politicians now make up Kabbahs government
and, despite gentle tut-tutting from the British, have returned
to business as usual. Health, education and other services are
virtually non-existent; apart from that provided by foreign aid
agencies. While the aid flows have been described as among the
highest in the world per capita, the few hundred million dollars
donated are dwarfed when compared to the size of the countrys
problems. After initial interest in a project boosted by Blair,
aid will inevitably decline. As the Economist commented,
Unfortunately, as the country becomes more stable, emergency
aid is drying up. Various UN agencies say they need three times
as much cash as they have received for development projects, and
the World Food Programme says it will have to reduce the amount
of food it hands out in July for lack of funds.
Sooner or later the UN troops will also pull outsome
reports suggest it may begin this yearas Western countries
withdraw finance. Despite their recent training, the loyalty of
the army to the Kabbah regime is questionable. Fully 70 percent
of the police and army voted for Johnny Paul Koroma in the parliamentary
elections, securing him a place in the parliament as head of his
Peace and Liberation Party. Koroma is a former army officer, responsible
for staging a coup against Kabbah in 1997 in alliance with the
RUF. Koroma may still face prosecution for war crimes.
As well as failing to overcome any of the fundamental problems
of Sierra Leonean society, the British and UN intervention is
largely responsible for exporting the civil war to neighbouring
Liberia. The think-tank International Crisis Group (ICG) has issued
reports explaining that the intervention in Sierra Leone has really
shifted the front lines in what must be seen as a single conflict
that spans three countriesSierra Leone, Liberia and Guinea.
...As the situation in Sierra Leone has improved, it has
become painfully evident that the war is not its own, but rather
part of a larger conflict that began in Liberia, engulfed Sierra
Leone and Guinea, and is now back inside Liberia.
The rebel group Liberians United for Reconciliation and Democracy
(LURD), which is fighting to overthrow President Charles Taylor,
has recently intensified its operations, and has moved close to
the Liberian capital of Monrovia. ICG explain that LURDa
coalition of various militias, many of them involved in fighting
against Taylor in the civil war in Liberia before the peace agreement
of 1997were assembled in Sierra Leone in February 2000,
and established liaison with the British military.
Kabbah was reluctant to let them use Sierra Leone as a base,
presumably because his British backers feared the war would escalate
in Sierra Leone. Consequently they shifted to Guinea, where the
US is providing military support to the regime there, which in
turn is giving support to LURD. Along with UN sanctions placed
on Taylor, according to ICG, Making the fight against the
Guinean-backed insurgency more expensive for him [Taylor] was
part of a US strategy to drain Taylors finances and weaken
his hold on power.
At least 500 Kamajor militia (the tribal Kamajors are supporters
of the Kabbah government and many of them are now recruited into
the official army) left Sierra Leone to join the LURD fighting
Taylor. An estimated 800 to 2,000 RUF fighters and their leaders
have gone over the border to fight for Taylor.
According to the ICG, the LURD has built up its support and
the civil war is likely to escalate. The war is taking place over
similar issues to those in Sierra Leone, with rebels claiming
to represent a popular opposition to the regime fighting to get
control of the countrys resources and the RUF, along with
the disparate groupings in Taylors armed forces, brutalising
the Liberian population.
In Sierra Leone the British are now set on developing a neo-colonial
approach to looting the countys rich mineral assets. In
relation to diamonds, a British anti-corruption boss
is to be appointed to supervise the police and army patrols of
mining areas and allow only the legal mining of diamonds
on land parceled out by the government and subject to taxation.
Africa Confidential reports, Britain will lend the
president an official for a year to give advice [on diamond mining]
and take the blame for unpopular decisions. The unpopular
decisions refer to easing out some of the local illegal
operators and encouraging foreign investors. According to Africa
Confidential, there are still reserves sufficient for large-scale
mining operations, such as the kimberlite reserves at Tongo and
Kono. Branch Energy, a division of South African-based DiamondWorks,
is repairing its facilities at Koidu, near Kono, and expects to
restart mining. Other mineral wealth such as rutile (titanium)
is also attracting overseas interest.
Some indication of how little the population of Sierra Leone
will gain from such operations, given that the countrys
only source of income is from mineral exports, can be seen in
the level of tax that is being applied to diamond companies. A
staggeringly low three percent tax is all that is to be taken
from investors profits, a level of free-market capitalism
even worse than in many other underdeveloped countries that have
not been through ten years of civil war.
See Also:
Blairs neocolonialist
vision for Africa
[16 February 2002]
War in Sierra Leone
and Guinea spreads to Liberia
[4 May 2001]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |