Mil Novecientos Once
Member
What do you guys think of this?
http://slate.msn.com/id/2084970/
U.S. Troops to Liberia?
By Nancy Palus
Posted Friday, June 27, 2003, at 10:38 AM PT
"We saw hell in Liberia," a Nigerian who recently escaped fresh fighting in the war-ravaged country told Lagos' Vanguard newspaper. The papers say the latest surge of violence between rebels and the government around Liberia's capital, Monrovia—inevitably also striking civilians—is fueling calls for U.S. intervention.
A peace accord signed by rebels and the government of Liberian President Charles Taylor in Ghana last week called for a national unity government—sans Taylor—to be formed within a month. Days after signing the deal, Taylor reneged, refusing to step aside. Fighting erupted anew, and rebels say they will not stop until they have seized the capital and ousted Taylor. Taylor was elected president in 1997, after an eight-year civil war he had launched. Anti-Taylor rebel movements, linked to conflicts the president is alleged to have fomented in neighboring Sierra Leone and Ivory Coast, began about three years ago. Rebels are now said to control about two-thirds of the country.
In recent days, rebels closed in on Monrovia, foreigners fled the capital, and hundreds of civilians died—including several June 25, when explosives struck a U.S. Embassy annex where refugees were seeking haven. This is the closest rebel groups have come to taking the capital. Britain's Daily Telegraph said, "The advance marks the greatest crisis Taylor has faced since he rose to power as a warlord 13 years ago." Taylor, known for his support of brutal rebel movements throughout the region—including alleged guns-for-diamonds trading—and his brazen defiance in the face of U.N. sanctions and sweeping international condemnation, now also faces war crimes charges presented June 4 by a U.N. special court in neighboring Sierra Leone.
The humanitarian crisis stemming from Liberia's conflicts is one of the worst on the continent. The latest violence—reportedly penetrating many refugee shelters—has put already desperate civilians in horrific conditions with nowhere to run. With the recent outbreak of fighting, the Telegraph reported, "Thousands fled their homes and thousands more who had already travelled to Monrovia to seek safety, packed their bags again in terror."
President Bush, who is scheduled to travel to Africa next month, said Thursday that Taylor must step down and vowed U.S. support for peace efforts in the country. But the United States has yet to commit to any action on the ground, as called for by people who draw comparisons to the considerable British role in Sierra Leone and France's intervention in its former colony, Ivory Coast. (Liberia was founded by freed U.S. slaves.) Several papers reported that Britain's U.N. ambassador, Jeremy Greenstock, called the United States "the natural candidate" to intervene. The Telegraph went as far as to say a U.S.-led force "looked likely" after Bush's remarks. The paper concluded, "It is unlikely that Sir Jeremy would have floated the idea of a US-led force without first having at least tacit approval from the Bush administration."
The Financial Times observed, "The chaos in Monrovia showed up the fragility of the ceasefire in the absence of an outside peacekeeping force." An op-ed in the New Democrat, a paper published in the Netherlands by Liberian exiles, called Taylor a "serial liar" and a "psychopath," declaring, "A force empowered to arrest the fugitive [Taylor] would do a service to humanity."
On Thursday, Liberian civilians mounted their own stark appeal for U.S. action. Britain's Guardian reported that Liberians marched on the U.S. Embassy, depositing at its gates seven corpses—among the more than 300 killed in this week's violence.
Papers in the region said an African solution to the Liberian crisis is crucial to the continent's progress away from war and toward development. An op-ed in Nigeria's This Day said it is "high time" Africa established a process for preventing and resolving conflicts. "Liberia offers the best opportunity for African leaders to show their skills and commitment in uplifting the African continent." Notre Voie, the paper of Ivory Coast's ruling party, said the continent's future stability depends on it. African leaders must "show themselves to be firm and unified to avoid rebellions destabilizing other African states tomorrow." The Ivorian paper echoed widely held anxiety over the effectiveness of the Economic Community of West African States, which brokered the latest cease-fire accord. "In failing, ECOWAS would show once again its incapacity to resolve crises in the sub-region. … The problem of ECOWAS is its lack of political will." A U.N. Security Council delegation set off Thursday on a mission to West Africa, partly in an effort to stem the violence in Liberia. The mission—which is to meet with several members of ECOWAS—is likely to press Taylor to step down.
A recent op-ed in Johannesburg's Mail & Guardian said impunity for leaders such as Taylor—who "have shattered the social cohesion of the continent and entrenched poverty"—must end. The op-ed said that although the timing of the recent war crimes indictment was wrong—coming as it did during the delicate time of peace talks in Accra—it was "the right thing to do. … Africa needs to confront the bald fact that the absence of accountability has for too long stood between the continent and real progress."
An editorial in the Financial Times conceded that peace and stability are not automatically assured in a post-Taylor Liberia, noting that the rebels trying to oust him themselves "have a murky agenda" and an abysmal human rights record. "A longer-term and wider strategy for the region is needed," the paper said. "As in Iraq, the removal of an undesirable leader is one thing, a plan for the future quite another. Mr. Taylor's departure would not be a solution. But it would be a start."
___________________________________________________
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...er27.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/06/27/ixworld.html
Bush threatens to pacify Liberia
By Tim Butcher, Africa Correspondent
(Filed: 27/06/2003)
An American military operation to restore order in Liberia looked likely last night as President George W Bush called for peace in the war-torn West African republic.
He drew cheers and applause from an audience of businessmen, academics and African leaders when he called on Liberia's President Charles Taylor, an indicted war criminal, to stand down.
"President Taylor needs to step down so that his country can be spared further bloodshed," he said.
Earlier, British diplomats raised the possibility of an American military operation with Sir Jeremy Greenstock, Britain's UN ambassador, saying that America would be the "natural candidate" for any Western-run operation in Liberia.
Mr Bush called for all sides in Liberia's bloody civil war to return to the negotiating table and to end a series of clashes that have cost thousands of civilian lives, including 300 in the capital, Monrovia, this week.
He spoke as the Liberian government claimed it had driven the rebels from the port area, a few miles from the heart of the capital, that they had occupied on Wednesday.
With a US Navy amphibious assault ship, the USS Kearsarge, just off the Liberian coast carrying 1,200 marines, Mr Bush has the option of ordering a significant deployment to one of Africa's most chaotic countries.
Liberia has close historic and traditional links with America. It was founded in the early 19th century as Africa's first republic by freed slaves from the United States.
For an intervention force, Sir Jeremy said, the United States is "the nation that everyone would think would be the natural candidate".
"I think that outside help of that kind at the present juncture, or ready to move when there is an agreement to stop fighting, an agreement that would need to be policed and observed, would look very constructive," he said.
"If there were a lead nation that was prepared to take action in Liberia, then I think that would be very broadly welcomed internationally. But we are not there yet."
It is unlikely that Sir Jeremy would have floated the idea of a US-led force without first having at least tacit approval from the Bush administration.
If America does send troops to Liberia, it will create a diplomatic symmetry in West Africa, matching Britain's deployment to Sierra Leone dating from 2000 and France's Ivory Coast operation since last year.
For the civilian population of Liberia, living in wretched conditions as one of Africa's poorest countries is again riven by heavy fighting, any peacekeeping deployment could not come fast enough.
Last week almost every civilian spoken to in a straw poll in Monrovia begged for military assistance from America to help break the cycle of violence. "We need the Americans to help us. They must come, it is our only hope," said Fatima Harrison, an elderly lady in an overcrowded slum in the centre of Monrovia.
Hopes were raised when the Kearsarge appeared on the horizon off Monrovia but its helicopters flew nothing but food and supplies into the US embassy on the city's Mamba Point promontory.
It echoed the 1990 deployment of US shipborne troops to Monrovia in a rescue operation for US passport holders that fell some way short of a full peacekeeping mission.
Civilians have routinely born the brunt of more than a decade of fighting in Liberia with rival militias killing civilians, raping women and looting property whenever fierce clashes occur.
http://slate.msn.com/id/2084970/
U.S. Troops to Liberia?
By Nancy Palus
Posted Friday, June 27, 2003, at 10:38 AM PT
"We saw hell in Liberia," a Nigerian who recently escaped fresh fighting in the war-ravaged country told Lagos' Vanguard newspaper. The papers say the latest surge of violence between rebels and the government around Liberia's capital, Monrovia—inevitably also striking civilians—is fueling calls for U.S. intervention.
A peace accord signed by rebels and the government of Liberian President Charles Taylor in Ghana last week called for a national unity government—sans Taylor—to be formed within a month. Days after signing the deal, Taylor reneged, refusing to step aside. Fighting erupted anew, and rebels say they will not stop until they have seized the capital and ousted Taylor. Taylor was elected president in 1997, after an eight-year civil war he had launched. Anti-Taylor rebel movements, linked to conflicts the president is alleged to have fomented in neighboring Sierra Leone and Ivory Coast, began about three years ago. Rebels are now said to control about two-thirds of the country.
In recent days, rebels closed in on Monrovia, foreigners fled the capital, and hundreds of civilians died—including several June 25, when explosives struck a U.S. Embassy annex where refugees were seeking haven. This is the closest rebel groups have come to taking the capital. Britain's Daily Telegraph said, "The advance marks the greatest crisis Taylor has faced since he rose to power as a warlord 13 years ago." Taylor, known for his support of brutal rebel movements throughout the region—including alleged guns-for-diamonds trading—and his brazen defiance in the face of U.N. sanctions and sweeping international condemnation, now also faces war crimes charges presented June 4 by a U.N. special court in neighboring Sierra Leone.
The humanitarian crisis stemming from Liberia's conflicts is one of the worst on the continent. The latest violence—reportedly penetrating many refugee shelters—has put already desperate civilians in horrific conditions with nowhere to run. With the recent outbreak of fighting, the Telegraph reported, "Thousands fled their homes and thousands more who had already travelled to Monrovia to seek safety, packed their bags again in terror."
President Bush, who is scheduled to travel to Africa next month, said Thursday that Taylor must step down and vowed U.S. support for peace efforts in the country. But the United States has yet to commit to any action on the ground, as called for by people who draw comparisons to the considerable British role in Sierra Leone and France's intervention in its former colony, Ivory Coast. (Liberia was founded by freed U.S. slaves.) Several papers reported that Britain's U.N. ambassador, Jeremy Greenstock, called the United States "the natural candidate" to intervene. The Telegraph went as far as to say a U.S.-led force "looked likely" after Bush's remarks. The paper concluded, "It is unlikely that Sir Jeremy would have floated the idea of a US-led force without first having at least tacit approval from the Bush administration."
The Financial Times observed, "The chaos in Monrovia showed up the fragility of the ceasefire in the absence of an outside peacekeeping force." An op-ed in the New Democrat, a paper published in the Netherlands by Liberian exiles, called Taylor a "serial liar" and a "psychopath," declaring, "A force empowered to arrest the fugitive [Taylor] would do a service to humanity."
On Thursday, Liberian civilians mounted their own stark appeal for U.S. action. Britain's Guardian reported that Liberians marched on the U.S. Embassy, depositing at its gates seven corpses—among the more than 300 killed in this week's violence.
Papers in the region said an African solution to the Liberian crisis is crucial to the continent's progress away from war and toward development. An op-ed in Nigeria's This Day said it is "high time" Africa established a process for preventing and resolving conflicts. "Liberia offers the best opportunity for African leaders to show their skills and commitment in uplifting the African continent." Notre Voie, the paper of Ivory Coast's ruling party, said the continent's future stability depends on it. African leaders must "show themselves to be firm and unified to avoid rebellions destabilizing other African states tomorrow." The Ivorian paper echoed widely held anxiety over the effectiveness of the Economic Community of West African States, which brokered the latest cease-fire accord. "In failing, ECOWAS would show once again its incapacity to resolve crises in the sub-region. … The problem of ECOWAS is its lack of political will." A U.N. Security Council delegation set off Thursday on a mission to West Africa, partly in an effort to stem the violence in Liberia. The mission—which is to meet with several members of ECOWAS—is likely to press Taylor to step down.
A recent op-ed in Johannesburg's Mail & Guardian said impunity for leaders such as Taylor—who "have shattered the social cohesion of the continent and entrenched poverty"—must end. The op-ed said that although the timing of the recent war crimes indictment was wrong—coming as it did during the delicate time of peace talks in Accra—it was "the right thing to do. … Africa needs to confront the bald fact that the absence of accountability has for too long stood between the continent and real progress."
An editorial in the Financial Times conceded that peace and stability are not automatically assured in a post-Taylor Liberia, noting that the rebels trying to oust him themselves "have a murky agenda" and an abysmal human rights record. "A longer-term and wider strategy for the region is needed," the paper said. "As in Iraq, the removal of an undesirable leader is one thing, a plan for the future quite another. Mr. Taylor's departure would not be a solution. But it would be a start."
___________________________________________________
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...er27.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/06/27/ixworld.html
Bush threatens to pacify Liberia
By Tim Butcher, Africa Correspondent
(Filed: 27/06/2003)
An American military operation to restore order in Liberia looked likely last night as President George W Bush called for peace in the war-torn West African republic.
He drew cheers and applause from an audience of businessmen, academics and African leaders when he called on Liberia's President Charles Taylor, an indicted war criminal, to stand down.
"President Taylor needs to step down so that his country can be spared further bloodshed," he said.
Earlier, British diplomats raised the possibility of an American military operation with Sir Jeremy Greenstock, Britain's UN ambassador, saying that America would be the "natural candidate" for any Western-run operation in Liberia.
Mr Bush called for all sides in Liberia's bloody civil war to return to the negotiating table and to end a series of clashes that have cost thousands of civilian lives, including 300 in the capital, Monrovia, this week.
He spoke as the Liberian government claimed it had driven the rebels from the port area, a few miles from the heart of the capital, that they had occupied on Wednesday.
With a US Navy amphibious assault ship, the USS Kearsarge, just off the Liberian coast carrying 1,200 marines, Mr Bush has the option of ordering a significant deployment to one of Africa's most chaotic countries.
Liberia has close historic and traditional links with America. It was founded in the early 19th century as Africa's first republic by freed slaves from the United States.
For an intervention force, Sir Jeremy said, the United States is "the nation that everyone would think would be the natural candidate".
"I think that outside help of that kind at the present juncture, or ready to move when there is an agreement to stop fighting, an agreement that would need to be policed and observed, would look very constructive," he said.
"If there were a lead nation that was prepared to take action in Liberia, then I think that would be very broadly welcomed internationally. But we are not there yet."
It is unlikely that Sir Jeremy would have floated the idea of a US-led force without first having at least tacit approval from the Bush administration.
If America does send troops to Liberia, it will create a diplomatic symmetry in West Africa, matching Britain's deployment to Sierra Leone dating from 2000 and France's Ivory Coast operation since last year.
For the civilian population of Liberia, living in wretched conditions as one of Africa's poorest countries is again riven by heavy fighting, any peacekeeping deployment could not come fast enough.
Last week almost every civilian spoken to in a straw poll in Monrovia begged for military assistance from America to help break the cycle of violence. "We need the Americans to help us. They must come, it is our only hope," said Fatima Harrison, an elderly lady in an overcrowded slum in the centre of Monrovia.
Hopes were raised when the Kearsarge appeared on the horizon off Monrovia but its helicopters flew nothing but food and supplies into the US embassy on the city's Mamba Point promontory.
It echoed the 1990 deployment of US shipborne troops to Monrovia in a rescue operation for US passport holders that fell some way short of a full peacekeeping mission.
Civilians have routinely born the brunt of more than a decade of fighting in Liberia with rival militias killing civilians, raping women and looting property whenever fierce clashes occur.
The same Kofi Annan who was too busy playing Mazola Twister to be concerned with what happened in Rwanda. I really like how the world whines about "the U.S. thinks it runs the world and that's wrong!" but when the SHTF somewhere and no one else has the cojones necessary to do the job right, it's "the U.S. should help, they are the rightful stewards of the world!" Is thaaaaaat right? Ya don't say! Well, world, for starters, how about freakin' PAYING the money you owe us?? Can't afford it? Frick you, pay us. You didn't think you had to pay it back? Frick you, pay us. Go talk to your courageous buddies the French. Or the Germans. I'm sure they'll be glad to sacrifice their young men so after you're liberated from a tyrant you can show your gratitude by shooting those soldiers that just five minutes back gave their whole morning ration to your kids. I'm sure they'll love to show up and have half the freakin' city turn out to drag one of their comrade's dead body through the streets and spit on it. Hey, save your own frickin' selves! If we don't see the writing on the wall on this one, we're dumber than I thought.
