Monday, November 7, 2016

Need for Two Responses to the Sierra Leone Conflict


The conflict in Sierra Leone generated a series of problems that were unprecedented in prior internal conflicts. Women and children were never drafted into military or used as human shields. At the outset of the conflict, Sierra Leone faced difficult problems rebuilding and integrating the once warring sides together into one harmonious society. Rebuilding Sierra Leone requires both Sierra Leone to accept foreign companies to invest in its resources and offer contracts with the government because they will help stabilize and strengthen the economy while the Sierra Leone government can focus its attention to rebuilding internal relations between groups and helping all citizens prosper.
Just because the civil war in Sierra Leone has ceased does not mean the life style is perfect. Foreign governments and companies can help reconstruct Sierra Leone by investing in their natural resources. International mining or timber companies can offer contracts to Sierra Leone which can offer a sense of income to the government as well as offer the government to learn from influential companies pertaining to strategically collecting and selling resources. A problem with trying to nationalize a country’s natural resources is that it can cause conflicts between leaders leading to civil war. Citizens of these states often support foreign companies because their experience yields the best profits for the people and state. Attempts to nationalize can just lead to conflict like in the Congo in 1961 and in Sierra Leone in the 1990’s. In 1961 Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba of the Republic of Congo attempted to nationalize the mines across the country, but many people enjoyed foreign companies owning the mines because it established trade relations and the companies were effective at yielding the most materials and income.  Alas the dispute over leadership led to a proxy war and UN intervention. Foreign companies will hire security contractors to protect their property which will not overstretch Sierra Leone’s undeveloped military. Foreign governments are doing an adequate job trying to limit the amount of conflict diamonds being bought and sold on the world market through the Kimberley Process, but the world needs to do more. Blood diamonds still make their way onto the black market, often through neighboring countries. CNN reported even though the conflict has ended in Sierra Leone, conflict diamonds still flow into neighbor country Zimbabwe, which is also a member of the Kimberley Process[1]. The Kimberley Process needs to be enforced with stricter punishments and more screenings especially in the neighboring areas of Sierra Leone and all conflict zones to show support for rebuilding a fragile world economy. Economists from other countries can help guide Sierra Leone’s government as how to diversify its economy so it does not totally depend on its natural resources.
Foreign governments cannot totally intervene in Sierra Leone’s country. Much of Sierra Leone’s population was affected by the civil war, the government must rebuild relations between the once warring sides into a harmonious society to represent caring for all the people not just one side. Other governments cannot rebuild the society as well because they do not understand the culture or conflict like the people who experienced it first hand. Many of the problems Sierra Leone faces are internal threats to their human security such as reintegrating warring sides, disarming soldiers and giving them the training or education for jobs, or helping feed and offer medical assistance to these people, the government needs to focus on these issues because they need to appear legitimate and reputable in citizens’ eyes. Opening a country’s doors to too much or the wrong type of foreign intervention can be hazardous to the long term stability of governments as seen in Iraq, Iran, or Chile. An ideal form of foreign aid would be through charities or NGO’s aimed at the sole purpose of helping provide humanitarian aid to people because they would focus on the civilians’ best interests in mind. Usually humanitarian charities would not be interested with the political leaders or the economic trade agreements of a government, but with the health and quality of life of people within the state.


[1] Paul Armstrong, “How diamonds fuel African conflict” on CNN, (May 16, 2012), Accessed November 3, 2016, http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/26/world/africa/blood-diamonds/.

4 comments:

  1. I understand that your argument focuses on how Sierra Leon should rebuild and create a stronger economy post civil war, however I am confused by your statement at the beginning, "Women and children were never drafted into military or used as human shields." You make this comment but never come back to why it may have caused a differentiation in how the conflict turned out. I think that women being used in this civil war has a large impact on what happened.
    I also want to mention your suggestion that outside, private companies should come in for the diamonds and then pay the government. Do you think that Sierra Leon will allow this. I feel as though this will cause a loss in economic gain for diamonds.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think when women and children are drafted into the military to fight against former friends and neighbors it destabilizes the society even more. Not only would it impact a person's ontological security because they worry who they can and cannot trust, it also threatens one's human security of physical safety. Reintegrating the Sierra Leone people, especially the women and children, who seemed to be most overlooked in the conflict, is crucial because these groups consist of a majority of Sierra Leone. The children are the future of the government so if Sierra Leone wants to direct its country into the right direction it needs to focus on properly reintegrating the women and children.
      I think Sierra Leone would strongly consider allowing foreign companies to invest in their natural resources because these foreign companies can yield the most revenue. If Sierra Leone tried to nationalize their mines and timber companies they may not yield as much as an experienced company. If foreign companies are allowed to compete for mining contracts it can open the door to increasing the importance of Sierra Leone and help them compete in the global market. With an increased interest in one sector of Sierra Leone, it can often open the door to positive spillover into other sectors like ores, machinery, or chemical products.

      Delete
  2. I have to harshly disagree with your argument that foreign governments should come it and make deals with the government because, particularly in a weaker state, it is extremely unlikely that average citizens will benefit from this at all. Foreign money may come in and invest in industry, but this money will most likely go into the pockets of corrupt government officials or wealthy corporations-- what is the incentive structure for massive resource based corporations to all of a sudden serve the needs of the people? Sure, they'll have more jobs, but who is going to enforce labor standards, fair pay, just working conditions? A transitional government? The conception of wealthy companies taking advantage of weak states has been played over and over and over again; the idea that Sierra Leone will only recover from external help is the same problem Katz critiques in the foreign aid process in Haiti. Sustainable development that works for people will come when elected officials in Sierra Leone are held accountable to their people, not corporate interests.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I 100% agree that the Kimberly Process needs to be enforced with stricter standards, but I am wary of countries intervening in another countries business. I think if the government is to invite another country in for help with the issue, then absolutely, but until that point an intervention must be considered on in cases of extreme need.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.