Tom Cargill
Saturday September 8, 2007
The Guardian
A government that was credited with shepherding Sierra Leone out of a brutal decade-long civil war - as popularised in the film Blood Diamond - is desperate to hold on to power as the country goes to the polls today in the second round of presidential elections. The government is facing an opposition riding high on a wave of dissatisfaction at the corruption, poverty and unemployment that continue to grip this small west African country five years after the war ended.
Sadly, this is not a unique situation in recent history. What is different here is the dominant role of Britain. This former colonial power intervened militarily under a Labour government in 2000 to rescue United Nations peacekeepers and the people of Sierra Leone from a conflict that plumbed the depths of human horror.
Since then Britain has poured not just money but human resources into the country. For a few years after 2000, Sierra Leone was recolonised in all but name. Every ministry was under British "advisory" supervision, as were the army and police. Staff from the Department for International Development, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and other UK ministries were, and remain, active in almost every level of government. Sierra Leone receives around £40m a year in UK aid. Indeed, it is upon Sierra Leone that the reputation of Britain’s claim to be an active force for good in the world rests.
Unfortunately, despite seven years of such intensive attention from Britain, Sierra Leone remains among the poorest nations in the world. At the same time, report after report has charted the steady growth of corruption and mismanagement in public life. Both the people of Sierra Leone and UK taxpayers may with some justification question the value of the time and resources that have been poured into the country.
This is why the success of today’s elections is so important, not just for Sierra Leone’s war-weary people, but for Britain as well. If this round passes as freely and fairly as the previous round for the most part did, then it will strengthen Britain’s position as a force for international development and social justice. If, however, the elections collapse amid allegations of rigging and violence, then it will be virtually impossible for even the most persuasive advocates of liberal interventionism to revive the UK’s global reputation, which has been so damaged by the war in Iraq.
As an election observer during the first round of elections in August, I was struck by the professionalism of the National Electoral Commission of Sierra Leone. There is much Britain can learn from the commitment to the integrity of the democratic process demonstrated by the polling staff and the public.
However, after losing the parliamentary elections, the governing Sierra Leone People’s party is now desperate to retain control of the presidency in the face of a strong challenge from the opposition All People’s Congress - which is equally desperate now that it can sense victory within its grasp. Tensions are high, and there have been outbreaks of violence between rival supporters, leading the president to threaten a state of emergency. There have already been convincing allegations of manipulation in the voter registration process, and elements in both parties are likely to go to any lengths to try and get their patron into office.
A manipulated or non-credible result would be a disaster for Sierra Leone, and the UK’s commitment there. While a discredited election is unlikely to mean a return to conflict in the short term, it will greatly fuel the withdrawal of popular consent, of the kind that led to the last civil war. However, unlike in Afghanistan or Iraq, the UK can still command the attention of Sierra Leonean politicians. Thanks to the military intervention and their visible commitment, the British are still popular in Sierra Leone. What is more, unlike in Nigeria, Britain could afford to demand and contribute to a re-run of elections, should they be required, as Sierra Leone has a population of just 6 million.
There is every hope of free and fair elections in Sierra Leone today. But if they fail to meet the necessary standards, Gordon Brown must demand a re-run. Either way, Britain owes it to the people of Sierra Leone to honour its commitment to the country. Doing so will give weight to the belief that Britain can be an interventionist force for good in Africa, and for the world.
· Tom Cargill is Africa programme manager at Chatham House, a London-based international affairs thinktank.
Comments