Final Thesis Copy

BREAKING THE VICIOUS CYCLE OF VIOLENCE AND CREATING A CULTURE OF PEACE: A PATH

FOR HEALING AND RECONCILIATION IN POST-WAR LIBERIA

Master of Arts Thesis (Peace and Conflict Studies)

Submitted by:

Aloysius Blanyon Nyanti

To The:

European University Center for Peace and Conflict Studies, In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for a Master of Arts Degree

In Peace and Conflict Studies Stadschlaining, Austria

December 2009

Supervisor: Dr. Hossain B. Danesh

II AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

APPROVAL

This thesis has been approved for meeting the requirements of the European

University Center for Peace and Conflict Studies, for the award of the Degree

of Master of Arts (M.A.) in Peace and Conflict Studies by:

H.B. Danesh

Dr. Hossain B. Danesh

Supervisor

Prof. Jorgen Johansen

Second Supervisor

ENDORSED: ______________________________

Dr. Ronald H. Tuschl, Ph.D

Interim Study Director

DATE APPROVED: _________________________

III AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

DECLARATION

I, Aloysius Blanyon Nyanti, do hereby declare that this research is my original work. To

the best of my knowledge, it has not previously been published by any academic institution

for a degree or otherwise. All the sources used herein are duly acknowledged.

Signature: _____________________ Date: 13th December, 2009

IV AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

DEDICATION

I dedicate this thesis to my late father, JOSEPH S. NYANTI, SR., who passed away

following a brief illness. Dad, your love and dedication to your family, have been an

inspiration for me.

I also dedicate this document to my late cousins, Gibson B. Tuobie and John Gibson, who

both died mysteriously. Your mammoth support to me during your days on earth will

forever be remembered.

May your spirits be infused with the joy of peace that was difficult for you to find on

earth. May you continue to rest in the perfect arms of our Heavenly Father until we meet

again.

V AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This thesis would not have been possible without the support of many persons. I cannot

mention the names of all the people who have contributed during the course of preparing

this thesis, but I am compelled to mention the names of few persons, who were influential

in the process. Firstly, thanks to God for the knowledge and strength.

I wish to express my profound gratitude to my loving wife, Mrs. Deborah Toe-Nyanti and

my children, whose patience and supportive understanding made me to travel abroad for

further studies. Also, to my beloved mother Mary G. Nyanti, for her support,

encouragement and firm parental management.

I do whole heartedly acknowledge the support, advice and encouragement of Rev. Korboi

M. Weegie. His support to me could even be felt miles away. I will forever remain

grateful to you for your infinite support and encouragement. My gratitude also goes to the

management and staff of the LCL -Trauma Healing and Reconciliation Program (THRP)

for their support and encouragement. It is to you that I owe the future.

I would like to acknowledge the support and contributions of the Lutheran Church in

Liberia (LCL) Central Administration, especially Bishop Sumoward E. Harris. Surely,

my study would not have been possible without his approval. I also owe debt of gratitude

to the World Council of Churches (WCC) for sponsoring my Master‟s Course through a

significant grant, as well as the management of the European Peace University for the

partial grant awarded me. Thanks also to Dr. Lisa Fandl, head of the peace library.

Thanks to my supervisors Dr. Hossain B. Danesh and Prof. Jorgen Johansen for their

constructive comments and suggestions. Your support was an inspiration to my work

I am grateful as I acknowledge the significant contributions of Rev. Hans Lindqvist and

Machrine Birungi Kamara for editing and fine-tuning of the thesis. You desire a Big Hug.

VI AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

ABSTRACT:

Watching your brother kill your parents, or your mother and sister being gang raped right

in front of your face, and being forced to witness and cheer for the torture and killing of

your family and loved ones, is unbelievable, but worse still incredible when you are

forced to wear a smile on your face as you witness all this happen right in front of you.

These are just a few of the hundreds of images that have sowed a horrendous nightmare,

which has stuck in the minds of so many victims of the brutal civil war in Liberia.

Between 1989 and 2003, Liberia was a theater of one of the deadliest civil wars in Africa.

The violence was characterized by series of massacres, ethnic cleansing, gross human

rights violations, displacement and massive physical destruction of the country. This

triggered off a devastated, war-ravaged society, struggling to recover from destruction,

suffering, pain and trauma.

An analytical overview of Liberia shows that efforts are underway to build sustainable

peace. But these efforts are greatly hampered by the bitter memories of war which are

harbored in the hearts and minds of the survivors, perpetrators and communities. The two

fundamental questions are: How do we break the cycle of violence and victimhood in

Liberia? And how can we heal the trauma and create a culture of peace?

This research therefore proposes some guiding touchstones and non-violent strategies

aimed at breaking the vicious cycle of violence, victimhood and trauma, and create the

culture of healing and culture of peace in post-war Liberia.

VII AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Approval II

2. Declaration III

3. Dedication IV

4. Acknowledgement V

5. Abstract VI

6. Table of Content VII

7. Map of Liberia IX

8. List of Abbreviations X

9. Central Theme of the Thesis 1

10. Structure of the Thesis 2

CHAPTER 1: HEALING AND POST-WAR RECONCILIATION DEBATE 5

1.1 Introduction 5

1.2 Conceptualization of Healing 6

1.3 Importance of Healing in Post-war Societies 9

1.4 Healing wounds of Violence in Post-war Societies: The TRC‟s Approach 12

1.5 TRC vs. War Crimes Court: The Debate of Healing & Reconciliation in Liberia 17

CHAPTER 2: LIBERIA‟S LONG FORLORN HISTORY 26

2.1 Introduction 26

2.2 Early History of Liberia 27

2.3 Formation of the American Colonization Society 28

2.4 The Roots of Local Discontent and Social Disintegration 29

2.5 Indigenous Uprising and the Aftermath 33

CHAPTER 3: THE PAINS OF A VICIOUS CIVIL WAR IN LIBERIA 38

3.1 Background and Development 38

3.2 The Aftermath of the Violence on the Liberian Society 44

3.3 Ending the War: The Role of ECOWAS & UN 47

VIII AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

CHAPTER 4: LIBERIA TODAY: CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES 50

4.1 Fundamental Challenges to Peace and Stability in Liberia 51

4.2 Windows of Opportunity for Peace and Development 54

CHAPTER 5: BREAKING THE CYCLE OF VIOLENCE IN LIBERIA 61

5.1 Creating a Culture of Healing 61

5.2 Creating a Culture of Peace 66

5.3 Developing a Leadership for Peace 71

CHAPTER 6: RECONCILIATION: FROM A CONCEPT TO PRACTICE 74

6.1 An Overview of Reconciliation 74

6.2. Paths to Reconciliation in Post-war Liberia 76

6.3 Peace Building in Liberia: From Concept to Practice 82

CHAPTER 7: LIBERIA‟S TRUTH COMMISSION: AN INSTRUMENT FOR

HEALING AND RECONCILIATION – A CASE STUDY 87

7.1 Background and Context of the TRC 87

7.2 The Mandates of TRC 89

7.3 Findings: The Truth Commission‟s Report 90

7.4 Observable Impact at National Level 91

7.5 Observable Impact at Individual Level 93

7.6 The Shortcomings of the TRC 96

7.7 TRC‟s Recommendations: Complexities and Challenges Ahead 97

7.7.1 Prosecution of Alleged Perpetrators 98

7.7.2 Reparations for Victims 99

CONCLUSION 102

Bibliography 104

IX AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Map of Liberia

Source: www.mapsofworld.com

http://www.mapsofworld.com/

X AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

List of Abbreviations

ACCORD African Centre for the Constructive Resolution of Disputes

ACS American Colonization Society

AFL Armed Forces of Liberia

CSOs Civil Society Organizations

DDRR Disarmament, Demobilization, Rehabilitation and Reintegration

ECOMOG Economic Community of West African States Ceasefire Monitoring Group

ECOWAS Economic Community of West African States

GoL Government of Liberia

ICTR International Criminal Tribunal of Rwanda

INPFL Independent National Patriotic Front of Liberia

IDPs Internally displaced persons

LCL Lutheran Church in Liberia

LDF Lofa Defence Force

LPC Liberia Peace Council

LURD Liberians United for Reconciliation and Democracy

MODEL Movement for Democracy in Liberia

MOJA Movement for Justice in Africa

NDPL National Democratic Party of Liberia

NPFL National Patriotic Front of Liberia

NPFL-CRC National Patriotic Front of Liberia Central Revolutionary Council

NPP National Patriotic Party

NTG National Transitional Government of Liberia

PAL Progressive Alliance of Liberia

PPP Progressive People‟s Party

PRC People‟s Redemption Council

RUF Revolutionary United Front

THRP Trauma Healing and Reconciliation Program

TRC Truth and Reconciliation Commission

TWP True Whig Party

UN United Nations

U.S. United States

ULIMO United Liberation Movement of Liberia

ULIMO-J United Liberation Movement of Liberia – Johnson

ULIMO-K United Liberation Movement of Liberia – Kromah

UNESCO United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization

UNMIL United Nations Mission in Liberia

UNOMIL United Nations Mission Observers in Liberia

UP Unity Party

1 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Central Theme of the Thesis

Whenever violence strikes a society, there is not only a desire for the victims to strike out

in retaliation, but also a desire for the perpetrators to continue the violence for more

victories, thereby creating a vicious cycle of violence. As was the case in Liberia, the

protracted aggression-revenge cycle has triggered off a devastated war-ravaged society

that is yet to recover from the destruction, pain and trauma. In the wake of the cataclysm,

the lives of both victims and perpetrators in the country cannot return to normal without

the process of healing. Therefore, it is essential to formulate non-violent strategies that

aim to break this cycle of violence and retaliation, heal the inner wounds caused by the

violence, and create a culture of peace for peaceful co-existence and healthy human

relationships in post-war Liberia.

The aim of this research therefore, is two-fold. Firstly, it intends to unearth the roots of

the violence in Liberia as a conscious attempt in breaking the cycle of violence. This

research specifically attempts to provide an overview of the gradual descent of Liberia

into civil war, looking back at the developments from the creation of the country, through

the feudal oligarchy of the Americo-Liberians, and the emergence of the military rule

(1980) to the ultimate civil war. Secondly, it proposes some guiding touchstones and non-

violent strategies that aim to break the vicious cycle of violence and create a culture of

peace for healing, national reconciliation, and sustainable development in the country.

This research is primarily based on library and internet sources. Therefore, it does not

claim to be an all-inclusive representation of the healing and reconciliation process in


post-war Liberia, but rather, it serves as a bird‟s-eye-view of how the cycle of violence

can be broken and replaced with the culture of peace for healing and reconciliation.

Throughout this thesis, I occasionally use words such as “we,” “ourselves,” or “us.” My

intention is to include myself as part of the process in breaking the cycle of violence and

creating a culture of peace, for peaceful coexistence and harmony in post-war Liberia.

Structure of the Thesis

This thesis is split into four main parts: Part one comprising of chapter one, introduces

a debate of the process of healing and reconciliation in post-conflict societies; Part two

comprising of chapters two and three, discusses the history and background of the

violence in Liberia; Part three comprising of chapter four, highlights some of the main

challenges and opportunities of post-war Liberia; and Part four comprising of chapters

five to seven, proposes possible solutions for the breaking of the cycle of violence and the

promotion of a culture of peace. This thesis consists of seven chapters followed by

conclusion and bibliography.

Chapter One, the literature review, introduces the debate on post-war healing and

reconciliation. The debate conceptualizes healing and its significance in post-conflict

society. It further unearths some of the assumptions embedded in the relationship

between truth-telling and reconciliation. The debate of the chapter concludes with Liberia

as a case study. It debates the use of Truth and Reconciliation Commission or War

Crimes Courts as a process for promoting healing and reconciliation in post-war Liberia.


In the debate, the retributive form of justice, the war crimes court approach, is contrasted

with the restorative justice model, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission approach.

Chapter Two gives the geo-political background of the country, from the pre-

independence era to independence. It also gives an insight into the roots of local

discontent and social disintegration of the first republic, which led to the Rice Riot and

military coup, popularly referred to as the “Indigenous Uprising” in Liberia.

Chapter Three delves into a short background and discusses the roots and path of the

brutal civil war. It highlights the effects or the aftermath of the violence on the Liberian

Society. The chapter also highlights the process leading to the end of the civil war. It

particularly analyzes the role of Economic Community of West African States

(ECOWAS), Economic Community of West African States Ceasefire Monitoring

(ECOMOG) and United Nations. This information or knowledge of the causes of the civil

war is useful for the formulation of policies in support of national reconciliation and

sustainable peace in the country.

The focus of Chapter Four is on the challenges and opportunities of post-war Liberia. It

highlights some of the challenges to peace and stability in the country, including national

and human security needs that could serve as recipe for renewed violence if unattended

to. It then explores conditions that could foster peace and stability. It specifically draws

attention to some of the windows of opportunity, including the reconstruction and

reformation of the security institutions, and the emergence of strong civil society

organizations in the country that could serve as foundation for shaping the future of the

nation, with the many possibilities and opportunities that lie ahead in life for all.


Chapter Five is about breaking the vicious cycle of violence as an important step to

healing, recovery and peace. It explores the concepts: culture of healing and culture of

peace that are essential in breaking the cycle of violence and promoting peace and

healthy human relationships in the country. It finally discusses the concept, Leadership

for peace, and the importance of developing leaders for peace in post-war Liberia.

Chapter Six introduces the concept of reconciliation. It discusses the processes and

elements of reconciliation in post-conflict society. It also discusses the possible paths of

reconciliation in the country including, acknowledgement, truth-telling, forgiveness,

justice and institutional reforms. Lastly, it concludes with a practical approach to peace-

building and reconciliation in post-war Liberia.

Chapter Seven is basically a case study of the Liberian Truth and Reconciliation

Commission. It discusses the background for the establishment of the Truth and

Reconciliation Commission in Liberia. It also discusses the mandates, findings and

observable impact, as well as some of the shortcomings of the Truth and Reconciliation

Commission. It further highlights some of the challenges and complexities that face the

implementation of the recommendations of the Commission intended to reconcile the

people of Liberia.

The conclusion highlights some of the main points discussed through the thesis and the

significance of creating a culture of healing and peace in post-war Liberia.


CHAPTER 1

HEALING AND POST-WAR RECONCILIATION DEBATE

1.1 Introduction

In the wake of violence in a society, the life of the population, both victims and

perpetrators, cannot return to normal without a process of healing taking place (Danesh et

al 2005:279). This is partly due to the fact that violence can destroy the physical habitat

of people and thereby cause them both physical and psychological injuries, including

social dislocation. Therefore, whenever a nation suffers the devastating effects of

violence, it becomes crucial to establish a systematic approach to healing of the entire

population, if the cycle of violence is to be broken and significant advances towards

reconciliation and peace are to be achieved (Danesh et al 2005:276). Taking post-war

healing and reconciliation as the focal point of this chapter, the following sets of

questions are examined and addressed:

What is the concept of healing?

What does the process of healing involve?

What is the relationship between individual healing and collective healing in the

wake of profound psychological trauma?

What are the linkages between healing and reconciliation in post-conflict society?

How can the inner wounds caused by divisions and conflicts be healed?

Is psychological, social, as well as spiritual healing even necessary for

reconciliation and peace?


1.2 Conceptualization of Healing

“In working with trauma for over three decades, I have come to the conclusion

that human beings are born with an innate capacity to triumph over trauma. I

believe not only that trauma is curable, but that the healing process can be a

catalyst for profound awakening – a portal opening to emotional and genuine

spiritual transformation. I have no doubt that as individuals, communities, and

even nations, we have the capacity to learn how to heal and prevent much of the

damage done by trauma. In doing so, we will significantly increase our ability to

achieve both our individual and collective dreams” (Peter A. Levine 2005:10).

The term “healing” commonly used in the discourse of peace-building and post-conflict

reconciliation, undoubtedly remains controversial. So what does the term “healing”

mean? The Mosby's Dictionary of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (2005)

defines healing as a “process of recovery, repair, and restoration;” or a process of “return

to wholeness.” It is a process of “becoming whole, a life-long journey of becoming fully

human, involving the totality of our being: body, mind, emotion, spirit, social and

political context, as well as our relationships with others and with the Divine” (Taylor

2006). From this definition, it is important to note that there are many forms of healing,

primarily - physical, emotional, psychological, social, and spiritual.

“Healing or the creation of “health” – whether biological or psychological is synonymous

with the creation of “unity”: the establishment of dynamic equilibrium within ourselves

and our interactions with the world” (Danesh et al 2007:279). Healing, for Danesh et al

(2007:277), is a “process of creating unity in all aspects of the individual Human being


and community life – physical, emotional, social and spiritual.” It is a process by which

unity is restored at both the individual and societal levels.

According to Carol Taylor (2006), healing is a process by which a society moves from a

sense of brokenness to a sense of wholeness. It is also a process, a way of life, an attitude,

and a way of approaching life‟s challenges in order to move on (Deegan 1988:15).

For his part, Brandon Hamber (2003:77) defines healing as a process or activity that

improves the psychological well being of individuals, repair and rebuild communities and

the social context. Healing, in other words, is a process of building bridges between

victims and perpetrators affected by violence.

Judith Herman (1992:133) describes healing as a process of recovery. In her opinion,

healing is based on the empowerment of survivors and creation of new connections. She

maintains that healing as a process, can only take place within the context of

relationships, and cannot occur in isolation. She believes that with a renewed

reconnection with others, the survivors can recreate the psychological faculties that were

damaged or deformed by traumatic experiences (Herman 1992:133).

Ervin Staub et al (2005:300) also view healing as synonymous to reconciliation. They

state that, healing from psychological trauma as a result of violence makes it less likely

for the continuation of violence. They further assert that healing is very important

because it requires people facing up to their painful experiences.


Paul Gutlove (2005:1), for his part views healing as a process of peace-building.

According to him, healing is closely related to peace-building. He maintains that, both

healing and peace-building are ultimately about developing or repairing healthy human

relationships. Just like Gutlove, Kimberly A. Maynard (1999:131) also views healing

from the community cohesion perspective. She states that healing is a process of

rebuilding community cohesion.

In essence, all these different researchers and experts view healing as the process of

“creating unity,” although they did not use the term “unity.” However, such concepts as

“wholeness,” “reconciliation,” improving “relationships,” community “cohesion,” are all

facets of the all-embracing concept of unity.

Evidently, there exists an urgent need for healing for both the victims and perpetrators in

any post-war society impacted by violence, if there is to be any hope for a better future.

Unless the wounds which inflamed the fires of violence, as well as the wounds that were

afflicted during the hostilities are healed, nothing will prevent the society from being

plunged into another cycle of violence.


1.3 Importance of Healing in Post-war Societies

“In the aftermath of violent conflict, peace is not simply the absence of violence.

Those who have experienced violence and war need also to experience healing.

To remain unhealed is to remain traumatized. Healing in this case implies more

than economic or political empowerment - it has to take place in relationships

among both victims and victimizers” (William Saa 2002:2).

Whenever violence strikes a society, it rips the souls and devastates the lives of everyone,

be it victims or perpetrators, leaving both parties trapped in their past traumatic

experiences. In the wake of this situation, those who have experienced violence and war

need also to experience healing (Saa 2002:2). This is because the process of healing can

be a catalyst for profound awakening – a portal opening to emotional and genuine

spiritual transformation for everyone, both victims and perpetrators for a meaningful

world (Levine 2005:10).

The process of recovery though seems to be very difficult and painful for victims and

perpetrators alike, it is indeed essential for a society that emerges out of conflict (Murithi

2009: x). This is because as Father Richard Rohr puts it, “Pain that is not transformed is

transferred” (Yoder 2005:30). Through the process of healing, the dark traumatic

memories of the past are brought to surface, thereby helping a society face its painful past

and mend the broken relationships (Lindqvist 2002:23).

The process of healing aims to empower victims and perpetrators in a post-war society to

move from point of exclusion to inclusion, and from alienation to participation (Otunnu

10 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

1996:52). Through this process, brothers and sisters who have descended into enmity are

able to restore shared lives and become once again reconciled and united in the society.

In other words, the process of healing involves building bridges between victims,

perpetrators and communities that have been in conflict.

Healing reduces the level of pain and suffering, and increases the chances of reconnection

and reconciliation. It also reduces the level of violence and strengthens relationships in

society. Therefore, the process of healing and reconciliation need to go together,

especially when former enemies continue to live side-by-side or together after violence.

Howard Zeh (2002:20) in his book, “The Little Book of Restorative Justice,” believes

that violence or crimes create wounds for the entire community as well, not only for the

victims and perpetrators. Such wounds, according to him, are considered to be the

damaged relationships of the society. He emphasizes that since violence ripples out to

disrupt this whole web of relationships in society, the process of achieving healing as a

means of restoring unity, becomes an obligation for everyone, not only victims and

perpetrators but the communities as well (Zeh 2002:20).

From the above explanation, it can be argued that the process of post-war healing is a

collective challenge for a society, based on the recognition that “your pain,” “my pain”

and the “others‟ pains” are similar, and this realization requires a process of assuming

personal and collective responsibilities for the anticipation of a meaningful future.

11 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Regarding the method of healing, William Saa (2002:3) states that, engaging with

traumatized population require not only by providing individual therapy, but also the

reconstruction of social networks which are often destroyed during the course of the

violence. He emphasizes that when the two processes occur side by side, there is a

reciprocal effect.

Danesh et al (2007:281) for their part, state that there are three main approaches that are

used to assist communities to recover from violence-related psychosocial trauma and ill-

health. These approaches, according to them, are Curative, Counseling, and

Rehabilitative; all intended to meet the needs of those suffering from the trauma of war.

The Curative approach refers to efforts by members of the medical and health professions

who have been entrusted by society with the mandate to decrease the suffering and heal

individuals or large afflicted groups. The Counseling approach is used to give advice or

to suggest modes of behavior and lines of action based on experiences, knowledge or

traditions, while the Rehabilitative approach aims to rehabilitate people through

formalized practices that help individuals and communities to overcome post-violence

disorders, so that they can resume normal functioning and thus live a healthier, individual

and relational life (Danesh et al 2007:281-282). They emphasize that all of these methods

are very important, each approach has its own merits, but using only one of them is not

fully adequate to respond to the conceptual, practical and economic challenges of healing

larger populations (Danesh et al 2007:281).

12 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

From the preceding discussion and giving the complex nature of post-war society, it is

evident that the process of healing wounds of violence in such a society is multifaceted

and difficult. As such, the humanitarian cannot be separated from the political, or the

immediate from the long-term, nor the rehabilitation from the development, each

dimension is a necessary component of healing, reconciliation and peace building in post-

conflict society.

1.4 Healing Wounds of Violence in Post-war Societies: The TRC‟s Approach

Throughout human history, human beings have committed heinous crimes through the

use of violence or wars. Countries like Liberia, Germany, Israel, Palestine, Nigeria, India,

Iraq, Sudan, Sri Lanka, Lebanon, Congo, Rwanda, Bosnia, Cambodia, Sierra Leone,

Ivory Coast, Uganda, Somalia, and South Africa have among many other countries

experienced terrible violence or civil wars. But after the bloodshed, the crucial questions

then become - how can the wounds caused by the violence be healed? And how can the

society move from a divided past to a shared vision for the future?

Today, there are three (3) main approaches that are used to assist communities to recover

from violence-related psychosocial trauma and ill-health. These approaches, as

mentioned earlier are Curative, Counseling, and Rehabilitative. The Truth and

Reconciliation Commission is an element of the Rehabilitative approach, and it

represents one of the main models of systematic whole-population recovery to date for

post-war societies (Danesh et al 2007:281-282).

13 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

The goal of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) is to “address the particular

wounds sustained by the victims of violence and its perpetrators, in a context of truth-

sharing and forgiveness” (Danesh et al 2007:281). The underlying philosophy of a Truth

and Reconciliation Commission is that, “national unity can be restored when victims,

witnesses, and even perpetrators of violence are given a chance to publicly tell their

stories without fear of prosecution” (Danesh et al 2007:282). This is because when the

past atrocities are disclosed, and the perpetrators of violence are given the opportunity to

confess their deeds, ask for forgiveness, and undertake reconciliatory actions in a society,

healing, reconciliation and peace will certainly prevail (Danesh et al 2007:281 282).

Certainly, when the silence is broken, it offers the opportunity for a new beginning.

The process of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission also provides survivors space to

create an actual picture of the past, although it has been argued that, it can be effective

only when sufficient psycho-social services are provided and not only the story-telling, in

promoting healing and reconciliation (Hamber 1995). According Alex Boraine (2001),

truth-telling is always important, but never so than when a country undergoes a transition.

Healing and reconciliation, according to Franklin Oduro, is all about the truth and its

publicity. He maintains that, reconciliation and healing can be achieved when the truth

about the past is told and acknowledged by both parties involved, through the process of

TRC. He further asserts that this process leads to the closure of the ledger book of the

past, and ends the cycle of accusations, denial and counter accusations (Oduro 2007:14).

14 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Since 1973, thirty-four (34) variations of Truth Commissions have been established in

twenty-eight (28) countries including Liberia. But there has been mixed reactions to the

success of most of the commissions with regard to achieving healing and national

reconciliation. Critics of the TRCs argue that, there have always been some complexities

in trying to get to the truth of what had happened among those involved in most of the

violent episodes. They further state that, the actual “truth” is often withheld in most

instances by both victims and perpetrators for fear of punishment and personal sense of

shame, and as well as the possibility of being shunned by loved ones and community

members (Danesh et al 2007:283).

In contrast to the notion that shared truth is a form of reconciliation, some scholars

contest. Franklin Odoru (2007:15) remarks that Micheal Ignatieff disagrees with the

concept that healing and reconciliation are possible because of the acknowledgement of

shared truth. Odoru states that, he (Ignatieff) also disagrees that shared truth is a

condition for healing and social reconciliation. He argues that since truth commissions

cannot overcome a societal division, all they can achieve is to reduce the number of

falsehoods that can be circulated unchallenged in public discourse. He further asserts that,

“there is never just one truth: we each carry our own distinct memories, and they

sometimes contradict each other” (Odoru 2007:15)

According to Eirin Mobekk (2005:265), truth in the form of narratives or storytelling is

never simply uncovered, but is partially constructed and affected by many processes and

actors. He argues that shared facts do not necessarily conduce to shared truths. Lyn

15 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Graybill however differs. Graybill argues that, “if the original narrative is suppressed, the

lie will be accepted as truth because victims can only overcome suffering by overcoming

the narrative of the lie and embracing a redeeming narrative” (Graybill 2002:82).

Social Scientist, Eirin Mobekk further posits that the use of TRC process as a transitional

justice mechanism helps to re-traumatize the victims of their horrible traumatic

experiences, be it confidential statements or public hearings. He believes that although

there is an underlying assumption that telling the truth leads to healing, the extent of the

trauma is often profound and reliving it through truth-telling, can serve to slow down the

healing process, particularly in a setting where there is a little available resources to

support victims of violence (Mobekk 2005:271). He further avers that, although TRCs are

being considered as restorative in nature, they still can re-traumatize; and healing perhaps

is a too vast goal for any TRC process. He however states that, for some other scholars,

there is a view that truth-telling and acknowledgment of the harm through the process of

TRC is undoubtedly a process that leads to reconciliation (Mobekk 2005:271).

While some scholars have argued that the Truth Commission is not the right process of

achieving healing and reconciliation in post-war society, most however do. Lyn Graybill

(2002:172) argues that since the process of moving from violent society to violence-free

society requires peaceful coexistence, national reconciliation and forgiveness, the process

of the TRC can help to achieve them. Speaking on peaceful coexistence as a worthy

outcome, Graybill (2002:172) citing Villa-Vicencio says, “even if at the end of the TRC

process we are „not fully reconciled‟ to one another, then at least we do not kill each

16 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

other.” He also maintains that, peaceful coexistence which is the point “between

vengeance and forgiveness,” is a laudable achievement of truth commissions (Graybill

2002:172).

Lyn Graybill (2002:82) further states that “for Judith Herman, the fundamental premise

of the psychotherapeutic work is to belief in the restorative power of truth telling.” He

maintains that, the sharing of traumatic stories in a supportive setting leads to healing for

both victims and perpetrators, but he however notes that, suppressing such stories, leads

to anxiety, stress and depression. He further emphasizes that, story telling is indeed

significant in post-conflict societies because it is the way for victims, perpetrators and

bystanders to construct a common memory of the past (Graybill 2002:82).

According to Sirleaf (2008), since the process of truth telling exposes and illuminates, the

truth when told and handled properly, heals and brings to closure of what really

happened. He believes that public hearing provides a platform for survivors to tell their

stories which make it difficult for perpetrators to deny the violations.

To crown up, the preceding anti-TRC arguments about the process of healing

reconciliation in post-conflict societies do not imply that the few critics mentioned herein

are absolutely right. One cannot only look at the writings of Mobekk, Odoru, Graybill to

just mention a few and conclude that they are absolutely right. In my opinion, not each

one of them holds the monopoly over the proponents of Truth Commission. I think what

might be the appropriate methods of healing and reconciliation in any post-conflict

17 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

society should not be based on the idea of the international actors, but rather on the

experiences of the citizens of the host country, taking into consideration the nature and

history of the conflicts, as well as the social, political and cultural contexts of the people

that need to be healed and reconciled.

I do concur with the arguments of Danesh et al, Graybill, Hamber, Boraine, Murithi, and

Oduro based on the notion that the process of Truth and Reconciliation Commission can

provide survivors a space to create images of the past and help to restore broken

relationships and unity among victims, perpetrators and community. Although they

support the TRC process, however, they believe that the process can be more effective

and efficient when adequate psycho-social programs are also provided to survivors.

In a nutshell, the need for healing, reconciliation and peace among victims, perpetrators

and the larger society through the process of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission,

especially following decades of brutality, subjugation, and divisiveness in Liberia is

indeed relevant and timely as it aims to heal, reconcile, and unify the people of the nation

once more.

1.5 TRC vs. War Crimes Court: The Debate of Healing & Reconciliation in Liberia

A key question facing countries emerging from violent conflict is how best to deal with

the painful legacy of past, while at the same time maintaining the fragile social harmony

that often characterizes post-conflict societies (Huyse & Salter 2008:iii). “Should priority

be given to bringing the perpetrators of past human rights violations to justice, thereby

18 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

combating the culture of impunity? Or is it more important to start by focusing on

measures designed to ensure peace and stability” (Huyse & Salter 2008:iii)? The

question about the how – whether Truth telling or War Crimes Court continues to

dominate public discussions, discourses, and the media in the country.

Proponents of retribution, who are emphasizing the beneficial results of prosecution,

argue that the process is victim-oriented. According to Huyse (2008:3), a “post-conflict

society has a moral obligation to prosecute and punish the perpetrators; because

retribution is exactly what most victims want.” He believes that, the process of

prosecution serves to heal the wounds of victims and restore their dignity and self

confidence, because it publicly acknowledges who was wrong and who was right. He

argues that “only trails lead to a full recognition of the worth and dignity of those

victimized by past abuses” (Huyse 2008:3).

Avruch & Vejarano (2002:39) assert that the perpetrators of human rights abuses and

violence must be tried by some sort of tribunals, or courts of law, intended to hold them

accountable for their actions. This is because according to (Sriram 2007:147), punishing

perpetrators may serve to restore or install democracy, the rule of law, and respect for

human rights. He further states that, the law proscribes certain actions and these actions

are subject to punishment. In other words, prosecution aims to reinforce the rule of law,

human rights, and democratic processes.

19 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

With respect to reconciliation, the proponents of retribution believe that for reconciliation

to stand any chance in the aftermath of the brutal civil war, it is critical to limit the danger

of renewed violence and terror through the use of a retributive justice system (Huyse

2003:97). Louis Kriesberg (2003:83) also adds that, since the prolonged suffering and

gross injustices in a society lead to violence, reconciliation cannot be achieved in the

absence of criminal prosecution of perpetrators. Justice and accountability, according

Odoru (2007:21), are the twin pillars of reconciliation. He emphasizes that justice

addresses lawless behaviors while accountability responds to the rule of law respectively.

For Huyse (2003:98), since reconciliation also involves the process of gradual building of

self confidence and mutual trust, the processes of implementing a culture of human rights

and democracy by the use of courts are steps to reconciliation. He further states that, the

basis for the use of war crimes courts for example, is aimed at: “avoiding unbridled

private revenge, protecting against the return to power of perpetrators, fulfilling an

obligation to the victims, individualizing guilt, strengthening legitimacy and

democratization process, and breaking the cycle of violence” (Huyse 2003:98). In his

view, this process will serve as the most potent deterrence against future abuses of human

rights and break the vicious cycle of impunity in post-war Liberia.

Although some supporters of war crimes court in Liberia agree that truth telling may be

the first step in the process of achieving justice and reconciliation at the individual level,

they are also of the opinion that, truth commission without any process of justice, as

evidenced by numerous cases, will not be sufficient for many of the victims in the

20 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

country (Mobekk 2005:272). While they seem to recognize the importance of Truth and

Reconciliation Commission in the process of achieving peace and stability in post

conflict society, they are of the opinion that, TRC is not the only mechanism that can be

used in the promotion of national and individual reconciliation in the society (Mobekk

2005:272). They believe that the structures of retributive and restorative justice can

coexist during a period of transition.

While there is a growing chorus of critics against the Truth Commission in the country,

many other intellectuals however view the TRC process as a worthy endeavor in

promoting healing and reconciliation. Proponents of Truth and Reconciliation

Commission believe that, in an attempt to restore the conditions of peaceful coexistence

following the more than a decade of brutal civil conflict, the act of punishing perpetrators

only promotes a vicious cycle of mistrust, suspicions, and resentment, all intended to

exclude a section of the society either socially, economically or politically. Such a

process of exclusion, according to critics, can lead to resentment and function as a

catalyst to reignite violence again in the society (Murithi 2009: x). In his (Murithi) view,

the purpose of TRC is restorative in nature with the underlying principle of trying to

restore relationships between victims and the perpetrators, so that they can continue to

coexist in the same community just like before the war (Murithi 2009:143).

Social Scientist Luc Huyse (2008:5) also argues that, the process of prosecution is

perpetrator-oriented and does not give victims the full attention they are entitled to in

order to be healed of the injustices they have suffered. In his view, “the Western-style of

21 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

justice does not fit the traditional African jurisprudence. It is too impersonal. The

African view of justice is aimed at the healing of breaches, the redressing of imbalances,

and the restoration of broken relationships” (Huyse 2008:5). This kind of justice,

according to him, seeks to rehabilitate both victims and perpetrators.

Reflecting on the holocaust for example, Karl Jaspers distinguished between four types of

guilt:

“Criminal guilt of those who actually committed the crimes; the political guilt of

those who helped such people to get power; the moral guilt of those who stood by

doing nothing as the crimes were being committed; and finally the metaphysical

guilt of those who survived whilst others were killed, thereby failing in their

responsibility to do all that they might have done to preserve the standard of

civilized humanity”(Rigby 2000:8).

From the quote above, Andrew Rigby (2000:8) argues that, while trials might be valid

processes for determining criminal guilt, they are not best suited to coping with all the

different forms, shades and degrees of culpability as in the case of Liberia. He maintains

that, although trials could make the victims feel happy that justice has been done, they

might not assist the process of healing division.

In the case of Liberia, the supporters of TRC argue that with country‟s recent past, it is

difficult to point out the “real victims and perpetrators.” According to Ezzat A. Fattah

(1994:80), both victims and victimizers are on two sides of the same coin; the victim and

22 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

offender populations are not, as commonly believed, two distinct and mutually exclusive

populations; they are homogeneous and overlap to a large extent. Hence, it is difficult to

point out the “real” victims and perpetrators. In his opinion, “yesterday‟s victims are

often today‟s offenders and today‟s offenders are frequently the victims of tomorrow; as

such the role of victims and offenders are not fixed, assigned, or static” (Fattah 1994:80).

Critics of the retributive justice system also argue that this process is arbitrary and

selective. According to them, in most countries where retributive justice system is

carried out after violence, only those who are believed to bear the greatest responsibilities

(“the big fish”), are tried and punished, while others who have also committed serious

crimes, (“the foot soldiers”) are left out, like in the case of Sierra Leone. In 2002 for

example, a Special Court for Sierra Leone was established to prosecute those who were

deemed to be the most responsible for the mayhem carried out during the war. The

Special court was particularly designed for leaders who allegedly directed and organized

the crimes committed during the war, while low-level soldiers were not subject to the

jurisdiction of the court (Murithi 2009:145-146). For those paying the price for their

actions while seeing many other perpetrators escaping punishment, justice can appear not

so much blind as arbitrary.

The major disadvantage is that, there is then left a significant section of the population

that feels victimized and scapegoated – and the divisions of the past are thereby

reproduced into the future which can become another breeding ground for further

violence (Rigby 2000:7).

23 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Furthermore, in the case of Rwanda, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda

(ICTR) indicted more than 100,000 people accused of human rights abuses, many of

whom are still awaiting trial since their arrest years ago. Many of those arrested are still

languishing in prison without trial, due to the inability of the International Criminal

Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) and the country‟s decimated justice system to try the

enormous number of cases (Graybill & Langran 2004:8). Many of those accused in the

genocidal continue to die in prisons each year, than are judged.

In Rwanda, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda ICTR was established in

1994, and as of December 2003, the Tribunal had only convicted 10 detainees. However,

there seems high level of disappointment for many victims to the ICTR‟s meager results

– 10 convictions in nearly ten years – all on a multi-million dollars budget. Worst of all,

some of those convicted were executed, an act described by some political observers as a

process of revenge rather than ending the cycle of violence and promoting reconciliation

(Zorbas 2004:34). Therefore, giving the pace at which the trial in Rwanda is been held, it

might even take more than a century to try nearly 100,000 people who are currently

imprisoned.

To crown up this debate, it is important to note that whereas trials are aimed at punishing

perpetrators of past abuses in the form of incarceration, the prime concern of the Truth

Commission is to address both victims and perpetrators, heal the wounds of the past

through the process of truth- telling, forgiveness and reconciliation, so that they can

continue to coexist in the same community as was the case before the war.

24 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Although some political analysts in Liberia are of the opinion that retribution is the best

form of justice that can be used to heal and reconcile the people of Liberia, I do however

differ. Justice in the form of retribution or incarceration will tend to exclude a section of

the society either socially, economically or politically. But the TRC process, which is a

form of restorative, rehabilitative, and regulatory justice, will help to heal, reconcile and

unify the people once more, partly because it involves the victims, perpetrators and the

nation as whole in the process of healing and reconciliation. As a restorative mechanism,

it provides the forum for perpetrators to publicly acknowledge past abuses, and plead for

forgiveness. The disclosure of the fact and admission of guilt is a sense of relief for

perpetrators and justice for the victims.

In addition, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, as both rehabilitative and

regulatory form of justice mechanism, specifically responds to specific psychological and

material needs of victims, in order to restore their human dignity and past losses, and sets

institutional responsibilities and reforms of the society, for recovery respectively.

The concept of justice is viewed from different perspectives including retribution,

restoration, rehabilitation and regulatory. According to some scholars, the Western

concepts of healing and recovery, are primarily based on repairing people who are

damaged and punishing those who have done the damaging, but the African concepts

tend to move into the direction of restoration, healing and reconciliation. African view of

justice is intended for healing the wounds, redressing the imbalances and the restoration

of broken relationships in the society. The African culture strongly encourages

25 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

forgiveness, reconciliation, and restorative justice over concepts of retribution and severe

punishment (Tutu 1999:51; Mehl-Madrona 2006:277).

In my opinion, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is the best option for Liberia,

realizing the complexity of its past and the nature of the conflicts. I am of the opinion

that when the TRC process is taken seriously and supported, it will certainly heal and

unify the people once more, give voice to the voiceless; and recognize the pain and

trauma suffered by the people who for many years have been persecuted by abusers.

Finally, the people of Liberia, although they are from sixteen (16) different ethnic and

cultural groups as historians remind us, they have a common future and that destiny is

interwoven. If they can examine their painful past, acknowledge it together, and

reconcile their differences, then they will together strive to rebuild the future for

themselves and the future generations. Even though the path of healing and national

reconciliation in the country will no doubt be difficult, but certainly it is the best way

forward for the nation with a painful history to rise to its nobler destiny (Pham 2004).

26 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

CHAPTER 2

LIBERIA‟S LONG FORLORN HISTORY

2.1 Introduction

The name “Liberia,” is derived from a Latin word “liber” which means “free.” The

country was named Liberia by the freed-slaves as honour to their freedom from slavery.

Liberia was founded in 1822 by freed slaves from the United States of America under the

auspices of the American Colonization society (ACS). The freed slaves became known

as the Americo-Liberians. Both the Americo-Liberians and the Congos, recaptives from

slave‟s ships from Congo River Basin in East Africa, who were deposited in Monrovia

and absorbed into the settler society, became known as settlers (Dennis 2006:1 & Pham

2004:2). “For much of Liberia‟s early history, the Congos were classified below the

Americo-Liberians, however over the years, the two groups joined and the terms

“Americo-Liberian” and “Congo” were used interchangeably” (Dennis 2006:1). The

African-Liberians or native Liberians that were met on the land when these groups

arrived in Liberia are referred to as Indigenous Liberians.

The freed slaves initially arrived in Liberia and established a settlement called

Christopolis now Monrovia, named after United States President James Monroe, who

was sympathetic to their cause. Liberia, Africa‟s oldest republic, declared its

independence on July 26, 1847.

27 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

The Liberian civil war had its roots in the unique circumstances in which the country

emerged as a nation. Liberia was established as a safe haven for freed American slaves

which made it to escape the European colonization on the continent of Africa, but was

subjected to a harsh regime of “democratic feudalism” imposed by a group of freed

slaves who are referred to as Americo-Liberians (Alao, et al, 1999:12). The Americo-

Liberians perpetuated themselves as a ruling and superior class in the country for 133

years. The actions of this elite group, its removal and the military rule that followed, all

shaped the future of Liberia and serve to influence the civil war that eventually engulfed

the country.

2.2 Early History of Liberia

Liberia was inhabited at least as far back as the 12th

century, perhaps earlier. The people

of Liberia are classified into three groups: Mel, Mende and Kwa. The Mel which consists

of the Gola and Kissi are believed to be the oldest inhabitants. The Mende speaking

group is comprised of Mandingoes, Vai, Gbandi, Kpelle, Lorma, Mende, Gio and Mano.

The Kwa speaking group include Bassa, Die (Dey), Grebo, Kru, Belle (Kwaa), Kru,

Krahn and Gbee.

The arrival of these tribes was perpetuated by the war that led to the decline of western

Sudanic Mali Empire in 1375 and later in 1591 of the Songhai Empire. Secondly, the

influx also stemmed from the severe drought which for a long time hit the region

resulting into desertification. The emergence of deadly diseases also explains why there

was a sudden upsurge in migrations. The inhabitants were pressured to move to a wetter

28 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Pepper Coast, and other safer communities for the safety of their lives. In an attempt to

expand their territories around the West African Coast and in the hinterland, these tribes

fought wars with other tribes in the country. They captured people of all ages and sold

them to both the Portuguese and British merchants, who in turn sold them to the new

masters in Europe, South and North America (Duworko 2008:8).

The inter-tribal strife and the slave trade ignited gross human rights violations, a

malicious and atrocious treatment of Africans against their fellow Africans. All of these

groups, the original inhabitant residents of the land, were present in the territory when the

first American-Liberians or settlers arrived in 1822 (Duworko 2008:9).

2.3 Formation of the American Colonization Society

The idea of sending freed slaves to Africa which eventually led to the formation of the

American colonization Society (ACS) was embraced by two main groups of people in

America. As stated by Alao et al (1999:12), “the first was the anti-slavery campaigners,

who argued that slavery was against the principles expressed in the U.S. constitution and

that people of colour should be sent away to an environment where they would enjoy full

civil liberties.” Furthermore, the second group according them was the “proponents of

the slave trade, who believed that the trade was under threat by growing number of freed

slaves who were liable to incite other blacks” (Alao, et al, 1999:12).

29 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

The defenders of the ACS argued that colonizing free blacks would protect slavery in the

United States and promote Christianity and civilization in Africa, neglecting the

argument of the abolitionists. It was against this backdrop that the American Colonization

Society dispatched a two-man team to West Coast of Africa in 1817, with the sole

purpose of finding a suitable home for the freed slaves (Alao et al 1999:12). It is against

this background that Liberia was founded by the ACS. Hence Liberia, as a settlement for

returning freed slaves from the Americas, grew into a colony, later a commonwealth and

achieved independence on July 26, 1847.

2.4 The Roots of Local Discontent and Social Disintegration

The people of Liberia are divided into two main groups: the descendants of freed slaves

known as the Americo-Liberians, and the native African population that had historically

lived in the area before the arrival of the settlers. The settlers subjected the indigenous

Liberians to series of war in the 1820s. Although there was inter-ethnic strife between the

native Liberians before the arrival of the settlers, the oppression that they experienced

during the 133 years of oligarchic rule, brought them closer together, paving way for

some form of cohesion between them (Alao, et al, 1999:15).

Alao et al (1999:15) are of the opinion that, power and influence in Liberia prior to the

civil war mainly centred around three institutions: the True Whig Party, the Church and

the Masonic Temple. The True Whig Party, formed by the Americo-Liberians oligarchy,

ruled from the declaration of independence, and produced all Liberian Presidents from

the inception of the country until the overthrow of the oligarchy in 1980. “The church and

30 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

the Masonic Lodge were interwoven because they both provided avenue for social

cohesion for those in the upper echelon of the ruling party” (Alao, et al, 1999:15). The

social and political cohesion of the oligarchy proved vital to their domination of politics,

religion and commerce in the country, but to the native Liberians, these institutions and

structures were symbols of repression that subsequently became targets for punishment.

Ironically, the settlers who suffered terrible exclusion themselves in America where they

were denied civil liberties by the American society instead decided to avenge their plight

by excluding their African brothers and sisters in the affairs of the state (Tarr 2007:200).

Those who were expected to promote missionary activities in Liberia, on their ancestral

continent, vehemently denied their fellow Africans citizenship of the nation until 1904.

“The latter became citizens only after embracing the adjudged civilized lifestyle

of the settlers in the country, having adopted Christianity and denounced

paganism for three years. However, fulfillment of these criteria did not guarantee

Africans social equality with the settlers. The social segregation of the aboriginal

Liberians remained” (Alao et al 1999:15).

According to James D. Smith (1996), the founding constitution of Liberia modeled on

that of the United States, was designed only for the needs of the settler population, with

less consideration and involvement of the native Liberians. Smith affirms that, a Liberian

educator and journalist Edward Wilmot Blyden, in his Independence Day address in

1857, chided his fellow Americo-Liberians when he said, "Prosperity is not real. The

31 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

prosperity of a nation is real when the springs of that prosperity are contained within

itself, when its existence depends on its resources" (Smith 1996).

Legitimatizing this oppressive and divisive governance structure, the Liberian Supreme

Court ruled in 1862 that the “African-Liberians were only subjects of the state, to be

ruled by the law of the land without citizenship, because of the peculiar situation of the

Africans in their incapability to understand the working of civilized governments” (Smith

1996). The Supreme Court ruling in my opinion, considered the African-Liberians as

inferior to the Americos. Surely, in the eyes of the Americo-Liberians, the Native

Liberians, by virtue of being considered “uncivilized” by western standards, were never

considered as people of values and worthy of inclusion in the Liberian society and

political system.

One of the major subjugation of the indigenous population, was the economic

exploitation through „forced labour‟ from 1927 - 1929, which is referred to in Liberia as

the Fernando Po Crisis. Liberian laborers, with the involvement of top government

officials, were being recruited and shipped to the Spanish Island of Fernando Po (in

Equatorial Guinea) under circumstances that looked like slave trade. A commission set

by the League of Nations, found some basis for the charges and implicated the Vice

President, Allen Yancy. Shortly after the publication of these findings, President Charles

D. B. King and Vice President Allen Yancy were forced to resign (africaWithin.com)

32 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

An era of gradual transformation designed to remedy these wrongs commenced in the

1940s during the administration of William V.S. Tubman. He took the first concrete step

to reintegrate the indigenous people into the national structures and unify the people of

Liberia through his Unification Policy. Also through his Open Door Policy, many jobs

were provided to native Liberians, although this policy was used by investors to exploit

the nation‟s natural resources. Tubman maintained his tight grip on power through a

combination of “clientistic politics and suppression of opponents” (Francis et al

2005:119).

President Tubman allowed women to finally vote in Liberia in 1951 after more than one

hundred (100) years of independence. The nation started to move toward gradual

enfranchisement and inclusion of the indigenous people. Through the National

Unification Policy, Tubman established new county jurisdictions and access to education

was increased, although Liberia still remained an autocratic one-party state (Sayle

2009:12), which continued to advance the Americo-Liberian hegemony. According to

Amos Sawyer, Liberia‟s former Interim President, the changes by Tubman, “energized

the quest by ordinary people to struggle for greater democratization and more meaningful

participation in the political decision-making process” in the country (Sawyer 2005:16).

Many Liberians believed that the educational policies of President Tubman served as a

real catalyst for the political change in the country. His foreign scholarship programs

provided many opportunities for native Liberians to study abroad, to broaden their

knowledge and understanding about the functions and duties of government. These young

33 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

native middle class scholars later formed groups to pressure government to change their

system of governance. By 1970s, pressure was mounted from many groups including

Progressive Alliance of Liberia (PAL), Movement for Justice in Africa (MOJA) and

Progressive People Party (PPP). Also Liberians abroad demanded rapid political changes

in the system of government (Adebajo, 2002a:22-23)

2.5 Indigenous Uprising and the Aftermath

Following the death of President Tubman, William Tolbert took over as president.

Tolbert, to some extent he continued the reformist trend of Tubman by:

“Bridging the gap that divided the Liberian people into an indigenous „country

people‟ and „Americo-Liberian‟ class. However, the change was not fast enough

and not substantial enough to hold back the political tidal wave that was coming.

But the old guards continued to dominate political power, through a de facto one-

party state” (Tellewoyan 2004).

At the same time, the high level of corruption coupled with series of economic problems

led to strong public opposition to the Tolbert government (Alert Series 1993:9). This

popular unrest reached its peak in 1979, following the increase of nearly 50% in the price

of a bag of rice (from USD 22 to USD 30), the main food for majority of Liberians. A

mass demonstration in protest to the increase in the price of rice erupted into violent

“Rice Riot” on April 14, 1979, triggering the so-called “year of ferment” which

terminated the oligarchic rule (Adebajo 2002a:23).

34 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Pushed by political activists, seventeen (17) non-commissioned Army Officers led by

Sergeant Thomas Quiwonkpa, commonly referred to as the strong man, from the Gio

ethnic group staged a coup d‟etat on April 12, 1980 and killed President William R.

Tolbert. The military junta later executed thirteen (13) other leading members of

Tolbert‟s government, mostly of Americo-Liberian descent. Master Sergeant Samuel

Kanyon Doe, by virtue of being the senior officer of the mutineer leaders, became the

leader of the military junta, ending the 133 years of rule of Americo-Liberian political

domination. The “People‟s Redemption Council” (PRC), a military junta formed by Doe

and his fellow mutineers, immediately suspended the constitution of Liberia and assumed

full state power (Sendabo 2004:28).

The coup d‟etat was greeted with enthusiasm. Many Liberians saw the rise of Doe, an

indigenous Liberian, as a victory for all indigenous Liberians, and one that would bring

an end to more than one hundred (100) years of Americo-Liberian rule. But the

enthusiasm of the people soon evaporated with Doe‟s imposition of a repressive krahn-

based military oligarchy. Human right violations and abuses became the order of the day.

Within just less than four years of Doe‟s presidency, almost all potential rivals were

eliminated while others were forced to flee the country (Adebajo 2002a:27-28)

In addition to the human rights abuses, the Constitution of Liberia was suspended and

new decrees were imposed. According to Kieh (2002), “Decree #88A made it a crime for

anyone to criticize a government official, while Decree #12 made labor strikes illegal in

the country.” Those that were labeled as “True Whig Party remnants” were constantly

35 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

harassed, intimidated and subjected to torture. There were also arbitrary arrests of

ordinary citizens, mass imprisonment, secret murder and executions of “perceived”

enemies. There were a series of bans on political party activities, civic organizations and

media institutions. President Doe also rigged the general and presidential elections of

1985 and declared himself president (Dorwrko 2008:18).

During the 1985 general elections, President‟s Doe‟s Party, the National Democratic

Party of Liberia (NDPL) emerged victorious through vote rigging. The elections were

marked by widespread fraud and rigging. Worse still, prior to the elections some of the

major aspirants were disqualified. The post election period was characterized by

increased human rights abuses, corruption and ethnic tensions in the country (Adebajo

2002b:45).

Shortly after the elections, Thomas Quiwonkpa, the former Commanding General of the

People‟s Redemption Council (PRC), attempted to stage a coup to overthrow President

Doe in an attempt to restore Jackson Doe, a fellow Gio who was widely believed to have

won the 1985 elections, but the coup failed miserably, and Quiwonkpa was captured and

brutally killed by government soldiers (Alert Series 1993:11). At the beginning of the

coup, the Gios and Manos attacked Krahns and Mandingoes in Monrovia. The attack on

Mandingoes by Gios and Manos during the early stage of the failed coup is believed to

have been sparked off by reports that the Mandingoes profited from Doe‟s government

and used their economic power to influence major political decisions at the expense of

36 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

other tribes. The Gios and Manos also accused the Mandingoes of acquiring land in

Nimba County where they were deemed not to have hereditary rights (Ellis 1999:78)

But after the abortive coup, and despite the gruesome murder of Quiwonkpa, the Armed

Forces of Liberia soldiers, mainly Krahn, went on the rampage in Nimba County and

indiscriminately killed nearly 3,000 Gios and Manos. They even burnt their villages and

towns. This single incident, more than any other, is believed to have set the stage for the

exploitation of ethnic rivalries that eventually culminated into a bloody fourteen years

civil war in Liberia (Adebajo 2002a: 29-30).

J. Peter Pham of James Madison University citing Jeremy Levitt of Florida International

University observed that:

“Doe‟s native regime … failed to progressively reconfigure let alone overhaul

Liberia‟s socio-political order. It rather widened preexisting fissures and sent the

country spiraling downward into an abyss of darkness from which it has yet to

recover. The outcome of Doe‟s rule may signal the extent to which

authoritarianism, corruption, ethnic divisions, and elitism have been entrenched

into the Liberian body politic and wider cultural fabric. Hence it may be asserted

that while the 1980 coup brought about the (short-lived) ethnic transformation of

Liberia‟s body politic, it did nothing to reconstruct its constitution of order or

fundamentally enhance the quality of life of the Liberian masses. In this sense, the

Doe episode demonstrates that majority rule, whether it is settler or native

Liberian, is not synonymous with democratization” (Pham 2006:2).

37 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Liberia‟s Former Interim President, Dr. Amos Sawyer in his assessment of Doe‟s era

noted that;

“Murder, torture and imprisonment became normal instruments of national

policy. Similarly, graft and corruption were also perceived as normal business.

The combination of ill-trained military people in search of bounties and ambitious

former clients of decaying patronage system seeking to maintain their privileges

had produced the right chemistry of ineptitude, plunder and brutal repression”

(Sawyer 2002:296).

By the mid 1980's, Liberia‟s history had spiraled into a dangerous impasse. On one hand,

there were growing awareness of rights and civil liberties, but on the other hand there

were ruthless suppression on a wide scale. As the military regime continued its repressive

form, the question was not whether a violent opposition to President Doe‟s government

would surface, but rather when this would happen (Alao et al 1999:20). Certainly, these

factors and many more have set the stage for ethnic rivalries that eventually culminated

into the brutal, barbaric and vicious civil war that engulfed the nation for fourteen years.

38 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

CHAPTER 3

THE PAINS OF A VICIOUS CIVIL WAR IN LIBERIA

3.1 Background and Development of the Civil War

There are multiplicities of factors that gave rise to the Liberian civil war, but none is

more significant than the massive historical disparities, between the privileged elite and

an impoverished population, decades of rampant corruption and repressive military

regime (Wolokolie 2007:1).

The 1980 coup d‟etat which terminated the 133 years of rule of the Americo-Liberian

oligarchy marked the beginning of Liberia‟s steep descent into crisis. Samuel Doe‟s

repressive military regime, his failure to return the country back to civilian rule after the

1980 coup that brought him to power, and his severe mistreatment of the ethnic groups,

Gio and Mano are the immediate triggers of the civil war (Ero1995:1).

Charles Taylor, a former civil servant in Doe‟s government who was accused of

embezzlement, and some of his supporters who were trained in Libya, invaded the

country to topple Samuel Doe‟s government. A group of one hundred sixty-eight (168)

insurgents under the leadership Charles Taylor entered Liberia through Ivory Coast and

attacked Butuo, Nimba County, on December 24, 1989. The group was called the

National Patriotic Front of Liberia (NPFL).

39 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Charles Taylor‟s NPFL rebel group did not find difficulty recruiting people, because it

received popular support in Nimba County. Taylor exploited the resentment of the Gio

and Mano ethnic groups by recruiting most of his fighters from Nimba County where

they lived (Francis 2005:120). As a way of gaining the support of the Nimbians, the rebel

leader Charles Taylor, presented the civil war as a continuation of General Quiwonkpa‟s

failed coup. The late Thomas Quiwonkpa, a Gio from Nimba County, enjoyed extensive

recognition in his home region. “This manipulation of the ethnic differences predictably

led to NPFL attacks on Krahns and Mandingoes, in its march to Monrovia, in which

many Krahn civilians were killed in the early stages of the war” (Adebajo 2002a:42). The

rebels were also backed by some of the Americo-Liberians who initially financed the

war.

But in their attempt to crash the rebellion, the rampaging Armed Forces of Liberia (AFL)

burned villages and towns and executed civilians in Nimba County. However, the

Liberian dense rainforests and the army‟s lack of vehicles and ammunitions and limited

man power made it difficult to contain the guerrilla insurgency (Adebajo, 2002a:42).

Earlier, most of the Gio and Mano soldiers in the Army and other security forces were

killed by the Krahn soldiers. In an extremely horrific act, more than 600 internally

displaced persons, mostly Gio and Mano civilians, sheltering at the St. Peter‟s Lutheran

Church in Monrovia, were murdered in cold blood by AFL soldiers on July 29, 1990,

including the father of the NPFL‟s rebel leader Charles Taylor.

40 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

As the NPFL approached Monrovia, it split into two groups: Independent National

Patriotic Front (INPFL) and National Patriotic Front of Liberia (NPFL) due to policy

differences. The Independent National Patriotic Front of Liberia (INPFL) under the

leadership of Prince Johnson captured and gruesomely killed President Doe on

September 9, 1990.

As the political situation became more chaotic in the earlier 1990s, several new guerrilla

formations appeared (Lindqvist 2002:6). Both Taylor‟s NPFL and its main opponents

split into factions, while the United Liberation Movement for Democracy (ULIMO) was

formed in 1991. ULIMO was composed mainly of the Krahn and Mandingo ethnic

groups under the leadership of Alhaji Kromah, but split after the death of General Albert

Karpeh in 1992, a member of the Krahn ethnic group. The political, commercial and

military enmities within the group grew robust until it split into two factions in 1994

(Ellis 2001:96). The movement was divided into two factions: ULIMO-J; mainly from

the Krahn ethnic group, headed by Roosevelt Johnson, and ULIMO-K, mainly

Mandingos, headed by Alhaji Kromah. Liberia Peace Council (LPC) of George Boley,

National Patriotic Front of Liberia Central Revolutionary Council (NPFL-CRC) of

Lavala Supowood and Lofa Defense Force (LDF) of François Massaquoi were also

formed.

Hans Lindqvist (2002:6) averred that the war was not an ethnic war initially, but a

struggle for power. But as the different armed factions recruited their fighters mainly

41 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

based on ethnic lines, it developed into a conflict with strong ethnic implications for more

than decade.

The intricacy of the war stemmed from the disintegration of the factions in search of

political power. One of the goals was to control the nation‟s natural resources, especially

diamonds, timber and gold (Lehtinen 2000:145). The control of these resources became

the major source of competition. Factions and alliances during the war were mainly

organized based on ethnic boundaries, but certain ethnically based factions further split

along the loyalties to personality and public profile of leaders and the identity of their

external alliances (Lehtinen 2000:149).

External support for different warring factions further exacerbated and extended the war.

For example, the U.S. and Nigeria supported the Doe government, while Burkina Faso,

Ivory Coast and Libya support the Taylor‟s military insurgence (Lehtinen 2000:149).

According to ACCORD International, Libya provided weaponry, military training, and

oil to NPFL; Burkina Faso contributed men and training facilities, while Ivory Coast was

the major conduit for suppliers and reinforcement (ACCORD 1996:15). Other factions

also received external support. For instance, ULIMO was supported by Sierra Leone,

AFL and the top ECOMOG hierarchy; LPC was supported by AFL and Nigerian

ECOMOG (ACCORD 1996:14; Sayle et al 2009:27-28).

42 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

It is explicit that succeeding stages of the Liberian civil strife, were punctuated by

heinous crimes, as well as unprecedented subversion of international norms of civility

during warfare, culminating in what is called “uncivil war” (Sesay 2003:90).

As the war ravaged throughout the entire country, the sufferings of civilians, caught

between the warring factions, attracted the attention of the media and ensured coverage

on the major world news (Furley & Roy 2006:180). As a means of ending the scene of

carnage, the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) established its

ECOWAS Ceasefire Monitoring Group (ECOMOG) as a peacekeeping force. The

multinational force intervened in Liberia on August 24, 1990. Following series of

conferences and agreements, the Abuja Agreement of August 20, 1996 finally ended the

war. The Abuja agreement called for a cease-fire and holding of a “special election” in

July 1997. During the elections, Charles Taylor emerged as the winner, with more than

75% of the total votes cast.

Charles Taylor won the elections by a large majority, primarily due to the following

reasons: firstly, there was a widespread intimidation by former fighters loyal to him, and

secondly, many of the voters believed that Taylor's forces would have resumed fighting if

he had lost the election. Taylor‟s victory is also attributed to the failure of the alliance of

political parties to push forth a single presidential candidate, and also the desire of some

Liberians to entrust Taylor with the responsibilities of rebuilding the nation which was

mainly destroyed due to his insurrection.

43 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

However, the euphoria was short-lived due to the repressive regime of Taylor. The new

Taylor government, like Samuel Doe‟s regime, became extremely autocratic, exploitative

and marginalized the majority of the population (Duworko 2008:18). Regarding the

plundering of the natural resources, S. Kpanbayeazee Duworko citing the Forestry

Concession Review Committee (2005), said that there was:

“Widespread noncompliance and pervasive mismanagement in the forest sector,

as exemplified by the over 64 million dollars in tax arrears accumulated by

concession holders and the fact that the combined land area allocated for forest

concessions over the last twenty-five years was two and a half times the forested

surface area of the entire country (Duworko 2008:18)

The Charles Taylor led government, was no different from past regimes. It exhibited the

tactics and methods of the past regimes including rampant corruption, human rights

abuses, torture, arbitrary arrests and detention of civilians. Also, an alliance between

Taylor and Foday Sankor, the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) leader in Sierra Leone

resulted in Liberia‟s involvement in Sierra Leone‟s civil war.

In an attempt to dispose the new government of Taylor, renewed fighting broke-out in the

country. The new insurgencies were led by Liberians United for Reconciliation and

Democracy (LURD) and the Movement for Democracy in Liberia (MODEL), both of

whom received support from Guinea and Ivory Coast respectively. As the insurgents

spread in the country and the security situation in Liberia, including the capital Monrovia,

44 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

was at its worst since the first rebel insurgency in 1999, nationwide state of emergency

was imposed by Taylor.

By the middle of 2003, Charles Taylor “had been weakened considerably by the military

pressure of the LURD and MODEL insurgencies, coupled with the political and

economic isolation resulting from U.N. sanctions imposed” due to his role in fomenting

Sierra Leone‟s civil war, and finally agreed for peace talks in 2003 (Pham 2006:2).

Under pressure from the international community, President Charles Taylor handed

power to his vice president and left for exile in Nigeria. This was arranged through the

efforts of some African leaders.

In August 2003, a peace agreement was signed in Accra, Ghana, marking the end of a

protracted violent conflict and a beginning of a new era of post-conflict reconstruction in

Liberia. The peace agreement and the establishment of transitional government in 2003

paved the way for general and presidential elections in 2005. The Unity Party (UP)

Standard Bearer, Mrs. Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf was declared President.

3.2 Ending the War: The Role of ECOWAS and UN

As the brutal civil war spread throughout the country and the killings and atrocities

continued to rise, the cry for external help by the Liberians became louder and louder.

But at the time, when the conflict captured the attention of the world in 1990, the

international community was mainly focused on a much larger problem, the invasion of

Kuwait by Iraq (UN 1996:13). Therefore, in the absence of decisive action from the

45 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

United Sates government and the rest of the international community including the

United Nations, and in the face of continued atrocities and mayhem in the country, it was

ECOWAS, the sub-regional body that intervened in the Liberian conflict. At the 13th

ECOWAS submit in May 1990, a Standing Mediation Committee was established to

examine ways of resolving first the Liberian conflict, and then other conflicts that were

brewing in the sub-region. There was also an invitation from President Doe requesting his

colleagues to come to his rescue by sending troops to Liberia (Alao et al 1999:29).

The West African States under the auspices of the Economic Community of West

African States (ECOWAS) decided in 1990 to provide military intervention, to save the

Liberian nation from descending further into anarchy. They formed the Economic

Community of West African States Ceasefire Monitoring Group (ECOMOG),

ECOWAS‟ military observer group and dispatched them to Liberia, with the aim that it

would keep an arranged peace between the factions. Significantly, but unfortunately, the

coming of ECOMOG to Liberia (Operation Liberty) did not meet the consent of NPFL,

nor a prior ceasefire agreement. Not surprisingly therefore, the multinational force had

hardly disembarked from the naval whey they came under a barrage of artillery on

August 24, 1990 from NPFL, which had opposed their intervention.

Following sustained casualties of ECOMOG upon its arrival on August 24, 1990 after it

had been attacked by the NPFL, ECOWAS reacted by swapping its white helmets for

green berets - from peace keeping to peace enforcement. The operation quickly became

46 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

enforcement rather than a mere act of self-defense as the multinational troops proceeded

to push the NPFL forces out of gun range of Monrovia (Alao et al 1999:30).

Major General Joshua Dogonyaro of Nigeria, the new force commander who replaced

Lieutenant General Arnold Quainor of Ghana, after he had been discredited by events

leading to the capture and death of former President Doe, ordered the troops to bomb

targets in Taylor‟s territory. This act was considered by some Liberians as a break of

ECOMOG‟s impartiality, and looked upon as the entry of another warring faction in the

Liberian war. “It can be argued that ECOMOG lost its status of a regional peacekeeping

force on several occasions between 1990 – 1996 and allied with AFL against the NPFL”

(Lehtinen 2000:147). Units of AFL and ULIMO fought alongside ECOMOG to defend

the city of Monrovia. It is believed that ECOMOG was also involved in illicit business

dealings after the capture of Buchanan from NPFL in 1993 (ACCORD 1996:15). The

alliance between ECOMOG and the warring factions weakened its desire neutrality.

These unfolding events in Liberia especially related to the conduct of ECOMOG

operation particularly after the “Operation Octopus” (at the time when Monrovia was

attacked by NPFL from eight different positions); set the stage for a stronger intervening

organization that was needed to take the peace process to a higher plane. It is in response

to this demand that the United Nations Observer Mission in Liberia (UNOMIL) was

established by the Security Council in September 1993 (Alao et al 1999:29-37). The

mandate of United Nations Observer Mission in Liberia (UNOMIL) was basically to

review the disarmament and demobilization of factions following the peace agreements,

47 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

by playing a supervisory role. Following the Abuja agreement in 1996, both ECOMOG

and UNOMIL successfully carried out the disarmament and demobilization of fighters

which led to the 1997 elections.

Finally, following the second phase of the civil war in August 2003, Taylor accepted to

relinquish power and sought asylum in Nigeria which paved the way for the United

Nations Peace Keeping Force (UNMIL) to intervene in Liberia. A transition of interim

government was set up in 2003. This paved way for the general elections in 2005, which

brought Ellen Johnson Sirleaf to power as the 23rd

President of Liberia.

From the start of the civil war, many actors both national and international played key

roles in ending the war. More than thirty (30) peace conferences and many peace

agreements were held all directed towards ending of the civil war. The Liberian Inter-

Faith Mediation Committee, comprising both Muslims and Christian organizations and

churches, was the first to start the process of ending the war in early 1990 (Pajibi 2008:8).

These peace conferences and agreements led to the establishment of the interim

governments, deploying of ECOMOG, holding of special elections in 1997, sending of

UN Peace Keepers in 2003 and the holding of general elections in 2005 which finally

ended the war in Liberia.

3.3 The Aftermath of the Violence on the Liberian Society

The 14-year brutal civil war in Liberia has been rated as one of the worst in Africa. An

estimated 300,000 people died and more than one million Liberians were internally

48 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

displaced while many others were forced to migrate to neighboring countries, especially

to Guinea, Ghana, Sierra Leone and Ivory Coast. Almost the whole population of Liberia

had to flee once or several times during the 14 years of carnage.

There were a series of massacres of civilians, ethnic cleansing, and cases of pregnant

women eviscerated, and massive physical destruction of the country. The carnage and

other heinous crimes committed by the various rebel factions and government militias,

affected every sector of the Liberian society, depopulated the rural areas, severely

disrupted traditional social systems and structures, and completely shattered state

institutions. The war has left most of the population with inner wounds, so severe that

people today are deeply affected by their traumatic experiences. Many valuable

properties were destroyed or stolen while many youths and children were recruited into

the fighting forces.

The number of civilian casualties during the war grew progressively and civilians formed

by far the greatest number of casualties for more than a decade, either as direct victims of

hostilities, or as a consequence of disruption and deprivation following military attack.

Civilians became the primary war targets. The focus of the violence on civilian was either

geared towards settling old scores or as a means of revenge. There were systematic cases

of rape and abuse of women and girls, incidents of cannibalism, arson and widespread

use of children as soldiers by all factions. Rival groups of militias attacked civil

communities far more frequently than they attacked each other, as a way of measuring

their power by their control of local population (Alao et.al 1999: 5).

49 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

The civil conflict severely suffocated the socio–economic and political order of the

country. The nation‟s economy remained unstable; the agriculture sector was seriously

destabilized, while prices of commodities escalated and unemployment spiraled high.

Poverty became widespread as living standards declined especially among the poorer

segments of the society.

Nearly all Liberians who are either home or in the Diasporas, have felt the consequences

of the civil war either directly or indirectly. The consequences have either been

psychological, social, emotional, or physical. Many people are living with wounds deep

in their minds. This atrocious process has shattered the lives of people leaving behind

feelings of hatred, trauma, mistrust, loss of value, and self- esteem.

These traumatic experiences are one of the long-term effects of the war on the Liberian

people. For example, traumatized children, who witnessed murder and physical abuse of

family members, friends, classmates and teachers in school premises, continue to

experience serious delusion. Many of these children today relate the school premises to

killing grounds from which they seek emotional escape by dropping out.

Therefore from the preceding discussion, it is quite clear that the consequences of the war

and instability in Liberia pose a serious challenge to healing, reconciliation, peace and

stability in the country.

50 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

CHAPTER 4

LIBERIA TODAY - CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES

“Peace agreements … do not in themselves end wars or bring about lasting

peace. In most cases, pre-war continuities and the war mentality jeopardize the

prospects of a consolidated peace and post-war reconciliation”

(David J. Francis 2000:357).

Liberia as a nation faces numerous challenges in the peace building process, as she

strives to build sustainable peace and promote reconciliation following the shadows of a

devastating civil conflict. Four years after Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf was elected president,

peace in Liberia remains fragile. The society is still grappling with the nightmares and

consequences of the war. The physical, social, and psychological damages inflicted on

the communities by the civil strife, remain a heavy burden on the nation and its

population.

There are formidable challenges facing the country amid efforts to break the endless

cycle of violence; restore civic trust, and build genuine peace and reconciliation. Crucial

to this, is the promotion of national and human security, the peaceful reintegration of ex-

combatants and returnees, and building of a participatory democracy and rule of law for

the establishment of credible institutions for an effective peace building process. These

challenges, if not addressed appropriately, can be a recipe for renewed instability and

violence in the country. However, it is worthy to note that amid these challenges, are also

51 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

windows of opportunity that offer a set of new prospects that can be grasped to lift

Liberia to another level. This chapter takes a closer look at the issues raised above.

4.1 Fundamental Challenges to Peace and Stability in Liberia

Liberia faces several challenges today in her attempt to break the cycle of violence and

build peace in the country. Crucial among these challenges is security; seen from both

national and human perspective. Despite significant strides that have been made in the

disarmament of ex-fighters and the restructuring of the nation‟s security institutions, it is

visible that the levels of lawlessness have spiraled upwards and deserve specific

attention.

In spite of the fact that the threat of a renewed armed conflict in the country has

decreased, the rise in crimes in the society today presents significant threats to individual

security and the country‟s future stability and peace (GoL 2008:47). The presence and

circulation of small arms and light weapons (SALW) is overwhelming, despite the fact

that during the process of Disarmament, Demobilization, Rehabilitation and

Reintegration (DDRR) and the restructuring of the security forces, many ex-combatants

and ex-servicemen handed in their arms. But the disarmament of some others with guns

proved difficult, especially for those in inaccessible rural areas (www.unddr.org). These

hidden small arms and light weapons are now used for a range of crimes - from armed

robberies to cross-border criminal activities in the country and the sub-region

(Zounmenou 2008:7).

52 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

The fact that stability is a precondition for peace, recovery and development, there is no

doubt therefore that, national security in Liberia remains of paramount concern, and for

this reason deserves a specific attention. For peace to be nurtured and sustained, security

is a prerequisite, because according to Amos Sawyer (2003), “Peace-building and

security are interlocked and mutually reinforcing.” Therefore, if nothing is done to

remedy these threats of insecurities in the country, it is likely that they could potentially

threaten the gains that have been made in consolidating the peace in Liberia and the sub-

region.

Additionally, the peaceful reintegration of ex-combatants and returnees into the society

remains another major hurdle to peace and stability in the country. Nearly six years after

the end of the civil war, the government of Liberia is still grappling with the problem of

reinsertion and reintegration of ex-combatants. Although rehabilitation and reintegration

phase of ex-combatants has ended, some of the ex-fighters are yet to be reintegrated into

the society, because funding for reintegration and reinsertion diminished during the

disarmament and demobilization phase. Hence, failure by government to reintegrate into

society the ex-fighters some of whom have retained their weapons, could be a strong

force to reckon with when new political problem emerge.

Since the peace agreement in 2003, a sizeable number of Internally Displaced Persons

(IDPs), many of whom are still traumatized have returned home. Even though the process

is still ongoing, the return of the formerly internally displaced persons has been a source

of retraumatization to both returnees and community members. The reintegration of

53 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

returnees‟ into the communities has been marked by several sensitive questions ranging

from: Who took my land and looted my property? Who damaged my house? Who

murdered members of my family? Whose brothers or sisters were fighters? Whose

daughters and sons married ex-combatants? Who harvested my crops? Who raped my

sister or mother (www.caritas.org)? These sensitive questions, if not dealt with

peacefully, may give rise to further conflict and violence at the community level and

undermine the process of reintegration and stability in the country.

In addition to the problems of reinsertion and reintegration of ex-combatants and the re-

traumatization of returnees, disputes over land and property are also some of the hurdles

associated with the reintegration process. According to GoL (2008:49):

“Persistent disputes and illegal occupation of private land holdings as a

consequence of war-related movements of people threaten to spark off endless

inter-personal conflicts and over-burden the already weak local and national

conflict resolution mechanisms.”

Therefore the crisis of reintegration regarding returnees, which is one of the fundamental

challenges to peace and security in the country, needs to be given serious attention if

there is to be peace and stability.

54 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Last but not least, the building of participatory democracy and rule of law in post-war

Liberia remains one of the crucial challenges to peace and stability. This is because, the

origin of most conflicts across the globe, including the Liberian war, can significantly be

traced from the mauling of democratic institutions and processes, as well as

marginalization of the population for a long period of time, leading to economic

deprivation and misery (Rogers 2006:13). As such, with the horrible past of the country,

another consequence of bad governance and marginalization, with the concentration of

power in few hands could lead to another round of fighting and instability in the country.

4.2 Windows of Opportunity for Peace and Development

Despite the numerous hurdles facing post-war peace-building in Liberia, it is also

worthwhile to realize that the post-war era offers a set of new prospects and

opportunities, not only to rebuild the damaged institutions and communities, but also for

reforming the systems and structures that have operated unfairly in the past. It is likely

that these institutions, systems and structures were among the factors that contributed

greatly to the outbreak of the violence. Thus, reforming them may contribute to political,

social, and economic stability, as well as peaceful coexistence and harmony. Cardinal

among the opportunities that could serve as stepping stones for the reinvention of Liberia

include: the restructuring and reforming of the security institutions, the emergence of a

strong civil society, and the presence of traditional based-family system.

Although the Liberian security institutions have lost public confidence because of the

tainted roles they played in the past, the extent to which the present security institutions

55 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

are restructured and reformed, it is likely that they will gradually regain public

confidence. Presently, the general populace enjoys security protection that is mainly

reliant upon United Nations Mission In Liberia‟s (UNMIL) resources and supporting

expertise, while the restructuring process of the security agencies - a major priority to

government and its international partners, is on-going (GoL 2008:43). To beef up the

security, a special unit of police has been created and armed, to combat the high rate of

serious and violent crimes in the country.

The restructuring and re-training of the security apparatus within the framework of a

comprehensive national security policy are strategic steps towards the building of a stable

and effective security environment. This is because this process has added new values

such as transparency and respect for human rights to the agencies that would enable them

to be more effective and accountable not only to the state, but also to its citizens.

However, given the magnitude of the conflict in Liberia, this reforming process should

focus on not only the military, but on all institutions that are authorized to use force, as

well as the judiciary, and provide them with the needed logistics for proper functioning.

There is also a great need to revisit and amend the Legislative Acts that established the

agencies to avoid overlapping of duties which often lead to friction, unnecessary tensions,

conflict and in-fighting within the sector (Jaye 2006:9).

It is also time for the nation to revitalize, create or transform its laws and institutions that

were destroyed or undermined during the course of the brutality. In this perspective,

56 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Liberia stands a great chance to be not only physically reconstructed, but also

comprehensively and conclusively rebuilding and restoring its political and social

structures and institutions, although this is an immense challenge. Nevertheless, this

requires combined national efforts to forge a stronger national identity and focus efforts

on reducing poverty, promoting national and human security, and averting a return to

conflict for peace and national reconciliation (UN 2006:iv).

The elected government, with continued support from the international community has

provided many Liberians, who have for so long suffered war and oppression, with

renewed optimism to seize the opportunities and rebuild a better country. We, as

Liberians, now have a chance to rebuild our country and to seize new opportunities to

build a better life (UN 2006: IV). But in my view, this optimism will be short lived

without a dedicated national effort.

Furthermore, the contributions of international partners and national revenue for post-war

development programs will depend greatly on the ability of government to manage

effectively. This is because good, transparent, and accountable governance is necessary

for the success of post-war reconstruction of Liberia. However, failure by state

institutions to proper manage the resources and respond to the basic needs of the citizenry

will be a major set back to the process of post-war recovery and reconstruction in Liberia

(Zoumenou 2008:13).

57 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

In addition to the restructuring of the security apparatus and the reinvention of a new

Liberia, the emergence of a strong Civil Society in the country remains another great

opportunity for post-war Liberia. The Civil Society Organizations continued to play an

active role in peace building efforts in Liberia. The Liberian Civil Society‟s visibility and

influence in peace building, national reconciliation, democratization, and conflict

prevention have grown, and have become essential forces in discourses, initiatives and

programs that foster peace and reconciliation in the country (Ekiyor 2008:27).

The Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) have continued to play a vital role as primary

providers of basic social services where public institutions and state apparatus are non-

existent or weakened, and have also become a symbol of hope for the hopeless. Even

though the Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) have at times been accused of aligning

themselves with warring factions and assumed political positions; this does not diminish

the positive contributions other CSOs have made and continued to make in promoting

peace and preventing conflict in Liberia (Ekiyor 2008:28).

The Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) have also played a key role in addressing socio-

economic disparities in the society by assisting with humanitarian aid, promoting social

justice, human rights and reconciliatory activities in the country (Ekiyor 2008:28). They

remain a unifying force in the society and continue to raise awareness about the

protection of human rights. They also shape public opinions, encourage public debates,

and advocate for democratic transformation in the society (Toure 2002:2).

58 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Lastly, the presence of the Traditional Based-Family System remains an opportunity for

post-war peace building in Liberia. “Traditional indigenous societies, by their very nature

tend to be communal, collective and more prone to foster an atmosphere of peaceful co-

existence” (Conteh-Morgan 2005:78). Although the civil war has destroyed the physical

infrastructure built during more than a century, the “traditional-based family system” still

remains the nation's bedrock through which peace and reconciliation can be fostered.

This collective community way of life and humane living is characterized by the

cherished values of the traditional African life, especially in Liberia (Ejizu 1989).

The use of traditional ways of life and traditional values in promoting peace and

reconciliation in the country, may result in a more communal grassroots involvement, and

thereby contribute substantially to a holistic peace building process (Conteh-Morgan

2005:78-79). This is because in the traditional-based family system, the members of the

society have obligations to others that stretch beyond those to whom they are related to.

According to Professor John Mbiti, a renowned African theologian, in the African

tradition:

“The individual does not and cannot exist alone except corporately, and whatever

happens to the individual is believed to happen to the whole group, and whatever

happens to the whole group happens to the individual. The individual can only

say: "I am because we are, and since we are, therefore I am.” This is an

important point in the understanding the African view of man" (Mbiti 1990:106)

59 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

From the quote above, there is a reason to believe that the traditional-based family system

remains an opportunity for the nation. Additionally, according to a Liberian adage,

“There is no bad bush for a child.” This implies that, although the war has created

divisions and broken relationships, and has also produced many ex-combatants who have

harmed their communities and families, there is no way that the society can neglect them

because of the connections either by relations, clans, institutions or traditions that bind

them together. This approach to peace building, in my opinion is very supportive,

because the society views conflict as a communal issue and handling such conflicts

becomes the collective responsibility of everyone in the society.

More besides, in the process of reconciliation and peaceful coexistence after war, it is the

family that plays the most important role, because the process of reconciliation in most

cases starts at the family and community levels. Most of the time, the return of ex-

fighters into communities after war, is mediated by their families through traditional

means (UNESCO 1995). Although families do not make most of the decisions which

begin war, they end up carrying the heaviest burdens for the resolution of the conflict and

reintegration of the victims of war. This is because the family is the first point of entry

and a symbol of peace, unity and humility. Family feeling is the first point of unity and

reconciliation. For this reason, the involvement of the family in the process of

reconciliation and peace-building in Liberia becomes an opportunity for the nation.

Today, throughout Liberia, the family has become an influential voice through which an

advisory message is sounded. Parents, guardians and the family at large are ensuring that

60 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

their sons and daughters do not go back to war and violence, not only for this generation

but also for future generations. Therefore, by strengthening the family voice in the

country, I am of the opinion that, the cycle of violence will be broken and replaced by the

culture of peace for peaceful coexistence, harmony and reconciliation

In sum, the ending the war in Liberia through the Accra peace Accord in 2003 does not

mean the achievement of genuine peace, but certainly the ending of the war offers a set of

new prospects and opportunities that can be grasped to move the country to the path of

stability, sustainable peace, national reconciliation, and development. In my opinion, in

order to remedy the problems that are challenging peace and stability in the country, there

is a need for a dual process. There is a need to take advantage of the existing peaceful

structures and grasp the windows of opportunity in the country, while at the same time

trying to tackle the challenges to peace earlier mentioned. This, I believe, with the

sincere involvement of everyone in the country, will remedy the problems, break the

prolonged cycle of violence and promote lasting peace, healing, reconciliation, and

sustainable development in post-war Liberia.

61 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

CHAPTER 5

BREAKING THE VICIOUS CYCLE OF VIOLENCE IN LIBERIA

“I killed the man because he killed my father when I was a child, but now I have

realized my mistake. I know the man‟s child will kill me and my child will do the

same. So it is a cycle of killing we have practiced. I want an end to this cycle”

(Ex-combatant - Uganda).

In the wake of violence, there is not only a desire of victims to retaliate, but there also lies

a desire of the perpetrators to continue this cycle of violence for more victories. This is

because when violence between groups‟ stops and the attitudes of members of the groups

toward each other are not transformed, the violence often recurs (Galtung 2004:186). As

a result, it is impossible for healing and reconciliation to occur in such a society if the

people are not healed and the cycle of violence, (the aggression-revenge cycle) is not

broken (Azar et al 1999:170). Creating a Culture of Healing and Peace in Liberia

therefore becomes essential if the cycle of violence is to be broken and significant

advances toward reconciliation and peace is to be achieved.

5.1 Creating a Culture of Healing

After violence, the relief that the violence is over could make people blind to the invisible

and long-lasting consequences of the violence such as, trauma and the desire for more

glory and revenge (Galtung 1996:13). This is why whenever a nation suffers from

violence and episodes of war, it becomes crucial to establish a systematic approach to

62 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

healing of the entire population, both victims and perpetrators affected by the violence by

creating a culture of healing. The Culture of Healing is a recovery process of society that

creates necessary conditions that attempt to heal the larger population – both victims and

perpetrators from their damaging consequences of the violence.

The process of healing or the creation of health, whether biological or psychological, is

synonymous with the creation of unity: the establishment of a dynamic equilibrium

within us, and our interactions with the world (Danesh et al 2007:279). If individual and

community healing are seen to be the societal equivalent of unity or harmony, then their

illness, the opposite of healing, could be seen to equate to disease or disunity. Taking the

individual and community „healing/unity‟ and „disease/disunity‟ allegory further, it could

be argued then, that an unhealed society is an unhealthy society as well.

The process of healing is the act of creating unity in all aspects of the human individual

and community life - physical, emotional, social and spiritual (Danesh et al 2007:279). It

helps to improve the psychological well-being of individuals, repair and rebuild

communities and the social context (Bloomfield et al 2005:77).

The concept, “Culture of Healing,” refers to the creation of environments in which the

psychological, moral and spiritual wounds and trauma sustained as a result of severe

conflict, violence and war are gradually healed (Danesh 2006:73). It is a recovery process

of society which creates necessary conditions that attempt to heal the larger population –

both victims and perpetrators from their damaging consequences of the violence (Danesh

63 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

2008:3). As people who have been affected by severe war traumas, the process of healing

is very painful and difficult, but also very important to pave way for the rebuilding and

reconstruction of our nation (Lindqvist 2002:19).

The first step toward a Culture of Healing lies in the understanding that societal trauma

has a lasting impact on the entire cultures. A culture of healing begins by realizing that

some of the existing problems and violence within the society may be attributed to

collective traumas of the society (Famula 2007:82). Therefore, trauma healing constitutes

the first step to recovery without which, it is impossible for traumatized Liberians to

address their conflicts constructively (Scherg 2003:12).

“Trauma healing on the collective level means that a society tackles past wrongs (the

“traumatizing events”) and addresses its wars and pre-war past,” which is the first step to

overcoming the causes of conflict, and reducing conflict potential on a long-term basis

(Scherg 2003:12). Helping to heal those psychologically traumatized Liberians will

certainly take many forms including trauma healing, direct aid, community-based

communization programs, building of infrastructure, rebuilding of houses, schools,

hospitals etc., the fulfillment of basic needs, and the rehabilitation and development of

the socio-political system (Scherg 2003:18, Maynard 1999:189).

“Trauma healing is closely related to peace building efforts; both are ultimately about

developing or restoring healthy human relationships” (Gutlove et al 2003:13). The

primary aims of trauma healing program are to give victims feeling that they have control

64 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

over their lives once again and to assist the affected populations by building upon their

strengths so they can regain their full functioning capacities. This process is geared

toward decreasing of isolation, anger, and the feelings of animosity toward others in the

society (RECONCILE 2008).

Trauma is usually considered horrific for an individual but it does have some positive

effects derived from a successful process of recovery. For example, some victims who

have recovered from trauma can develop a high motivation achievement, and are able to

cope with life challenges much better. In some cases, both victims and perpetrators who

have recovered from trauma often serve as “good counselors” to other traumatized people

in the society (UNESCO 1999:24-25). From this scenario, it can be argued that, a

“wounded healer” is also a “good healer.”

One of the greatest challenges of healing a large population and many communities, as in

the case of Liberia, is the task of creating healthy relationships among the people in the

society. This is because, healing of a large population “rests on the idea that unity

building at intrapersonal, interpersonal and inter-group levels and is the main instrument

for healing from violence-induced traumatic conditions” (Danesh 2008:10). This process

of community healing and societal recovery requires the individual and community

involvement, as well as the participation of the government, and the civil society. All

stakeholders must be involved, and all elements of the healing process need to be present.

65 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

If post-war societies in Liberia are to grow in peaceful manner, the hostile parties

ultimately have to find ways to heal, reconcile or at least find forms of peaceful co-

existence, bearing in mind that peaceful co-existence demands a change of perspective

(Scherg 2003:12). “Each party must be capable of putting itself in the other‟s position,

understanding and sympathizing with the other‟s needs, interests and positions,” because

addressing conflicts without empathy and compassion will certainly not reach the

emotional level required, and will not be sustainable (Scherg 2003:12).

“Therefore, healing deep-seated antagonism or changing ideologies of

antagonism through various types of interactive conflict resolution procedures

can contribute to reconciliation. …Members of each group can describe the pain

and suffering of their group at the hands of the other…they can grieve for

themselves…they can begin to grieve for the others as well. Members of each

group can acknowledge the role of their own group in harming the other. Mutual

acknowledgement of responsibility can lead to mutual forgiving” (Staub 1998).

Healing from trauma certainly reduces pain, enables people to live constructive lives, and

reduces the likelihood of violence by victims and thus a continuing cycle of violence in

society (Staub 1998)

The foundations of the culture of healing for post war Liberia should be based on the

establishment of mutual trust between victims and perpetrators within the framework of

unity-based worldview. Culture of healing also seeks the provision of basic human needs

66 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

and rights for all members of the society, and the presence of conditions of hope and

optimism for a better future (Danesh 2008:10; Danesh et al 2007:310). Moreover, the

ability of a society to forgive, reconcile and resolve future conflicts through peaceful

dialogue is an important process of the culture of healing.

To sum up, the ability of survivors to love and forgive is what sustains the process of

healing and reconciliation when all else fails. This process helps a society to recover, re-

discover and develop a new vision for the future. As Winston Churchill (1874 – 1965)

puts it, if the human race, especially Liberians, wish to have a prolonged and indefinite

period of material prosperity, they have only got to behave in a peaceful and helpful way

toward one another.

5.2 Creating a Culture of Peace

“Today there is no longer a choice between violence and nonviolence. It is either

nonviolence or nonexistence. I feel that we have to look at this total thing anew

and recognize that we must live together peacefully. That the whole world

including our nation is one – not only geographically but it has become one in

terms of brotherly concern and oneness of humanity” (Martin Luther King Jr.,

cited by Patrick J. Harvey 2009:1, emphasis added).

Peace, once defined as the absence of war or all forms of direct violence, is now seen as

much broader and dynamic process, especially for post war-society. For many people,

peace in the context of a post-war nation is just more than the absence of hostilities, but

as the presence of harmony, maintenance of an orderly and just society, and a sense of

67 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

human belongingness. Peace is also sometimes defined by some scholars as the meeting

of all of one‟s basic needs and an inner sense of calm. However, peace is more than a

feeling of calm, an absence of violence, and the meeting of basic needs. It is the presence

of justice, love, equality, and unity in all aspects of life.

“The expression “Culture of Peace” presumes that peace is a way of being, doing and living in

society that can be taught, developed, and best of all, improved upon”

(www.unac.org/peacecp/intro/index.html). A “culture of peace” as a concept, is referred

to as, “an environment in which the principles of equality, justice, individual and group

safety, security and freedom in the context of ethical, lawful, and democratic practices are

the norms” (Danesh 2008:7). UNESCO (1995:16) also adds that “a culture of peace

consists of values, attitudes, behaviors and ways of life based on non-violence and

respect for fundamental rights and freedom of every person.” In such a society where

this culture exists, all human rights are extended to "benefit the entire human family," in

all its dimensions, as opposed to the culture of war in which rights only benefit

exclusively a tribe or a ruling class at the expense of the majority (http://www.sfr-

21.org/cop.html).

By creating a culture of peace which is “peace in action,” will enable Liberians to resolve

problems through dialogue, negotiation and mediation, all based on non-violence

principles so that war and violence are no longer possible in the society

(www.unac.org/peacecp/intro/index.html). Through this process, the “enemy images”

will be transcended and superseded by tolerance, mutual trust, harmony and respect for

each other‟s culture and moral values in the society (http://www.sfr-21.org/cop.html).

http://www.unac.org/peacecp/intro/index.html

http://sfr-21.org/humanrights.html

http://www.sfr-21.org/cop.html




68 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

The process of creating a culture of peace in Liberia is not only meant to resolve current

conflicts, but to also create a situation in which disputes arising do not lead to violence

(Hinde & Parry 1989:7). Conflict transformation in this context involves community-

level activities that attempt to directly and positively affect inter-identity relationships,

and to enhance the prospects of peaceful coexistence among community members

(Maynard 1999:178). The process is also intended to empower Liberians with relevant

skills and knowledge, and improve their dispute handling capacities in order to handle

conflict nonviolently in the society.

Conflict transformation activities in Liberia will mainly alleviate tensions and provide a

voice to underlying grievances that otherwise may not be articulated. These programs

will legitimize, support and give power to individuals and groups working in concert

toward inter-identity relationships. Through the process of sustained dialogue, Liberians

in turn, will begin to redraw lines of moral behaviors and create boundaries for tolerance

of hostile acts (Maynard 1999:179). This process will also facilitate the group decision

making and enhance the democratization process in the country.

The main building blocks of a culture of peace in the Liberian society ought to be the:

unity-based worldview, consciousness of the oneness of humanity, and peaceful

resolution of conflicts (Danesh et al 2007:287). The unity-based or peace-based

worldview is based on the recognition that humanity is one and that the oneness of

humanity is expressed in diversity (Danesh et al 2007: 38 & 306). It is also based on

positive humane relationships in which life is viewed as a web of interrelations and

69 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

interconnections. This type of worldview believes in the right relationship with self,

others, and the larger group. Therefore, creating a culture of peace in Liberia will mean

creating a society that is unified and peaceful.

According to UNESCO (1995:19), a culture of peace can only flourish in a society where

the roots of violence are destroyed and replaced by other positive alternatives including:

economic security and development, political security and democracy, military security

and disarmament, and development of global solidarity. The process of a culture of peace

in any society is also marked by sharing and free flow of information to ensure

transparency and the contribution of everyone. The full participation and empowerment

of women as an integral approach, is essential to the promotion of a culture of peace in

post-war Liberia.

Human security is indeed an essential element of a culture of peace. It aims to protect

people‟s vital freedoms – protecting them from critical and pervasive threats. It means

using processes that build on people‟s strengths and aspirations. It also means creating

systems that together give people the building blocks of survival, dignity and livelihood

(www.humansecurity-chs.org). Human security aims to empower people, to develop

their potentials and become full participants in decision-making process in the society

(UNESCO 1995:186).

http://www.humansecurity-chs.org/

70 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

To achieve a genuine and sustainable peace in Liberia and create a culture of peace, it is

necessary to create a situation in which disputes arising do not inflame violence. For this

purpose, peace education must play an important role in shaping of individual modes of

behavior for the development of positive values, attitudes and aptitudes for peaceful

coexistence. According to Nina Meyerhof (2006), “peace education is not the history of

peacemaking, but the capacity to create peace in one‟s environment while standing for

truth, justice and self preservation.” Peace education, which is peace by peaceful means,

does not teach people what to think, but rather it develops people capacities to think, to

reject all forms of violence and make violence an unacceptable option among individuals

in the society. Professor Danesh (2005:306) adds that, since every human person is

created with the inherent potential to develop his or her uniquely human capacities to

know, to love, and to choose, educating everyone for peace is indeed imperative for a

peaceful society.

According to Len Ellis (2008), a culture of peace cannot be dictated or demanded, but “it

requires the commitment of the whole society and must emerge from the grass-roots

level, seeding peace and nonviolence in the everyday dialogue and behavior of all

people.” This process therefore, should engage every aspect of social relations and sector

of the society, from the centers of power to the most remote villages in the country for

peaceful coexistence and healthy human relationships.

71 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

5.3 Developing a Leadership for Peace

If certain individual attributes or skills, are associated with peace-oriented leaders, the

critical question then would be, how can we cultivate these skills and attributes in the

leaders of post-war Liberia, for the promotion of peace, justice and harmony?

Throughout human history, many people have always associated leadership with power,

be it physical, economic, social, or psychological, and authority - the legitimate sanction

to use power. And in most cases, those leaders with power were often cruel and

destructive, having no regard for the principles of legitimate authority. Currently

however, a third indispensable element for effective leadership has been identified in

addition to power and authority. Many scholars believe that to be a good leader one

needs to also learn the principles and skills of leadership (Danesh & Danesh 2005:1).

In the past, it was often thought that the leadership role could be assumed or inherited,

but today, there is a long held view that leadership is something that can be learned. That

is, every individual can gain and learn the skills that are necessary to be good and

effective leaders (Danesh & Danesh 2005:1). According to many scholars, the capacity

for leadership is not in-born, but rather cultivated through education and constant

practices.

Today, ideas about leadership are continually involving and so are its definitions. For

example, Debra J. Jordan (1996) defines leadership as “the ability to help others meet

their goals.” Also, Marie Harmony (2002) defines leadership as “a process of getting

72 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

things done through people” (Danesh et al 2007:196). But as Danesh et al (2007:196)

observe, these definitions of leadership do not provide sufficient measure of true

leadership for some reasons. Firstly, if leadership is simply the process of “getting things

done through people,” then Adolph Hitler and Mahatma Gandhi, or Idi Amin and Nelson

Mandela could be compared by equal measures. Secondly, if leadership were simply

about “helping others meet their goals,” then helping terrorists to bomb a public facility

would be accounted equal. But this is not the case, because a True or Peace-Oriented

Leadership is based on truth, justice and unity (Danesh et al 2007:196).

Peace-Oriented Leadership creates a civilization of peace and seeks to promote the

oneness, nobility, equality, justice, freedom and peace for all members of the society and

humanity (Danesh et al 2007:207). It is characterized by dedication, sincerity in word and

deeds, honesty and courtesy, as we as trustworthiness, accountability, humility and

kindness. Furthermore, it is based on service, self sacrifice, uprightness and moderation

of conduct.

Leadership for peace “is the process of leading people to the source of all good.”

(Danesh et al 2007:209). Leaders for peace are people who are serving their societies

with humility for the welfare of both their people and the entire human race. Leadership

for peace also aims at creating justice, peace, prosperity, and happiness of the people of a

society.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idi_Amin

73 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Peace Leadership is not just about leading people in any manner or heading of an entity,

organization or institution. “A leader for peace is someone whose capacities for

knowledge, love, and will are awakened, are aligned with ethical principles, are

harmonized and brought into focus through conscious reflection” (Danesh et al

2007:210). “Being a leader for peace means „taking the lead‟ in your own life to

understand the importance of unity, service, and justice and to bring these principles into

being through actions” (Danesh et al 2007:209).

“What distinguishes leaders for peace is their vision of the possibility of universal human

well-being and justice, and their courage to faithfully and responsibly live by the ethical

standards of that vision, even when others do not” (Danesh et al 2007:209). Leaders for

peace inspire others by their sincerity, humility, and conviction and they plant the seeds

of transformation in the hearts and minds of those whom they meet and serve. Such

leaders produce positive effects in the world, and influence others to create a culture of

peace (Danesh et al 2007:209 - 210).

In conclusion, although everyone in Liberia may have some ability to lead, everyone can

be a better leader through education for peace. Through „Education for peace‟ in Liberia,

every Liberian both young and old, will use their capacities, talents and energies in

service for the promotion of peace, justice and harmony for all Liberians and the world at

large.

74 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

CHAPTER 6

RECONCILIATION: FROM A CONCEPT TO PRACTICE

“A terrible truth of human life is that we must live with those who have wronged

us and with those whom we have wronged” (Mary C. Rawlingson 2006:139).

“Why do we need to address the scars of the past? Why do we need to think of the past,

to recall and remember some of the most difficult disturbing moments in our own lives

and the recent history of our country” (Fejic (2005:24)? Sometimes, we may either

prefer to let it go altogether and look at the future, or start building new democratic

systems and institutions. But there is a problem with such an attitude. The best

institutions and best democratic systems will not function properly if the population

remains deeply divided, and if the human relationships of the society are plagued with

pervasive fear, mistrust, and suspicion across ethnic, economic, generational and political

lines (Fejic 2005:24). Ultimately, the past must be addressed in order to reach the future.

Therefore reconciliation, if designed and implemented in a genuine and meaningful way,

is the means to do that for any post-war society including Liberia.

6.1 An Overview of Reconciliation

Human beings are intensely social species, highly dependent for their well-being on good

social relations with those around them. But the aims of normal individual human beings

are constantly conflicting with those of others, and in pursuit of our own goals, we

frequently do harm to each other in words, in physical violence, and so on (Santa-

75 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Barbara 2007:173). Following the harm, we however need to confront the past with the

present in order to be able to live together in harmony and peace. Confronting such a

horrible past in a reconciliatory way is very painful, but also very important for peaceful

coexistence, harmony and a shared vision for the future.

The term reconciliation, according to Krishna Kumar (1999:9), “derives from the Latin

expression „conciliatus’, which means “coming together.” Reconciliation is the act of

people coming together following separation. It is a process by which societies torn apart

by conflicts, try to mend their social fabrics and reconstitute the desire to live together

peacefully (Gloppen 2005:20). In short, reconciliation is a process through which a

society moves from a divided past to a shared future. The process entails coming to terms

with an imperfect reality which demands changes in our attitudes, our behaviors, our

aspirations, our emotions and feelings, perhaps even our beliefs. This is not only just a

process; it is a difficult and long-term process especially for a society that has

experienced a widespread violent conflict (Bloomfield 2003:13). This process however

applies to everyone, not just for those who suffered directly and those who inflicted the

sufferings; it is about the society as a whole.

One of the reasons why post-war reconciliation is very complex lies in the fact that it is at

the same time a goal – something to be achieved, and a process – a means of achieving

that goal. The goal, of course, is an ideal – a harmonious, reconciled society in peace with

itself, and with its neighbors. However, what is even more significant is the “process” -

how do the people involved move forward, what do they do to come closer to a

76 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

harmonious and peaceful society, capable of managing its differences through peaceful

dialogue and democratic means (Fejic 2005:25). Thus, the ensuing discussion explore on

the paths or approaches to reconciliation in post-war Liberia

6.2 Paths to Reconciliation in Post-war Liberia

“In the process of armed conflict, societies and the institutions which compromised them

break down. In the face of the violence, social rules and morality are threatened and a

type of “social anarchy” can occur” (Drummond 1999:8). In the wake of the social

anarchy, the process of reconciling and rebuilding healthy human relationships among

formerly estranged persons is multifaceted, involving several initiatives and strategies in

order to rebuild the social order. In Liberia for example, the process of building peace

and reconciling the traumatized population and communities to once again live side by

side in peace and harmony, undoubtedly requires many concrete processes of

reconciliation. Cardinal among them is the process of acknowledgement, forgiveness,

truth telling, restitution, justice, and institutional reforms.

Reconciliation by acknowledgement is a process of acknowledging the others. We

acknowledge the others through understanding the harm that has occurred through our

actions, either directly or indirectly. Acknowledgement of the others is widely viewed as

critical in the process of reconciliation in post-war society (Rey 2001:257). As such, if

genuine reconciliation is to be attained in post-war Liberia, the different sides of the

conflict must be able to relate to each other as humans in relationship.

77 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

“The traditional African concept of ubuntu describes the philosophy that a person is a

person through other persons, or I am human because you are human. If I undermine

your humanity, I will dehumanize myself” (Rey 2001:257). Therefore, acknowledging

the existence of the humanity of the others, after the protracted period of conflict in the

country, is indeed a necessary step to genuine reconciliation and harmony in Liberia.

In addition to acknowledgement, one of the important paths to reconciliation in post-war

Liberia is the process of forgiveness, without which there will be no future for the nation.

According to Archbishop Desmond Tutu, true reconciliation cannot be achieved in any

post-war society without the process of forgiveness. Forgiveness, which is one of the

most essential elements of reconciliation, is the ability to „let go‟ of the past, and to

„forgo‟ the quest for revenge. Forgiveness is also a process by which the offended parties

accept the offenders‟ acknowledgment of the wrong, together with the expression of

sorrow. In this way, the parties - both offenders and offended, are brought into a common

moral community (Rey 2001:258).

Forgiveness comes about when confession is made and followed by sincere apology from

the offender. This does not mean that the offended condones or accepts the behavior of

the offender, but rather to free oneself from ongoing psychological torture, thus clearing

the path by which one can seek justice that is motivated, not by revenge, but by the

pursuit of collective change and transformation in the society (Wink 1997:12). The

essence of forgiveness is to create the possibility for a relationship to recover from the

78 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

damage it suffers from. It is a process that benefits human social life by helping

relationships to heal.

Although forgiveness appears to be weak when offered, it leaves us feeling stronger and

less vulnerable. “Forgiveness is a gift to our own peace of mind, our self-esteem, our

relationships with others and our future. It frees us from entanglement in the past. It helps

us re-establish control over our lives by letting go of unpleasant events and people and by

reconnecting us with healthier, more positive people and directions” (Cloke 2001:94).

Although forgiveness does not change the past, it does enlarge the future.

Both forgiveness and reconciliation, which attempt to heal old wounds and break the

cycle of violence and hatred, is the work of a peacemaker. As such, peacemaking is one

of the most important skills that Liberians can cultivate to reinvent a new Liberia.

Certainly, the ability of Liberians to love and forgive one another is what will sustain the

process of healing and reconciliation, when all else fails.

Post-war reconciliation, for many scholars, necessarily includes the revealing of the

“truth.” According to Kader Asmal et al (1999:46), the heart of reconciliation “is the

facing of unwelcome truths in order to harmonize incommensurable worldviews, so that

the inevitable and continuing conflicts and differences stand at least within a single

universe of comprehensibility.” Accordingly, Reconciliation by truth is a process of

reconciliation where public disclosure of truth of the past becomes an accepted shared

truth of the society and leads to a closure of the past and of the cycle of denials (Oduru

79 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

2007:27). It is attained when the truth about the past is told and acknowledged by both

parties involved, leading to a closure of the ledger book of the past. A closure of the past

however, does not suggest that the past will be forgotten or denied, rather that it will be

remembered and processed in a manner that will not lead to or foment a renewed

violence, but an atmosphere of civility, tolerance and positive engagement (Oduru

2007:29). The pursuit of reconciliation by this process in Liberia will necessitate the

willingness and readiness of both victims and perpetrators to come forth and make known

the truth about the past for the sake of healing and sustainable peace.

Another essential path to reconciliation is the process of Restitution. Reconciliation by

restitution, which is one of the means of post-war reconciliation, primarily aims to

rehabilitate victims and open the possibility of bringing the laughter back to the next

generations. Therefore, for reconciliation to be sustained in Liberia, it is imperative that

the physical, psychological, and social damages caused by the past injustice be

acknowledged and repaired.

Since reconciliation by restitution requires changing the victims‟ situations, mechanisms

to bring about restitution (or restorative justice) in the society should include but not be

limited to compensation, provision of health services, symbolic restoration including

public monument, public apologies, and efforts to advance social reintegration at the

local community level in the country (Gloppen 2005:18).

80 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Ultimately, the aim of reconciliation by restitution is to return survivors to a better social

and economic status and thus restore their human dignity. This is because the focus of

post war reconciliation is the survivors and not the nation or community structures

(Coward & Smith 2004:249).

The need to overcome the enmities that developed during the years of instability and war,

and “build bridges between ordinary people” suggests a need for reconciliation by justice

for post-war Liberia (Lambourne 2004:4). However, the central question regarding this

process of reconciliation is not whether justice must be done, but how. Reconciliation by

justice is a process of justice, either retributive or restorative, that is instituted by a

society depending on the culture, to acknowledge guilt of past abuses and recognize

victims for their sufferings and humiliations. Through the process of justice preferably

restorative justice in Liberia, the pains and sufferings of the victims will be

acknowledged, and the broken relationships in the society will be restored. In addition to

the restorative form of justice, a regulatory form of justice that will deal with broader

issues of establishing fair rules and social behaviors in Liberia is also essential.

Lastly, the break down of societies and social order during an armed conflict is a major

issue faced by post-conflict societies. The disintegration of healthy social patterns and

community cohesion leaves behind cultures of fear and distrust. Therefore, the

reestablishment of feelings of security, representation and community through the

process of institutional reform is an important part of the social reconstruction that can

lead to lasting peace, healing and reconciliation in Liberia (Drummond 1999:25).

81 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Institutional reform, which is a forward-looking strategy, is a comprehensive process of

creating, revitalizing and reforming laws, systems and institutions that have operated

unfairly in the society. It is an important top-level method for reconciliation in post-war

society. The rebuilding and restoring of political and social structures and institutions

including constitutional reforms, economic reforms, reforms of the justice apparatus, and

in sectors such as education, health, and housing will play a central role in the

reconciliation process in Liberia. “Progressive changes to address the inequalities and

gaps in the social, economic and political structures are fundamental to avoid a return to

violence” (Oduru 2007:30). The social, economic and political inequalities, which are the

products of the past oppressions and the source of the violence in Liberia, need to be

changed and transformed to give meaning to reconciliation and reinstating a sense of

security, safety and order in the society (Oduru 2007:30; Brouneus 2007:7).

Additionally, the material and economic well-being of Liberians and the improvements in

socio-economic status of the society in general, through the provision of social amenities,

employment and high standard of living, will enhance the process of peaceful

coexistence, harmony and reconciliation. The practice of good governance in the society

will also enable Liberians to progress positively by way of positive attitudinal change

toward one another.

Institutional Reforms in Liberia also connote the practice of democracy and good

governance. As such, it is imperative that the society in general adhere to the tenets and

practices of good governance based on accountability, participation, transparency, and

82 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

predictability. Through the process of democratic good governance, the rights of all

citizens irrespective of ethnic background, religious, or political affiliation will be

respected. The process will also promote the rule of law, justice, individual rights and

freedoms, and support the reintegration of the previously excluded into the society by

way of democratic citizenship.

In summary, reconciliation in Liberia then, should be considered as a holistic process that

entails the process of acknowledgment, truth telling, forgiveness, restitution, justice, and

institutional reform at all levels of the society: at the individual or interpersonal, at the

communal, and at the national levels for the promotion of peaceful coexistence and

healthy human relationships. It is also important to note that reconciliation in post-war

Liberia might depend as much or even more on other important factors, such as an

improved economy, the passage of time, or the influence of local or traditional healing

customs and rituals. Furthermore, in order to achieve reconciliation in Liberia through

these methods, it is imperative that several strategies that will target both victims and

perpetrators at all levels of the society be designed and implemented in reconciling the

people once more.

6.3 Peace Building in Liberia: From Concept to Practice

The term Peace-building is used to describe a varied set of activities or programs, the

manner that these programs are implemented, as well as their potential outcomes

(Llamazares 2005:14). Peace building particularly involves:

83 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

“Those activities and processes that: focus on the root causes of the conflict,

rather than just the effects; support the rebuilding and rehabilitation of all sectors

of the war-torn society; encourage and support interaction between all sectors of

society in order to repair damaged relations and start the process of restoring

dignity and trust; recognize the specifics of each post conflict situation;

encourage and support the participation of indigenous resources in the design,

implementation and sustenance of activities and processes; and promote

processes that will endure after the initial emergency recovery phase has passed”

(Spence 2001:137-138).

The purpose of peace building is primarily to help, support and encourage people to

realize their potentials. Concretely, peace building involves strategies to prevent violent

conflicts from igniting, escalating or relapsing. It is the practical aspects of implementing

peaceful social change though socio-economic reconstruction and development between

individuals or groups affected by conflict or violence (Llamazares 2005:4).

From the above definition of peace building, it is crystal clear that building peace and

reconciliation in a post-war society like Liberia, between individuals and groups can

never be achieved only by words, nor by solemn statements, or by signing of well

formulated peace accords. Instead, peace and reconciliation that makes a real change to

the everyday situation of individuals and that even affects their psyches, their souls, must

be concretized in physical actions (Lindqvist 2002:27).

84 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Undoubtedly, peace and reconciliation in Liberia can be strengthened when the people

who earlier fought each other, feared each other, hated each other, decide to do

something positively together, something concrete. That is, to initiate activities that can

influence emotions, attitudes, and behaviors in the society and encourage the community

to work together, sweat together, laugh together, and play together - this is certainly an

effective way of peace-building and reconciliation (Lindqvist 2002:27).

Moreover, cooperation in decision-making processes in undertaking joint community

projects or activities, and solidarity engagements with one another by way of social

gatherings and functions, will be the fruits of the process of reconciliation in the country.

Through these interactions, songs, stories and poems, the people of Liberia will once

again be provided with a renewed hope and with courage for a shared vision for the

future. Ultimately, through this process, the “enemy images” will be transcended and

superseded by tolerance, mutual trust, harmony and respect for each other‟s culture and

moral values in the country (http://www.sfr-21.org/cop.html).

Even though the attainment of real peace and genuine reconciliation in post-war Liberia

is a difficult and tedious process, however, that should never discourage Liberians to try

and strengthen the process by all available means for the promotion of peaceful

coexistence and harmony in the country. “Peace is not an abstract idea that becomes a

reality through efforts on a high political or diplomatic level; it must be built by

everyone, and everyone is needed in order to achieve total peace” in post-war Liberia

(Lindqvist 2002:17).


85 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Sustaining and promoting peace and reconciliation in Liberia demands several activities

and strategies at all levels of the society. One cannot conduct peace building only from

the top - down. If there is any activity that should be conducted from the bottom-up, it

should be peace building. By strengthening and empowering local actors for peace, the

foundation will be laid for national reconciliation. This process will enable local peace

actors to take ownership of the peace building initiatives in their communities, mend their

broken relationships and peacefully coexist.

Empowering local peace animators or facilitators in the communities will help to prevent

violence breaking out in these communities. To this, special training should be provided

to community leaders, including teachers, religious leaders, service providers, and local

authorities, so they can knowledgeably intervene in disputes in their institutions and

localities (Drummond 1999:11). Changing the attitudes of the new generation away from

violence that they have grown to know is a vital part of a long-term post-war recovery

and peace building process in the country.

The empowerment of local actors with practical skills and knowledge required to handle

disputes peacefully in Liberia will foster peace and reconciliation. Through the process,

the youth, women and men in the country will be galvanized to get involved in the peace

building and reconciliatory activities in their communities and institutions. This will

certainly become important driving forces for peaceful coexistence and development in

the country. The involvement of the youth, men and women in peace building initiatives

in Liberia will enable the peace building process to reach every aspect of the social

86 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

relations and sector of the society, from the centers of power to the most remote villages

in the country. Ultimately, this process will promote a healthy decision-making structure

necessary to rediscover unity, discuss differences peacefully, and at the same time help to

develop a common vision for the society (Drummond 1999: 17).

The process of peace building in Liberia also requires forgiveness and reconciliation

because both forgiveness and reconciliation attempt to mend the broken relationships and

create unity at all levels of the society. Through the process of unity, Liberians will be

able to forgive and reconcile their differences, and once again live in peace.

As we strive to reconstruct the damaged infrastructure and institutions in Liberia

following the shadows of a devastating civil conflict, let it be known that, the best

institutions and best democratic systems in the country, regardless of how perfectly and

democratically they are designed, will not be able to work properly if the population

remains deeply divided, and if the human relationships of the society are plagued with

pervasive fear, mistrust and suspicion (Fejic 2005:27). The process of healing,

reconciliation, and peace building therefore ought to be part of the rebuilding process of

post-war Liberia, because it seeks to mend the broken relationships of survivors and

victims and promote healing, unity and peaceful coexistence in the society.

87 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

CHAPTER 7

LIBERIA‟S TRUTH COMMISSION: AN INSTRUMENT FOR HEALING AND

RECONCILIATION – A CASE STUDY

“We are collecting people‟s memories because we want to contribute to the

construction of a different country. This path was and continues to be full of risks

… only those who have the strength to confront those risks can be its builders”

(Bishop Juan Gerardi, 1998).

7.1 BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT OF THE TRC

The central question faced by societies whenever an era of brutality and suppression has

ended is how to close the past traumatic chapter, and set the scene for social harmony and

peaceful future. Dealing with the horrible past especially through a reconciliatory process

indeed requires the mobilization of a variety of techniques. The historical accounting by

means of truth-seeking, which is one of the most important methods in the process of

reconciliation, is sometimes used in some post-war countries to promote healing and

reconciliation (Freeman & Hayne 2003:122).

Bearing this in mind, the Accra Peace Accord, being the final peace treaty in the Liberian

civil conflict, called for the establishment of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission

(TRC). The Act of the TRC was subsequently passed into law by the National

Transitional Legislative Assembly (NTLA) on May 12, 2005. The Truth and

Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was formally inaugurated on June 22, 2006 and thus

began its operational phase. The TRC was composed of nine (9) commissioners, drawn

88 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

from diverse backgrounds, with representatives from the legal community, religious

groups, private sector, civil society groups, etc. It was headed by Jerome Verdier.

The Liberian Truth and Reconciliation Commission, just like most TRCs around the

world, was intended to facilitate genuine healing and reconciliation between victims and

perpetrators in the context of truth-telling and forgiveness. The Commission was

established to heal relations between opposing sides, by uncovering all pertinent facts,

distinguishing truth from lies, and to pave way for acknowledgement, appropriate public

mourning, forgiveness, healing and reconciliation.

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission believed that confronting and reckoning with

the past was necessary for successful transitions from conflict, resentment and tensions to

reconciliation, healing and peace. The presumption was that, when perpetrators or

survivors of violence were given the opportunity to confess their deeds, ask for

forgiveness, and undertake reconciliatory actions in the society; peace, healing, and

development would certainly prevail (Danesh et al 2007:281). The TRC also believed

that, when the silence is broken for both victims and perpetrators, it would offer them an

opportunity for a new beginning of hope for the future. The underlying philosophy of the

Liberian TRC was that, national unity could be restored when victims, witnesses, and

even perpetrators of violence were given the chance to publicly tell their stories without

fear of prosecution in order to reach a more unified future (Danesh et al 2007:282).

89 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

7.2 Mandate of Liberia‟s Truth Commission

Four key words summarize the objectives of the Liberian Truth Commission: truth,

healing, justice and reconciliation. In broader terms, the TRC was mandated to:

Document and investigate the massive wave of human rights violations that

occurred in Liberia during the period January 1979 – October 2003;

Establish the root causes of the conflict and create a forum to address issues of

impunity; identify victims and perpetrators of the conflict;

Establish a forum to facilitate constructive interchange between victims and

perpetrators to recount their experiences in order to foster healing and

reconciliation;

Investigate economic crimes and other forms of human rights violations and

determine whether these violations were part of a systematic and deliberate

pattern of violations or isolated events of violations;

Conduct a critical review of Liberia‟s historical past to acknowledge the historical

antecedents to the conflict and correct the historical falsehood;

Compile a comprehensive report of the activities and finding of the Commission

together with recommendations of measures to prevent future violations of human

rights (TRC 2008a:2).

In the pursuance of these objectives under the theme: “Understanding the Conflict

Through its Principal Events and Actors,” the TRC conducted public awareness

campaigns, collected thousands of witness testimonies, undertook investigations into key

90 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

events, and held public hearings in all 15 counties of Liberia, as well as in the diasporas

(TRC 2008:2). It was believed that through the process of meeting these objectives, the

Commission would restore the moral order of the Liberian society, create a culture of

peace, human rights and respect for the rule of law, and also prevent the reoccurrence of

human rights abuses in the society.

7.3 Findings: The Truth Commission Report

A 370-page report was presented to the National Legislature on July 2, 2009, containing

the findings of three (3) years of work by the TRC in accordance with its Act. Several

recommendations were contained in the final report of the Commission for the purpose of

enhancing healing and reconciliation in the country. The recommendations of the report

were split into the following categories: Prosecution, Public Sanctions, Amnesty,

Reparations, and National „Palava Hut‟ Forums.

The report recommended the establishment of an “Extraordinary Criminal Tribunal” for

Liberia to prosecute people who allegedly committed gross human rights violations and

war crimes, as well as host of corporations for alleged economic crimes . A total of one

hundred six (106) people, including Charles Taylor, the former leader of the disbanded

armed rebel group, National Patriotic Front of Liberia were recommended for prosecution

by the TRC. Taylor, who is also the former president of Liberia, is currently on trail in

the Netherlands for his alleged role in the decade-long Sierra Leonean armed conflict.

91 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

The TRC also recommended a thirty (30) year public sanctions against fifty-two (52)

persons. These include alleged financiers of former warring factions and political leaders

including the current President, Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf (TRC 2008a:240).

The TRC further recommended that thirty-six (36) persons, who were found liable for

crimes committed during the war, should not be prosecuted, because they confessed their

crimes before the Commission, expressed honesty, and were remorseful for their actions

during the war.

Moreover, the TRC recommended the establishment of National Palava Hut Forum as a

complementary tool for national reconciliation and justice. According to the Commission,

the establishment of the Palava Hut Committees in all of Liberia‟s sixty-four (64)

districts, will provide victims with a public venue to confront perpetrators living in their

communities in order to hasten reintegration and reconciliation and community-based

atonement in the country (TRC 2008a:240).

The TRC also recommended that “full reparation” to all victims of past violations and

abuses and their families be provided (TRC 2008b:6-7).

7.4 Observable Impact at the National Level

On a collective basis, the healing benefits of the TRC as an instrument for national

reconciliation, have been immense, although there have also been some shortcomings of

the Commission. Today, the nation is going through a process of confronting some of the

92 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

unpleasant realities of the past, especially the last thirty (30) years of its history. This

sacrifice by Liberians to confront their horrible past is gradually helping them to

experience a cognitive process on the national scale.

Secondly, the critical review and re-documentation of the country‟s history or national

narrative carried out during the TRC process, for the purpose of reflecting the

experiences, beliefs and aspirations of Liberians of all backgrounds, is gradually helping

some Liberians to understand the historical antecedents to the conflicts in the country,

particularly the issues that underpinned their history; divided them as a people and nearly

eviscerated the state (www.trcofliberia.org/news). Certainly, the review of the national

narrative by the TRC is a boost for the nation in its quest for healing and reconciliation.

Furthermore, in addition to the public hearings and historical review, the Commission

also held thematic hearings on governance and economic crimes. These are only a few of

the many ways in which the TRC as a national instrument for reconciliation is

contributing to healing and reconciliation in the country at the national level.

Besides the positive impact of the TRC on a national scale, the Commission is also

having an impact on the individual victims and survivors. The ensuing discussion

therefore explores some of the observable impact of healing and reconciliation on the

individual level.

93 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

7.5 Observable Impact at the Individual Level

There is no doubt that the TRC process has invoked some painful memories and

experiences by asking victims to retell their horrible stories after so many years, and by

entrenching long-buried conflicts. Although the opening of wounds of the past could

have been traumatic for people trying to put behind them wartime atrocities and redirect

their hopes for the emergence of a cohesive and peaceful nation, conflict theorists

contend that the process was indeed necessary to address the fragmented relationships,

and to initiate psychological healing in the country (Kumar 1999:11). Furthermore, some

scholars believe that, the official acknowledgement of the past atrocities and injustices in

the country, is very important for working with individual traumatic experience, because

it helps to validate past experiences, to restore dignity, and to establish a social climate

that condones neither repression nor violence in the society (Brouneus 2007:12).

Therefore with regard to the overall contributions to reconciliation and healing in the

country at the individual level, the process of the Truth Commission is helping thousands

of people in a host of ways on a large-scale.

Firstly, the TRC has encouraged all Liberians and expressed the need and right of every

citizen to have an honest and truthful account of the events in the country‟s history, by

facilitating series of public hearings for both victims and perpetrators in the country, and

in the diasporas. This process provided the forum for the acknowledgement of past

wrongs, brought to light those traumas, acts of violence and human rights abuses

sustained during the conflicts. The creation of an accurate picture of the past through this

94 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

process, is helping survivors to accept what had happened to them, and also helping them

to validate and acknowledge their experiences.

In addition, through this forum, the culture of silence was broken. Several perpetrators

were able to furnish survivors with important information about their disappeared family

members and loved ones. Also, some perpetrators through this process expressed regret

and took responsibilities for their actions, although others did not. Some perpetrators in

particular, made confessions, apologized, and pleaded for forgiveness. In one particular

instance, a TRC witness was quoted saying;

“I want to tell the Liberian people I am sorry for whatever I did that was the

cause of people losing their lives. I am sorry. I am sorry. I am sorry. I am sorry,”

While lying on the red carpet of the Centennial Memorial Pavilion on Ashmun

Street where he was testifying before commissioners of Liberia‟s Truth and

Reconciliation Commission (TRC).“I am saying, this sorry from the depth of my

heart” (www.trcofliberia.org/news).

Secondly, the TRC initiated and facilitated several meetings and workshops with and

between people, often afraid to meet again. These activities helped to encourage

traumatized people to speak out about their hurts and pains. These forums also provided

different groups opportunities and possibilities to find common grounds, which in turn,

paved way for reconciliation between some victims and perpetrators, and to some extent

reconciliation at the community level. These activities in addition, are helping to restore

the meaningful social connection between some survivors and their communities, and

95 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

helping them to create a meaningful future and a sustaining faith that was not possible

before (TRC 2007:10-12).

Thirdly, the TRC has sparked off a beginning of a rights-based culture in the country in

which many people became aware of the existence of certain basic and inalienable rights

that they did not know about.

In addition to these achievements, several recommendations were contained in the TRC‟s

final report as a means of achieving and fostering greater healing and reconciliation in the

country. The recommendations in general, seek not only to acknowledge the historical

events and pains resulting from the tragedy and to reconcile the wounded nation, but also

to address issues that most likely led to the instability and war. The Commission

recommended the establishment of a Human Rights Commission and series of

institutional reforms in the security services, the judiciary and other related sectors in the

country. It also recommended the establishment of reparation and rehabilitation Trust

Fund, to provide modest but meaningful reparations that would have the potential to

make significant difference in lives of victims and their families.

Although the Liberian Truth Commission was certainly not a perfect process, the fact

remains that many people were deeply touched by the Commission‟s work. These are

only a few of the numerous ways in which the TRC has contributed or is contributing

toward healing and reconciliation at both the national and individual levels in the country.

Aloysius, I t

96 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

7.6 The Shortcomings of the TRC

Despite the achievements of the Liberian Truth Commission, there have also been some

shortcomings of the Commission as an instrument for healing and reconciliation. From

the onset of the work of the Commission, there were vivid internal wrangling and

repeated conflicts among Commissioners who were charged with responsibilities to

reconcile and reunite the people of Liberia. These disputes at the hierarchy of the TRC

exposed it to public ridicule and also undermined the credibility of the work of the

commission. According to some Liberians, the fact that the entire life span of Liberia‟s

TRC was characterized by infighting amongst its commissioners, to the extent that the

Supreme Court of Liberia had to intervene to restore order in certain instances, was an

indication of how unreliable and incredible the Commission was (Thomas 2009). Worse

still, the credibility of the report is undermined by the fact that two of the commissioners

declined to sign the final report, of the Truth and Reconciliation commission.

According to some political observers in Liberia, the infighting among the

Commissioners discouraged many Liberians from participating in the TRC process. They

asserted that, the divisions among the commissioners could be a recipe for further

disunity and quash the much desired efforts for reconciliation in Liberia. In line with this

argument, the low turn-out of the TRC process, could be attributed to the internal

wrangling among the commissioners.

Another shortcoming of the TRC was its refusal to accept suggestions for forgiveness and

reconciliation for all perpetrators, as put forward by nearly 60% of the people that

97 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

testified before the commission. Instead, the commission proposed prosecution and

public sanctions for most of the alleged perpetrators. Several Liberians believe that, the

statement-givers who constitute the main and actual victims of the civil war, have every

right to share their views, concerns and aspirations, in determining a process that could

pave way for healing and reconciliation. Some Liberians including Sheikh Kafumba

Konneh and Pearl Brown-Bull, former Commissioners of the TRC argued that,

prosecution was not the option suggested by the majority of the victims during the

process of statement-taking and public hearing, but rather a decision by a few

commissioners (Nyuan-Bajay 2009).

Lastly, one of the shortcomings of the commission also concerns reparations. Although

in the summary report of the TRC it noted that reparations is a desirable and appropriate

mechanism to redress the violations of human rights, it fails to acknowledge that

reparations are not only a desirable element of transitional justice, but that the State of

Liberia has legal obligations to provide them (Schmid 2009).

7.7 TRC‟s Recommendations: Complexities and Challenges Ahead

There is no doubt that, once the Truth and Reconciliation Commission has submitted its

final report, it is formally going to be dissolved and the task of carrying out its

recommendations will certainly fall to others. This is because all of the TRCs that have

been instituted around the world have operated within a given time-frame. But

unfortunately, the implementation of the recommendations of many TRCs around the

world, has frequently been a major shortcoming, even where there has been a legal

98 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

obligation on the part of government to implement, as was the case in El Salvador for

example (Freeman & Hayner 2003:137).

In the case of many other TRCs, some of the causes of non-implementation of the

recommendations were either lack of political will, or sufficient funding and institutional

capacity, which are also some of the problems that Liberia faces today. Although the

Liberian Truth Commission has finally completed its work, the biggest challenge that lies

ahead is how to make the recommendations of the Commission a reality in Liberia. The

subsequent discussion therefore explores on the complexities and challenges of two of the

TRC‟s recommendations.

7.7.1 Prosecution of Alleged Perpetrators

The TRC, in its final report, recommended for the establishment of an “Extraordinary

Criminal Tribunal” for Liberia to prosecute people who allegedly committed gross

human rights violations and war crimes (TRC 2008a:239). The TRC believes that the

prosecution of perpetrators, who have committed gross violations of human rights, is an

important aspect in dealing with the legacy of the past, and for the promotion of healing

and reconciliation in the country. Although prosecutions in Liberia could serve to deter

future crimes and be a source of comfort for victims to build trust again in government

institutions, it is also a complex process that requires practical considerations, taking into

account the human and financial resources, as well as the political will for successful

implementation (Zyl 2005:210).

99 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Today, the justice system in Liberia is suffering from chronic capacity restraints. The

lack of human, material and financial resources is severely undermining the

administration and delivery of justice in the country (GoL 2008:72). In order for justice

to be served, those who administer justice must be properly trained, equipped and

resourced. Besides, when violations are widespread and systematic involving hundreds

of crimes, the criminal justice system simply cannot cope. This is because the criminal

justice process has to demonstrate a scrupulous commitment to fairness and due process,

and this necessarily entails a significant commitment of time and resources (Zyl

2005:210).

Moreover, imposing justice on former leaders of warring factions and top former military

commanders, is likely to increase tension and social conflicts in ways that might prevent

national reconciliation in the country. This is explained by the fact that some former rebel

leaders have already warned that there would be trouble if anyone attempts to arrest

them. With these constraints and complexities, it is likely that prosecution of perpetrators

with reference to recommendations made by the TRC will seriously be hampered or

delayed (Zyl 2005:210). As the saying goes “Justice delayed is Justice denied,” and

nothing is more damaging than an ineffective justice system (Huyse 2003:105).

7.7.2 Reparation for Victims

The Commission recommends that the government of Liberia provides full reparation to

all the victims and their families of past violations and abuses in Liberia from 1979 to

2003 (TRC 2008b:6-7). This is because in the face of widespread violations of human

100 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

rights and humanitarian law, states have obligations to provide reparations to victims of

gross violations and human rights abuses (Freeman 2005:14). While it is impossible to

put a price tag on the suffering of victims, but reparations are another sign of the

government's commitment to healing the old wounds and reconciling the people.

Reparation, which is basically considered as a payment of time, effort or money to undue

past transgressions, can take many forms. It includes material assistance such as

compensation payments, pensions, bursaries and scholarships; psychological assistance

such as trauma counseling; and symbolic measures such as monuments, memorials and

national days of remembrance (Zyl 2005:211). But the central question in the provision

of reparation is the definition of victim-hood: Who are the victims? Should only those

who participated in the TRC process be qualified for reparations or all Liberians affected

by the war or instability? Should reparations be based on harm, victims‟ current needs or

a mixture of the two? These are critical questions. Therefore, a comprehensive reparation

policy for the thousands of people affected by years of instability and war in Liberia will

be both technically complex and politically delicate, partly because of its significant

moral, political, and financial implications.

Besides, the financial, political and logistical complications to an effective reparation

program in Liberia may also hinder this process especially as it competes with other

state-building goals such as provision of basic services including schools, hospitals,

roads, and the list goes on.

101 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Nevertheless, while it is true that achieving these recommendations is not a trouble-free

task, the level of the difficulty involved should not be an excuse for the Government of

Liberia to avoid its legal and moral obligations. While we congratulate the TRC for the

work and recommendations, it is now the responsibility of government and the civil

society with the support of the international community to make sure that these

recommendations are implemented to prevent the reoccurrence of the past and for the

promotion of reconciliation, peace and social harmony. Working together collectively

toward peace and reconciliation in all its forms, is the only way forward to breaking the

cycle of violence and facilitating healing, peace, and reconciliation in post-war Liberia.

102 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

CONCLUSION

From this research, I can then conclude that Liberia‟s history of the conflict and violence,

to a large extent, defines the challenges faced by the government, international

development partners and Liberia‟s citizens in the pursuit and promotion of healing,

reconciliation, and peaceful coexistence in the country. According to some scholars, a

nation that has come out of violent conflict is likely to experience conflict again if

concrete efforts are not made to deal with the roots of the conflict and heal the population

(Duworko 2008:44).

Consequently, to keep violent conflict from re-occurring in Liberia requires a concerted

effort by all Liberians with the appropriate support from the donor community, to address

the causes of the conflicts and create a Culture of Peace in the society that will promote

and enhance healing, reconciliation, peaceful coexistence, equality, human rights, unity

and opportunity for all Liberians.

Creating a culture of peace in post-war Liberia will generate necessary conditions that

will enable the society to be healed of the damaging consequences of violence, traumas

and imbalances from which crimes manifest. Such process will pave way for both victims

and perpetrators to mend their broken relationships, forgive and reconcile with each

other, for peaceful coexistence and social harmony. Through this collective process, the

“enemy images” will be transcended and replaced by tolerance, mutual trust, harmony,

unity and respect for each other‟s culture and moral values in the society.

103 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Creating a culture of peace in Liberia also means building a society that is reconciled,

unified and peaceful. This will enable the people of Liberia to recover, re-discover and

develop a new vision for a peaceful future.

Since the process of creating a culture of peace is not only meant to resolve current

conflicts, but also to create a situation in which disputes arising do not lead to violence,

it is important that peace education and peace studies be introduced into school

curriculums to enable the youth and younger generation learn more about humane living

that will enable them to develop positive values, attitudes and aptitudes for peaceful

coexistence. Through this process, they will also be able to understand the fundamental

principles of peace, such as truth, unity and justice and how they can be applied in their

daily lives in the society. Such learning in my opinion, will significantly change the

atmosphere at homes, communities and the society at large, and in turn pave way for

pleasant and peaceful individual and community association and coexistence.

Finally, all Liberians, although divided under sixteen (16) different ethnic and cultural

groups, have a common or joint destiny. As such, if they can truthfully examine the

painful past, acknowledge it together and reconcile their differences, then they will

together strive to rebuild the future for themselves and the future generations. There is no

doubt that the path of healing, forgiveness, reconciliation and peaceful coexistence in the

country will be difficult, but certainly it is the best way forward for Mama Liberia, with a

painful history, to rise again to her nobler destiny and rejoin the community of nations as

a viable, peaceful and sovereign nation.

104 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ACCORD (1996): The Liberian Peace Process 1990-1996, published by Conciliation

Resources in Association with International

Adebajo, Adekeye (2002a): Liberia‟s Civil War: Nigeria, ECOMOG, and Regional

Security in West Africa, A Project of International Peace Academy, Lynne Rienner

Publishers, London

Adebajo, Adekeye (2002b): Building Peace in West Africa: Liberia, Sierra Leone and

Guinea Bissua, International Peace Academy Paper Series, Lynne Rienner Publishers,

London

Alert Series (1993): Disintegration of the Liberian Nation Since the 1989 Civil War,

Human Resource Information Center, USA

Alie, Joe (2008): Extracted from: Traditional Justice and Reconciliation after violent

Conflict: Learning from African Experiences, p. 125

Asmal, Kadar et al (1997): Reconciliation through Truth: A Reckoning of Apartheid‟s

Criminal Governance, 2nd

Edition, (Cape Town: David Philip Publishers, 1997)

Avruch, Kevin, and Beatriz, Vejarano (2002): “Truth and Reconciliation Commissions:

A Review Essay and Annotated Bibliography.” Social Justice 2(1-2):47-108 (with B.

Vejarano). (Republished in The Online Journal Of Peace and Conflict Resolution, Issue

4.2, Spring 2002; 37 – 76, available at web address:

http://www.trinstitute.org/ojpcr/4_2recon.htm).

Azar, F., Mullet, E., & Vinsonneau, G. (1999): The propensity to forgive: Findings from

Lebanon. Journal of Peace Research, 36(2), 169-181.

Baer, H. (2006): Reaching Reconciliation: Churches in Transition to Democracy in

Eastern & Central Europe

Barry Greenwald, Ph.D. (2001): Abnormal Psychology (Psyche 207) Fall Semester, 2000

Lecture Notes or see http:www.uic.edu/classes/psych/psych270/PTSD.htm

Bloomfield, David, Barnes Teresa; Huyse, Luc (2003): Reconciliation After Violence

Conflict, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, Stockholm,

Sweden

Boraine, Alex (2001): A Country Unmasked: Inside South Africa‟s Truth and

Reconciliation Commission, Published by Zebra Press, South Africa

Brahm, Eric (2004): Beyond Intractability

http://www.trinstitute.org/ojpcr/4_2recon.htm

http://www.beyondintractability.org/action/author.jsp?id=29039

105 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Brounéus, Karen (2007): Reconciliation and Development, Dialogue on Globalization,

OCCASIONAL PAPERS BERLIN N° 36, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung Germany

Cabrera, Martha (2005): Living and Surviving in a Multiply Wounded Country, in:

Mulberry Working Paper Series; no. 2/2005, Durban, Olive Publications.

Conteh-Morgan, Earl (2005): Peacebuilding And Human Security: A Constructivist

Perspective, International Journal of Peace Studies, Volume 10, Number 1,

Spring/Summer 2005

Cousens, Elizabeth M, Jan, Ameen, Parker, Alison (1996): United Nations High

Commissioner for Refugees & International Peace academy, Healing the Wounds:

Refugees, Reconstruction and Reconciliation, Report of the second conference sponsored

jointly by UNHCR & IPA, USA

Coward, Von Harold, Smith, Gordon (2004): Religion and Peacebuilding, Sunny Press,

USA

Danesh, H. B. & Sara Clarke-Habibi, (2005): Education for Peace Curriculum Manual:

A conceptual and Practical Guide, International Education for Peace Institute, Canada

Danesh, H. B. (2006): Towards an Integrative Theory of Peace Education, Journal of

Peace Education, Vol. 3, No.1, pp 55 – 78

Danesh, H.B. (2008): Creating a Culture of Healing in Multiethnic Communities: An

Integrative Approach to Prevention and Amelioration of Violence-Induced Conditions.

Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 36, No 6. pp. 814-832

Danesh, Roshan & Danesh, Hossain (2005): Leadership for Peace, excerpts from

leadership for peace manual

Deegan, P. E. (1988): Recovery: the lived experience of rehabilitation. Psychosocial

Rehabilitation Journal, 11, 11-19.

Dennis, Peter (2006): A Brief History of Liberia: International Center for Transitional

Justice.

Drummond, Jennifer (1999): When the Shooting Stops: The Importance of Port-war

Conflict Recovery in Preventing Future Violent Conflict, M.A. Thesis for the Degree in

Advanced Studies in Peace and Conflict Studies, European University Center For Peace

Studies, Austria

Duworko, Kpanbayeazee S. II, (2008): Celebration Ten Year of the LCL Trauma Healing

and Reconciliation Program: Reflections and Challenges, Sabanoh Printing Press,

Monrovia

106 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Ebo, Adedeji (2005): The Challenges And Opportunities Of Security Sector Reform In

Post-Conflict Liberia, Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces

(DCAF) Occasional Paper –N. 9 Geneva,

Ejizu, Christopher I. (1989): African Traditional Religions and the Promotion of

Community-living in Africa. http://www.afrikaworld.net/afrel/community.htm

Ekiyor, Thelma (2008): The Role of Civil Society in Conflict Prevention: West African

experiences, The complex Dynamics of Small Arms in West Africa - Disarmament

Forum

Ellis, Len (2008): “Creating a Culture of Peace”, See

www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/viewpoints/stories

Ellis, Stephen (2001): The Mask of Anarchy: The destruction of Liberia and the

Religious Dimension of an African Civil War, New York University Press, USA

Ero, Comfort (1999): ECOWAS and the Sub-regional Peacekeeping in Liberia, N0. 1995

Famula, Kristin (2007): Healing Societal Traumas and Transforming Collective

Consciousness: A Path to a Culture of Healing, M.A. Thesis, European Peace University,

Austria

Fattah, Ezzat, A. (1994): The Vital Role of Victimology in the Rehabilitation of

Offenders and Their Reintegration into Society: In The interchangeable roles of victim

and victimizer, Helsinki: European Institute for Crime Prevention and Control

Fayemi, Kayode (2004): Responsibility to Rebuild: Challenges of Security Sector

Reconstruction in Sierra Leone and Liberia,

Fayemi, Kayode, J (2004): Governing Insecurity in Post-Conflict States: The Case of

Sierra Leone and Liberia

Fejic, Goran (2005): The Need to address the scars of the past: In the Role of the

Parliaments in the National Reconciliation Process in Africa, Regional Seminar

Organized jointly by the Parliament of Burundi, The IPU and International IDEA,

Bujumbura,

Francis, David J, Faal Mohammed, Kabia John, Ramsbotham, Alex (2005): Dangers of

Co-deployment: UN Cooperative PeaceKeeping in Africa, Africa Center for Peace and

Conflict Studies, Department of Peace Studies, University of Bradford, Ashgate

Publishing Limited, UK

Francis, David J. (2000): “Tortuous Path to Peace: The Lomé Accord and Postwar

Peacebuilding in Sierra Leone”, Security Dialogue, 31:3 (September 2000), p. 357.

http://www.afrikaworld.net/afrel/community.htm

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/viewpoints/stories

107 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Freeman, Mark & Hayner, Priscilla (2003): The Truth Commission of South Africa and

Guatemala: In Reconciliation After Violence Conflict, edited by Bloomfield, David,

Barnes Teresa; Huyse, Luc, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral

Assistance, Sweden

Furley, Oliver and May, Roy (2006): Ending Africa‟s Wars: Progressing to Peace,

African Studies Center; Coventry University, UK

Galtung, Johan (2004): Transcend and Transformation: An Introduction to Conflict

Work, Pluto Press, London

Gloppen, Siri (2005): Roads to Reconciliation: A conceptual Framework: In Roads to

Reconciliation edited by Elin Skaar, Siri Gloppen & Astri Suhrke, Lexington Books,

USA

Government of Liberia (2008): Poverty Reduction Strategy for Liberia

Graybill, Lyn & Kimberly Lanegran (2004): Truth, Justice, and Reconciliation in Africa:

Issues and Cases, African Studies Quarterly, Vol. 8, Issue 1

Graybill, Lyn S (2002): Truth and Reconciliation in South Africa: Miracle or Model?,

Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc., London, UK

Greenwald, Barry Ph.D. (2001): Abnormal Psychology (Psyche 207) Fall Semester, 2001

Lecture Notes: see: http:www.uic.edu/classes/psych/psych270/PTSD.htm

Gutlove, Paul (2005): Psycho-social Healing: Theory and Practice, University of Tromse

Center for International Health, USA

Gutlove, Paul (2004): “Prevention of Violence in Communities, Schools, and Other

Institutions” June 3-6, 2004 in Ljubljana, Slovenia,

Gutlove, Paula and Gordon, Thompson (2003): Psychosocial Trauma Healing for Post-

Conflict Social Reconstruction: A Health Bridges for Peace Guide for Practitioners for

the Social Reconstruction in the Former Yugoslavia, Institute for Resource and Security

Studies,

Harris, Mulbah G., (2002): Help for the Traumatized: A Basic Understanding of Trauma

Healing, Christian Literature Crusade, Freetown, Sierra Leone

Harvey, Patrick J (2009): The Cycle of Violence: Addressing Victimization & Future

Harmfulness Through An Integral Lens, A Dissertation for the requirement for the

Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Indiana University of Pennsylvania

Herman, Judith (1992). Trauma and Recovery: The aftermath of violence -- from

domestic abuse to political terror. New York: Basic Books, New York

108 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Heuer, Andre (2007): Liberia: A Short History Part I

Howard-Wolokolie, Jamesetta (2006): Liberia: Country Brief: Presented by the Ministry

of Youth & Sports Republic of Liberia November, 2006, at African Development Forum

Huyse, Luc (2008): Tradition-based approaches in Peacemaking, transitional justice and

reconciliation policies, extracted from Transitional Justice and reconciliation after

Violent Conflict: Learning from African Experiences, IDEA; Sweden

Jaye, Thomas (2003): Liberia: Setting Priorities For Post-Conflict Reconstruction,

Journal of Security Sector Management, Published by Global Facilitation Network for

Security Sector Reform, University of Cranfield, Uk, Volume 1 Number 3 – December

2003

Jaye, Thomas (2006): An Assessment Report of the Security Sector Reform in Liberia,

Submitted to the Governance Reform Commission, September 2006

Jaye, Thomas (2007): Liberia‟s TRC: Contexts, Mandates and Challenges

www.pambazuka.org/en/category/comment/42769

Jeong, Ho-Won (2009): Conflict Management and Resolution: An Introduction,

Routledge, USA

Jordan, Debra, J. (1996): Leadership in Leisure Service, Venture Pub Publisher, U.S.A

Kargbo, John Abdul (2002): The Effects of the Civil War and the Role of Librarians in

Post–War Reconstruction in Sierra Leone, University of Sierra Leone: VOL. 12, NO. 2

FALL 2002

Keer, Rachel & Mobekk, Eirin (2007): Peace and Justice: Seeking Accountability after

war, Polity Press, UK

Kieh, George Klay Jr (2000): Military rule in Liberia, Journal of Political and Military

Sociology, Winter2000, See:

www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3719/is_200001/ai_n8892608/

Kriesberg, Louis (2003): Comparing Reconciliation Actions within and between

Countries. In Yaacov Bar-Siman-Tov, ed., From conflict resolution to reconciliation.

New York: Oxford University Press.

Kumar, Krishna (1999): Promoting Social Reconciliation In Post-conflict Societies

Selected Lessons From USAID‟s Experience, USAID Program and Operations

Assessment Report No. 24, Center for Development Information and Evaluation U.S.

Agency for International Development

http://andresjourney.blogspot.com/2007/09/liberia-short-history-part-i.html

http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/comment/42769

http://findarticles.com/p/search/?qa=Kieh,%20George%20Klay%20Jr

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3719/

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3719/

http://winter2000/

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3719/is_200001/ai_n8892608/

http://www.justiciarestaurativa.org/articlesdb/authors/731

109 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Lambourne, Wendy (2004): Post-Conflict Peacebuilding: Meeting Human Needs for

Justice and Reconciliation, Peace, Conflict and Development – Issue Four, April 2004

ISSN: 1742-0601

Lehtinen, Terhi (2000): Liberia: from bloody war to a warlord state. Greed, grievance and

weak states: overview of African conflicts; Department of Political Science, University of

Helsinki,

Levine, Peter A. (2008): Healing Trauma: Pioneering Program for Restoring the Wisdom

of your Body, Sound True, Inc. Colararo, USA

Lindqvist, Hans (2002): Building Peace Where Peace Is Always Threatened: Trauma

Healing and Reconciliation Experience in Post war Liberia, LWF Development

Education Forum, Geneva

Llamazares, Monica (2005): Post-war Peace Building Review: A Critical Exploration of

Generic Approaches to Post-war Reconstruction, Center of Conflict Resolution –

Department of Peace Studies, working paper # -14, University of Bradford, UK

Maoz, Ifat (2004): social-Cognitive Mechanisms in Reconciliation, in From Conflict

Resolution to Reconciliation, ed. Yaacov Bar-Siman-Tov, Oxford University Press

Marta, Cullberg Weston (2001): A Psychosocial Model of Healing from Trauma of

Ethnic Cleansing: The Case of Bosnia, The Kvinna till Kvinna Foundation

Maynard, Kimberly A. (1999): Healing Communities in Conflict: International

Assistance in Complex Emergencies, Columbia University Press, New York

Mbitt, John S (1990): African Religions and Philosophy, London, Heinemann

Mobekk, Eirin (2005): Transitional Justice in Post-Conflict Societies – Approaches to

Reconciliation

Murithi, Tom (2009): The Ethics of Peace Building, Edinburg University Press, Ltd, UK

Nettles, Darryl (2007): "Liberia: Study of Liberian Government and its Relationship to

American Government" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the

Study of African American Life and History, Atlanta Hilton, Charlotte, NC, Oct 02, 2007

Nyan-Bayjay, Nat (2009): Commissioners of Liberia‟s TRC Divided over Final Report,

See: www.ceasefireliberia.com/2009/07/commissioners-of-liberia%e2%80%99s-

truth.com

Oduro, Franklin (2007): What do we understand by Reconciliation?, Emerging

Definitions of reconciliation in the context of transitional Justice

http://www.ceasefireliberia.com/2009/07/commissioners-of-liberia%e2%80%99s-truth.com

http://www.ceasefireliberia.com/2009/07/commissioners-of-liberia%e2%80%99s-truth.com

110 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Omotola, J. Shola (2002): Beyond Transition: Challenges of Security Sector Reform and

Reconstruction in Liberia, Volume 4 Number 4 – November 2006, Shrivenham, UK

Otunnu, Olara A (1996): Healing the Wounds: What nature of wounds? In Healing the

Wounds: Refugees, Reconstruction and Reconciliation, Report of the second conference

sponsored jointly by UNHRC and IPA, 1996, USA

Pajibi, Eric (2008): Traditional Justice Mechanisms: The Liberian Case, International

IDEA Publication, Stockholm, Sweden

Pham, Peter, J. (2004): A Nation Long Forlorn: Liberia's Journey From Civil War toward

Civil Society, A quarterly publication of the International Center for Not-for-Profit Law,

Volume 6, Issue 4, September 2004 USA

Pham, Peter, J. (2006), Reinventing Liberia: Civil Society, Governance, and a Nation‟s

Post-War Recovery, Volume 8, Issue 2, January 2006.

Potter, Nyancy Nyquist, (2006): Trauma, truth and Reconciliation: Healing damaged

relationships, Oxford University Press Inc, United States

Rawlinson, Mary (2006): Forgiveness: Beyond Virtue and the Law - The Moral

Significance of the Act of Forgiveness: In Trauma, truth and Reconciliation: Healing

damaged relationships, edited by Nancy Potter Nyquist, Oxford University Press Inc,

United States

RECONCILE International Training Material; Yei South Sudan, 2007

Rigby, Andrew (2000): Forgiving the past: Paths towards a culture of reconciliation,

Center for the Study of Forgiveness and Reconciliation, Coventry University, UK

Rogers, J. D (2006): Challenges to Post-War Economic Reconstruction: A Case of Sierra

Leone, Presentation at the 4th

Anniversary celebration, Furah Bay College, Freetown

Rosenberg, Sarah (2003): Victimhood, See:

www.beyondintractability.org/essay/victimhood

Rossi, Vicky (2008): A Shared Human Identity - A Foundation of Peace Culture: In The

PaxEye, World Peace Journal, N0. 1, 2008, pp 37 – 57

Saa, William (2002): Approaches to Dealing with Trauma cause by war and political

repression, Committee for conflict transformation support newsletter, see: http://www.c-

r.org/ccts/ccts18/healing.htm

Santa-Barbara, Joanna (2007): Reconciliation; In Hand Book of Peace And Conflict

Studies, edited by Charles Webel and Johan Galtung, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group,

London

http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/victimhood

http://www.c-r.org/ccts/ccts18/healing.htm

http://www.c-r.org/ccts/ccts18/healing.htm

111 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Sawyer, Amos (2003): Peacebuilding In Liberia: Foundational Challenges And

Appropriate Approaches, 24 August 2003

Sawyer, Amos (2005): Social Capital, Survival Strategies, and their Potential for Post

Governance in Liberia, Research Paper No. 2005/15, United Nations University

Sawyer, Amos (2002): Beyond Plunder: Toward Democratic Governance in Liberia,

London: Lynne Reinner Publishing, USA

Sayle, Andrew Timothy, Dr. Dangbe W. Sua, Rev. Darigbe LeRoy Sua, Thomas Weber,

Sherman Tarnue, Valerie Ashford & Thomas S. Axworthy (2009): Liberia: Assessing the

Conditions for Liberal Democracy in a Post-conflict State, Creating an International

Network of Democracy Builders: Volume 2, Revised January 2009

Scherg, Nina (2003): Development-oriented Trauma Healing in Post-war Situations,

Eschborn, Germany

Schmid, Evelyne (2009): Liberia: Truth and Reconciliation Commission releases Volume

I of Final Report, Transitional Justice Forum: http://tj-forum.org/archives/003394.html

Sendabo, Terefi (2004): Child Soldiers Rehabilitation & Social Reintegration in Liberia,

Life Peace Institute, Sweden

Sesay, Amadu (2003): Civil War, Child Soldiers and Post Conflict Peace Building in

West Africa, Publishers by College and Publishers Ltd

Sledge, Tim (1992): Making Peace With Your Past (Nashville: Life Way Press)

Smith, J (1996): Liberia's Ugly Past: The perspective; see:

www.theperspective.org/uglypastI.html

Solar, Susan Lee & Bright, Susan (2006): Reconciliation: Forgiving and healing instead

of endless cycles of retaliation

Sørbø, Gunnar M (2004): Peacebuilding in post-war situations: Lessons for Sudan R

2004: 13 Chr. Michelsen Institute Development Studies and Human Rights

Spence, Rebecca (2001): “Post-Conflict Peacebuilding: Who Determines the Peace?” in

Bronwyn Evans-Kent &Roland Bleiker (eds): Rethinking Humanitarianism Conference

Proceedings, 24-26 September 2001. (St Lucia: University of Queensland, 2001), pp.

137-8.

SPENCER, METTA (2006): STORYTELLING AND CREATING A CULTURE OF PEACE,

BUILDING A CULTURE OF PEACE IN SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITIES, PEACE IN ACTION

http://tj-forum.org/archives/003394.html

http://www.theperspective.org/uglypastI.html

112 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Staub, Ervin (1998): Breaking the Cycle of Genocidal Violence: Healing and

Reconciliation. In: John H. Harvey (Hrsg.): Perspectives on Loss – A Sourcebook.

Bunner/Mazel: Philadelphia

Staub, Ervin (2003): Preventing Violence and Generating human Values: Healing and

Reconciliation in Rwanda, In IRRC Vol. 85, n. 852, December 2003

Staub, Ervin, Pearlman, Laurie Anne, Gubin, Alexandra, Hagengimana, Athanase (2005):

Healing, Reconciliation, Forgiving and The Prevention of Violence After Genocide Or

Mass Killing: An Intervention and Its Experimental Evaluation in Rwanda, Journal of

Social and Clinical Psychology, Vol. 24, No. 3, 2005, Pp.297 – 334

Tarr, Byron (2007): Reconstruct Governance to rouse Liberia, Long Forlorn. In Security,

Reconstruction and Reconciliation: When the Wars End, edited by Ndulo, Muna

University College London Press, London

Taylor, Carol (2006): Healing Presence: Creating a Culture that Promotes Spiritual Care

Supportive Voice, Vol. 11 No. 2 Summer 2006

Tellewoyan, Joseph K. (2004): "The Years The Locust Eaten: Liberia 1816-1996"

Thomas, Victor (2009): The TRC Report: Motives and Credibility; See

www.peopletopeople.info/id301.html

Tutu, Desmond (1999): No Future Without Forgiveness, London: Rider

UNESCO (1996): From Culture of Violence to Culture of Peace, UNESCO Publishing,

France

UNESCO (1995): UNESCO and a Culture of Peace: Promoting a Global Movement,

Culture of Peace Series, UNESCO Publishing

UNESCO/FAWE (1999): Training Module for Education for a Culture of peace,

UNESCO/FAWE Cooperation and Collaboration, January 1999

United Nations (1996b): Managing Arms in Peace Processes: Liberia, Disarmament and

Conflict Resolution Project, UN, New York

UN (1996a): Managing Arms in Peace Processes: Disarmament and Conflict Resolution

Project in Liberia, New York

UNDP (2006): Common Country Assessment for Liberia, June 2006

Wink, Walter (2005): Healing a Nation‟s Wounds: Reconciliation on the road to

Democracy

http://www.peopletopeople.info/id301.html

113 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

Wippman, David (1993): Enforcing the Peace: ECOWAS and the Liberian Civil War,

New York: Council of Foreign Relations Press

Yoder, Carolyn (2005): The Little Book of Trauma Healing: When Violence Strikes and

Community Security is Threatened, Intercourse, Pennsylvania: Good Books

Zeh, Howard, (2002): In his book, „The Little Book of Restorative Justice‟, Good Books,

Intercourse, PA, USA

Zorbas, Eugenia (2004): Reconciliation in Post-Genocide Rwanda, In African Journal of

Legal Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2004

Zounmenou, David (2008): Managing Post War Liberia: An Update, Institute for

Security Studies Situal Report

Zyl, Paul van (2005): „Promoting Transitional Justice in Post-Conflict Societies,‟ In

Security Governance in Post-Conflict Peacebuilding, ed. Alan Bryden and Heiner Hänggi

(Geneva: Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces, 2005).

114 AABBNN –– EEPPUU –– 22000099

OTHER REFERENCES/ SOURCES

TRC (2008a): Final Report of TRC VOLUME I, Monrovia – Liberia:

www.trcofliberia.org/reports/final

TRC (2008b): Summary Final Report of Findings, Determination and Recommendations,

VOLUME I, Monrovia

TRC (2007). Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Liberia Third Quarter Report,

January 1 – March 31, 2007

TRC (2007). Quarterly Reports, 1st April 1 – 31

st September, 2007, available at:

www.trcofliberia.org/reports/quarterly-reports/april-1-september-31-2007

TRC (2007). Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Liberia Third Quarter Report,

(May 2007 – September 2007)

TRC (2005). The Act That Established the Truth And Reconciliation Commission (TRC)

of Liberia, May 12, 20005 or www.trcofliberia.org/about/trc-mandate

Working for Reconciliation, A Caritas Handbook Caritas International 1999 Available at:

www.caritas.org/upload/wkg/wkgreconc.pdf

Commission on Human Security Report, New York 2003, See: www.humansecurity-

chs.org

www.AfricaWithin.com, Report of the International Commission of Inquiry into The

Existence of Slavery and Forced Labor in the Republic of Liberia", U.S. Government

Printing Office, Washington, 1931,

www.unikum.ac.at/~hstockha/neu/html/cabreracruz.html

www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/w/winstonchu165927.html.

www.trcofliberia.org/news

www.unac.org/peacecp/intro/index.html


http://www.trcofliberia.org/reports/final

http://www.trcofliberia.org/reports/quarterly-reports/april-1-september-31-2007

http://www.trcofliberia.org/about/trc-mandate

http://www.caritas.org/upload/wkg/wkgreconc.pdf



http://www.africawithin.com/

http://www.unikum.ac.at/~hstockha/neu/html/cabreracruz.html

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/w/winstonchu165927.html

http://www.trcofliberia.org/news



Final Thesis Copy

Documents

Transcript of Final Thesis Copy