US embassy in Freetown
By Umaru Fofana
I still remember, very vividly, on that fateful day. It was in October 1999. On an official visit here was US Secretary of State, Madeline Albright. The then rebel leader Foday Sankoh was reneging on the peace process and had encamped himself in the then rebel stronghold of Kailahun turning down all pleas to come to Freetown and push the peace process forward.
Ms Albright told a news conference at the then US Information Services (USIS) at the embassy at Walpole Street that Sankoh must come to Freetown. She left the news conference for a short consultation and by the time we knew it she was back, promising journalists the rebel chieftain would be in Freetown "soon".
True to her promise, after weeks and months of dithering over coming to Freetown and even cussing all who had asked him to do so, Sankoh was flown in on a helicopter. That was the power of the United States at its most unambiguous display, unfolding right in front of our eyes. As a budding journalist at the time, I started reflecting on my International Relations notes at the university and shaking my head to see what was really meant to be a superpower as epitomised by the United States.
I also vividly recall the decisiveness with which Britain intervened in Sierra Leone - militarily and diplomatically - to change the course of events that helped significantly in ending the war. From their troopers led by the SAS, to their diplomats led by Sir Jeremy Greenstock at the United Nations and Peter Penfold here on ground. That seems a long way away now as the interest for ordinary Sierra Leoneans seems to be petering out in Washington and London. Agreed the war has ended but an engagement at the highest and most decisive level should help avert any future slide back into conflict.
Globally US dominance still holds albeit with some nuances. But in Sierra Leone it seems to be fraying at the edges, probably reflecting the mood on the continent. Or maybe not. Now, there seems to be a re-carving of influence across Africa. With Gambia having ditched Taiwan and fallen into the realm of China, the world's second largest economy is flexing its muscles and stretching its wings to try to hit everywhere and leave an impression - mostly using unaccounted-for cash. It should not be too long before Burkina Faso and Swaziland will follow the Gambia example.
With this, and unless it changes tact, the influence of the West led by the United States will continue to wane. And the masses, not the leaders, will continue to suffer and suffer even more. This may be due in as much to the fact that the US is backsliding as to Africa's leaders increasingly eschewing being held to account and playing that hoax of a nationalist card. So Western aid that comes with such strings attached as respect for good governance and rule of law is being avoided by our leaders in preference to China's intervention which has an interest of its own altogether namely profit in raw material, not democratic good governance. What that does is to entrench dictatorship and violate fundamental rights.
In the case of Sierra Leone the United States seems to be the reason for the ostensible diminishing influence. It seems to me that the world's most powerful country is making the same mistakes it made in Latin America which led to leftists taking over simply because America either turned its back on them or took them for granted.
It was impressive that even at the height of the civil war in Sierra Leone in the 1990s Washington maintained its ambassador in Freetown even if its consular service was somewhat incomprehensibly closed. However with the return of peace to Sierra Leone the world's most powerful nation, it would seem, has taken its feet off the accelerator.
After the unnecessary controversy that Ambassador June Carter Perry was involved in here, for simply visiting the vandalised offices of the opposition Sierra Leone People's Party, she left the country. There were concerns that the Government here was uncomfortable that she did what she did and probably had to do. We were told by the US embassy here that Ambassador Perry left on health reasons. Whatever was wrong in that visit to the opposition's office, some sections of the local media went for her jugular. She went back home and never came back. Not only did she not come back but it took a long hiatus for Washington to send her successor.
Now since the departure of Michael Owen last year there is yet to be a new ambassador in Freetown albeit a replacement has been named. This could, maybe not, be due to some protest against something, but no one is saying anything as reason for the delay. Assuming it is not a protest action, which will most definitely be the official line from the embassy, then the US does not need telling that the long absence of an ambassador, not once but twice in just a few years, leaves a huge vacuum however strong the Charge D'Affaires may be. One ambassador on ground is worth more than two away. And an ambassador on the ground is in no way the same as none.
One of the things that may adversely come to haunt US influence in Sierra Leone is its apparent failure to stand up and challenge on those values America stands for in the way it should - democracy, free speech and rule of law as encapsulated by separation of powers. I have been told even by non-Americans that if the US leaves the people of a country on their own they are in the lurch. It seems we are getting there, with Washington seemingly interested largely in dining with our leaders and leaving the people to struggle on their own for some of the most basic freedoms as political rights the exercise of which has dire consequences here. Or even free speech which can land one in jail very easily with a judiciary sometimes dictated to by politicians and the journalists not compensated or proof of their culpability provided.
Apparently because there is oil and gas in the offing in Sierra Leone and the US and European companies are among those in pole position to have access to it, Washington seems to be ignoring abuses happening here. I was astounded that the Chinese former ambassador (while on his way out) found time and space to speak the truth about the failings of the Sierra Leone government and how some state functionaries were toying in their offices lazily instead work for the people, while the US outgoing ambassador was busy praise-singing and saying everything was honky dory in the country. If you believed him Sierra Leone making acceding to the elite group of Millennium Challenge Corporation members countries was just a formality because corruption had been stamped out.
Talking about the MCC brings to the fore what ordinary Sierra Leoneans can enjoy even if the government is reluctant to let them have it. If not for that arrangement the Right to Access Information of FOI would still be a pipe dream. Thanks for that America, but there is a lot you can do bordering on the freedoms and rights of ordinary people.
America must take back its position or risk being what China is - business for profit - and forget the core values of its forefathers and those which used to inform its foreign policy especially in Africa. And Britain which has spent huge sums on making the judiciary do what is right under its JSDP project is so ever silent while justice is often being made nonsense of. And the European Union, while it was very instrumental in ensuring Guinea liberalised its airwaves and democratised, even if that is still a long way off, has failed to push through even those basic recommendations made by its own election observers here. Let alone to help strengthen the independent media in Sierra Leone.
Until and unless the West returns to basics, our democracy will be emasculated, freedoms curtailed to suffocation proportions and the masses left in the lurch. And we are all back to square one - like the West like the hapless Sierra Leoneans.
(C) Politico 04/03/14
