SHUR Committee Meeting

SUB-COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

SOUS-COMITÉ DES DROITS DE LA PERSONNE ET DU DÉVELOPPEMENT INTERNATIONAL

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Tuesday, May 11, 1999

• 1523

[English]

The Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier (Brampton West—Mississauga, Lib.)): I call to order the Subcommittee on Human Rights and International Development of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade. I'd like to welcome everyone here today and everyone who's watching today's meeting of the subcommittee.

Before we begin, I should point out that since our meeting unfortunately coincides with the briefings provided to the standing committees on foreign affairs and national defence and other parliamentarians on the situation in Kosovo, a number of MPs cannot be with us until 4 o'clock, but we'd like to get started now.

Those who have followed the work of the subcommittee will know members are very interested in human security issues in Africa. We are considering undertaking a study on the subject this fall.

One of the situations in Africa that concerns all Canadians is that in Sierra Leone. As you know, in March Minister Axworthy named his special envoy for Sierra Leone, our colleague, David Pratt, MP for Nepean—Carleton, and gave him the task of assessing the situation in the region and making recommendations to the government. I understand Mr. Pratt's report has just been released this morning, and we are pleased to have him here to brief us on it.

• 1525

We are doubly fortunate, in attempting to understand the situation in Sierra Leone, to also have with us from Washington His Excellency John Ernest Leigh, High Commissioner of Sierra Leone to Canada.

A number of representatives of the diplomatic core in Ottawa have also taken time to attend our meeting today.

We welcome you and thank you for coming.

Excellency, I'll explain how we do this. Mr. Pratt knows the routine. We will have a presentation from you and one from Mr. Pratt, and then we will go to questions. A number of other members will be joining us.

David, would you like to start, or would you like His Excellency to start?

Mr. David Pratt: [MP (Special Envoy to Sierra Leone of the Minister of Foreign Affairs)] Thank you, Madam Chair.

First of all let me say what a pleasure it is to be before your committee and to be in this chair rather than in one of those chairs. This is a bit of a different role for me, but I'm certainly looking forward to it.

You've already taken the opportunity to introduce His Excellency John Leigh, the High Commissioner to Canada from Sierra Leone. I'd like to introduce another individual who was instrumental in helping this process along, Mr. Jacques Crête, the director of the west and central African division of the Department of Foreign Affairs. Mr. Crête accompanied me on my visit to Sierra Leone, along with Lieutenant-Colonel Stephen Moffat, also from the Department of Foreign Affairs. He's with the peacekeeping division. Mr. Crête and Mr. Moffat were instrumental in helping to get the report together and have it before you today.

I'd like to give the floor over to His Excellency John Leigh to make some comments, and then I will follow up his comments with just a few brief remarks, followed by some of the recommendations I would like to put on the table. So I'll hand the floor over to His Excellency.

The Chair: Okay, thank you.

Excellency.

Mr. John Ernest Leigh (High Commissioner to Canada for the Republic of Sierra Leone): Thank you, Mr. Pratt.

Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.

Honourable members of the subcommittee, thank you very much for your interest in Sierra Leone and for allowing me to testify before you today on the situation in my country.

The timing of this hearing could not be more appropriate. Given the understandable preoccupation of western nations and the western media with the crisis in Kosovo during the last two months or so, almost to the exclusion of all other matters, the people and the elected Government of Sierra Leone very much appreciate the opportunity given them to brief this honourable subcommittee on a grave tragedy unfolding in West Africa.

I begin by saying I have carefully read the report prepared for the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Honourable Lloyd Axworthy, by the honourable member from Nepean—Carleton and Canada's special envoy to Sierra Leone, Mr. David Pratt, which is entitled Sierra Leone: The Forgotten Crisis.

On behalf of the elected Government of Sierra Leone, I thank the Honourable Lloyd Axworthy for his initiative in appointing a special envoy for Sierra Leone and for authorizing a delegation—the very first from a western nation—led by Mr. David Pratt, to visit Sierra Leone for a firsthand assessment of the deep crisis in my country.

I also would like to take this opportunity to thank the honourable member for Nepean—Carleton for his long-term interest in my country and for a job well done during his recent fact-finding tour in my corner of the world. We very much appreciate his abiding interest in our people and our country. To the people of his constituency, the people of Bo, my hometown in Sierra Leone, send their greetings and their appreciation for standing by them all along.

I wholeheartedly endorse Mr. Pratt's report. I do so not only because of its factual accuracy but also because of its thoroughness, its plain language, and, last but not least, its perceptive analysis of the Sierra Leone tragedy. The report reflects a complete understanding of our situation and the role Canada ought to play to help us and the rest of West Africa out of a terrible situation as soon as possible.

• 1530

Sierra Leone today is not a peaceful place at all. In fact it is a very dangerous war zone and has been so for nearly a decade, but increasingly so since May 25, 1997.

In 1991 a small band of Sierra Leone-born rebels, trained in Libya and accompanied by Liberian and Burkina Faso soldiers, calling themselves the Revolutionary United Front, or RUF, crossed the eastern border from Liberia with the objective of overthrowing the corrupt, long-running All Peoples Congress regime of Major-General Joseph Momoh.

That incursion was also Charles Taylor's way of getting even with Sierra Leone, because that corrupt government allowed West African peacekeepers, known as ECOMOG, to use Sierra Leone territory as a staging area to end violence in Liberia. Charles Taylor is now the President of Liberia. At the time, he was a most violent warlord, and he continues his violence towards Sierra Leone.

In this violent war in Sierra Leone, anything and everything is a target: homes, churches, mosques, polling booths, schools, hospitals, shops, factories, motor vehicles, buses, places of employment, priests, nuns, imams, parishioners, journalists, politicians, the literate, the illiterate, doctors, lawyers, teachers, peddlers, peasants, women, men, babies. Everything is a target, because the RUF and its supporters have no respect for humanity and things humankind values. Because of its repeated violent crimes against unarmed humanity in Sierra Leone, the RUF has no credibility in the country, but it is widely feared, because of its callousness and brutality.

What began in 1991 as a civil war to purportedly compel good governance in Sierra Leone has since turned into a heavily disguised war of aggression by Liberia, backed by Libya, Burkina Faso, and others, for the purpose of confiscating and squandering my country's considerable store of very valuable natural resources. Ironically, the antagonists of 1991 are now allies, inflicting brutal suffering on unarmed civilians and determined to overthrow the elected Government of Sierra Leone.

Mr. Pratt has already correctly analysed in his report the situation in Sierra Leone, and I need not repeat his findings and comments here. Suffice it to say that in my view, the perpetrators of crimes against humanity in Sierra Leone today are the ideological descendants of those who sold their fellow Africans to slavery centuries ago, because they are willing to commit atrocities against their own people for the purpose of accessing natural resources so that they can squander them.

The long-time objective of Charles Taylor of Liberia, Burkina Faso, and Libya is to do to the rest of West Africa what they are doing today in Sierra Leone. Accordingly, the violence in Sierra Leone threatens the stability and prosperity of the entire West African sub-region.

The tragedy in Sierra Leone cannot be solved without appropriate international intervention. Canada is in an ideal position to help bring the conflict in Sierra Leone to a timely and satisfactory conclusion for at least two reasons.

First, Canada is highly regarded in West Africa for her achievements in human development and human security, as evidenced by her top position in the United Nations Development Programme's human development index, her leadership role in the abolition of landmines use, and her practice of democracy at home.

Second, Canada is both an anglophone and a francophone country and is perceived by us in West Africa as a non-threatening and neutral power. It would thus be easy for Canada to be accepted in the mediator's role by both English- and French-speaking countries in the sub-region.

• 1535

Canada's role in West Africa can easily be limited to the following three areas.

One, Canada can easily support ECOMOG's dual track policy of security at home and peace talks with the rebels.

As far as security assistance is concerned, ECOMOG, the West African peacekeepers, led by Nigeria, needs to be strengthened so that it becomes strong enough to adequately protect civilians and the democratic institutions they are trying to build or rebuild following RUF depravities. Presently ECOMOG is undermanned and under-equipped, and this has enabled the RUF to inflict terrible suffering on civilians almost at will, as well as to destroy private and public property. Military support for ECOMOG could come in the form of light arms, combat military transport, military training, medical help, as well as rebuilding the Sierra Leone police force.

Canada can help in diplomatic advocacy. Democratic governments in West Africa need diplomatic help, not only within ECOWAS in the West African sub-region, but also in international councils, such as the UN Security Council, General Assembly, and other UN agencies; the Commonwealth; and so forth. Some of the governments in West Africa have a military pedigree, so a number of them are not as supportive of Sierra Leone as the facts warrant.

Canada can use her considerable diplomatic power and prestige to help halt the flow of weapons to Sierra Leone rebels. Canada can help get Libya, Liberia, and Burkina Faso to terminate their support for the RUF. Canada can help get other nations to assist ECOMOG and to help prosecute war criminals in Sierra Leone. The crimes committed against humanity in Sierra Leone are absolutely mind-boggling. Those people should be prosecuted. If they are not prosecuted, they are bound to repeat their crimes across the continent.

Further, Canada can help discourage the illegal international trading in Sierra Leone diamonds. Diamonds are what is fuelling the war. Canada can also use its diplomatic power to help creditor nations write off or reduce Sierra Leone's crippling external indebtedness. Without significant debt relief, Sierra Leone will never achieve her full potential in the community of nations.

Sierra Leone needs humanitarian aid, and Canada can assist in that area. As set forth in Mr. Pratt's report, the humanitarian situation in Sierra Leone and Guinea is simply terrible—absolutely terrible. Nearly 1.2 million of our people are internally displaced. More than 500,000 people are in refugee camps in Guinea and Liberia. Thousands of our people have lost body parts on account of deliberate RUF terror tactics. There is a pressing need for food, shelter, medical help, clothing, school materials, and so forth. As long as ECOMOG is undermanned and under-equipped, the flow of casualties, refugees, and the internally displaced will remain unending.

Lastly, Canada can help with reconstruction once peace is achieved. Sierra Leone is normally referred to in international literature as the world's poorest country. Sierra Leone is poor because for nearly 30 years, beginning in the late 1960s, it has been the world's most poorly governed country. Civilian and military governments were nothing but rogues and oppressors.

The country, on the other hand, is naturally very wealthy. In fact the war in Sierra Leone is about wealth. A number of international economic development experts associated with multinational organizations headquartered in Washington, D.C., New York, and Europe have described the geology of my country as a metallurgical kaleidoscope of minerals. Vast quantities of gold, diamond gemstones, titanium, platinum, bauxite, iron ore, and chrome are just a few of my country's natural resources, deposited there by nature. An estimated 50% of the land surface of Sierra Leone contains gold and diamond alluvial deposits.

• 1540

Our land is naturally well watered and suitable for large-scale commercial agriculture. Tropical hardwoods abound. Coffee, cocoa, and other tree crops grow easily on our land. The country sits atop the rich east Atlantic continental shelf, one of the world's richest remaining fisheries.

Moreover, the country is geographically very beautiful. The Sierra Leone peninsula is the only place in a very large stretch of Africa where mountains meet pristine, sandy ocean beaches of sparkling, blue-green, clean, clear salt water. Similar beautiful beaches constitute most of the Sierra Leone coastline, awaiting economic development.

Sierra Leone will never be able to develop these resources without international capital, management, and technology, as well as access to international markets, such as Canada's. Sierra Leone's large store of natural wealth will enable her to rebuild her institutions without becoming a permanent drag on other nations. Canada need not fear, therefore, to be involved in Sierra Leone, because our country will eventually be able to pay its own way.

Once again, I thank Madam Chairman and the honourable members of this subcommittee for allowing Sierra Leone to be heard in Canada today.

Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Pratt, do you have something to add to that?

Mr. David Pratt: I do have a few brief comments, Madam Chair.

I have a list of recommendations and suggestions for action by the Government of Canada. There are 19 of them in total. I won't waste the time of the committee by going through them, but if they could be appended to the committee's report, I think it would be extremely helpful for members to understand exactly where I think the scope of Canada's assistance could be.

Let me start by first of all thanking the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Honourable Lloyd Axworthy, for giving me this opportunity to serve as his special envoy to Sierra Leone. My history in Sierra Leone goes back to 1990, when I visited the country, certainly under better circumstances, as a participant in a program that was sponsored by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and funded by CIDA, which linked Canadian municipalities with sub-Saharan municipalities for the purposes of development.

I can tell you that in my 11 years of elected office, the task Minister Axworthy gave me is certainly one of the most interesting and challenging projects I've been associated with.

My mandate in connection with my role as special envoy was to report on the security, humanitarian, and political situation in Sierra Leone. It's my view that the ongoing conflict in Sierra Leone has many parallels with the situation in Kosovo, because of the scale of the human tragedy, the number of refugees generated, and the potential it has to destabilize the region it's in—in this particular case, the West African sub-region.

As His Excellency mentioned, the humanitarian situation in Sierra Leone is desperate and has the potential to get much worse. The latest estimates from relief agencies placed the number of internally displaced persons at 700,000. There are another 500,000 refugees in neighbouring countries: Guinea has 400,000 and Liberia another 100,000. In Freetown alone, the capital city, estimates of internally displaced people run as high as 250,000.

Apart from a serious shelter crisis and the need for food assistance, one of the most critical problems facing Sierra Leone is the situation of the small towns and villages in the interior of the country, which are outside the control of the government. Unofficial estimates put the number of people living in rebel-controlled areas, with no access to humanitarian assistance, at approximately 1.5 million people.

The security situation in Sierra Leone remains extremely tenuous. The Government of Sierra Leone, supported by ECOMOG, the Nigerian-dominated West African force, only really controls the Freetown peninsula and a few of the major towns. The Kamajor militia force, which is sympathetic to the government, also holds some key towns, but the rest of the country certainly appears to be in the hands of the Revolutionary United Front rebels.

Just to sum up, I believe Canada should be providing more humanitarian assistance and further logistical support for ECOMOG forces. I also believe that politically Canada could play a leadership role as a member of the Security Council by putting pressure on those countries supporting the rebels and by serving as a bridge between anglophone and francophone countries in the region.

That's it for my official statement, Madam Chair. I'm sure we'd be pleased to respond to any questions members of the committee might have.

The Chair: I'm sure there are questions as well. Thank you, Mr. Pratt.

Mr. Martin.

• 1545

Mr. Keith Martin (Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, Ref.): Thank you very much, Madame President.

Thank you all for coming today. It's a very serious issue. I'd like to congratulate Mr. Pratt on the fine work he's done on this very serious issue that is on many of our minds.

While I agree, Your Excellency, with many of the things you've said, particularly the solutions, the question that comes to my mind is, how? The problem of the illegal flow of weapons into Sierra Leone is a very serious one, as we all know, but how do we manage to block off that flow? The rebels are coming in from the east. How are we going to block off the flow of arms to them in that area, which is extraordinarily difficult to patrol?

On the issue of diamonds, since you said this is as much an economic issue of people trying to secure the diamond mines in the eastern part of the country as anything else, how do we manage to block off those diamonds, which are so easily and readily taken out of the country, not only by boat but also on small planes and on foot?

I know Mr. Fowler is going to Angola right now to deal with this particular issue, because as you know, they're faced with a very similar problem, with diamonds fuelling the war in Angola right now.

I'm very interested to know how we're actually going to do that, given the fact that diamonds are very hard to trace because of the similarity of diamonds coming from all over Africa, particularly sub-Saharan Africa.

Also I'd like to know your opinion of the role of the African Development Bank and whether or not the African Development Bank can play a larger role in trying to put pressure on the countries contributing to this, such as Libya, Burkina Faso, and Liberia. I'd also like to know whether the IMF and the World Bank play a role.

Lastly, as we know, the contributing countries to ECOMOG are having an increasingly difficult time finding support within their own countries, particularly Ghana and Nigeria, for sending their troops there. How do we manage to support ECOMOG? How do we manage to convince the contributing countries to continue with this? Or do we strengthen the domestic capabilities of the armed forces in Sierra Leone to do the job and then gradually remove ECOMOG forces from the picture?

Thank you.

Mr. John Leigh: Thank you, honourable member. These are very tough questions. I'll answer them in the order in which you asked them.

Before the weapons get to Liberia, they are shipped out of eastern Europe. They're shipped out of Ukraine. So the Canadian government can use diplomacy to talk to the Ukraine government to make sure they guard against shipping weapons to our area.

I believe the Government of Ukraine is willing to release shipments of weapons made to Liberia and to Burkina Faso. Canada can use its good offices by checking those manifests against what Burkina Faso and Liberia are holding in stock, and ask them to account for the difference.

So not only can we ask Ukraine or Bulgaria—whoever is shipping those weapons—to stop shipping, but we can ask those countries next to Sierra Leone to account for their weapon purchases. We believe all the weapons purchased by Burkina Faso are ending up straight inside Sierra Leone via Liberia. So diplomacy can work in that area. Sierra Leone will ask Ukraine, but Sierra Leone needs support for information, because it's a small country. We will need international support to get Ukraine to cooperate with us.

Secondly, diamonds can easily be traced to their source of origin. There's a DNA of diamonds. So the diamond centres in the world are very specific. They're in Belgium. They're in Beirut. They're in some other towns. Canadian diplomacy can help Sierra Leone to identify where those diamonds are coming from and who the buyers are so that we can sue them for distributing stolen goods. If we can sue them in a legal court of law and claim damages, maybe there will be no market for Sierra Leone diamonds or illegal diamonds. Those are the areas where Canada can help.

The African Development Bank is a very small, highly undercapitalized bank, so it will put no major pressure on any of the governments in West Africa. The World Bank may. The IMF may. We are using those approaches. But basically people like Gadhafi and Charles Taylor and Compaore don't listen to anybody. They don't.

• 1550

Taylor is actually running an organized crime administration in Liberia, so it's going to be extremely difficult to use this kind of financial pressure on him. He's getting money from Sierra Leone, all the money he needs, so he doesn't need to deal with the IMF and the World Bank.

So getting the diamonds out of his possession is one way to deal with him. Making sure there are no markets for his stolen diamonds would be another way to do the thing. Blocking the weapons flow to Liberia would be another approach.

You asked about ECOMOG and the local support. I don't think local support for ECOMOG is drying up in West Africa. What is drying up in West Africa are finances to pay for ECOMOG. Nigeria has been carrying the ball all these years—seven years in Liberia, and now several years in Sierra Leone. When oil prices were very good, Nigeria never complained. But oil prices have declined from $25 a barrel to less than $10 a few weeks ago, and it is causing financial hardship to Nigeria. Nigeria needs its own resources to develop its own country.

So if we get military support from countries such as Canada, the United States, and Britain, I believe any complaints against ECOMOG in West Africa will dry up. It is finances they're complaining about, not the need to support an elected government in a neighbouring country. They are all for that.

The Sierra Leone army was for a very long time an instrument of political corruption. They staged a coup on May 25, 1997 and caused horrendous human suffering in Sierra Leone. ECOMOG removed them in February and March 1998; 5,000 or 6,000 surrendered, and ECOMOG persuaded President Kabbah to rehire some of these people. These people were rehired and retrained, but last November and December they switched sides again and joined the rebels, and they are the ones occupying the area while the government is out of control right now. We were occupying the whole country, but because they switched sides after they had been pardoned and there was supposed to be reconciliation, we lost the diamond mines and we lost part of the northern province.

So we're now in the process of rebuilding a brand-new military from scratch, and we're getting support from the British government. Where Canada can play a role is in retraining our police force. Our police force took a lot of casualties from the invasion in January, and over the years, they've allowed management standards to deteriorate. It is more a police force to promote the corrupt activities of the rogue governments than it is to provide civilian security. Canada can assist in modernizing the Sierra Leone police.

I hope I've answered your questions and have not forgotten any points.

Mr. Keith Martin: Thank you very much.

The Chair: Mr. Pratt.

Mr. David Pratt: I'd just add a few comments to those of the high commissioner.

Some of the recommendations I've formulated do touch on some of the issues you've referred to.

In no particular order, first of all, in terms of support to ECOMOG, of course the Canadian government did provide $1 million of logistical support to ECOMOG in January, but in view of the overall needs of ECOMOG, that money is used up fairly quickly.

In terms of recommendations for ECOMOG, one of the things I'm suggesting is that, if possible, Canada continue to provide non-lethal support to ECOMOG troop-contributing nations beyond the level previously provided, in either the amount or the type of support, such as the financing of helicopter flying hours for the ECOMOG support helicopter, which is very important to their effort. I also recommend that we seriously examine the possibility of providing lethal support to ECOMOG troop-contributing nations—that is, direct contributions of small arms, ammunition, etc.—and that we encourage other donor nations to participate in the effort to support ECOMOG.

Also, it's important that Canada explore with the United Kingdom—because the United Kingdom is very instrumental in providing the bulk of support to ECOMOG right now—areas where we might be able to provide some limited support, both lethal and non-lethal, to the new Sierra Leonian army. I say this because your point is well taken: eventually the Sierra Leonian army is going to have to take over and deal with the situation in the country.

• 1555

Also, assuming a peace agreement, I recommend that Canada examine the possibility of providing, in the medium term, training opportunities for the new Sierra Leonian army through Canada's military training assistance program, MTAP, in such areas as leadership and advanced military studies with DND, civil-military cooperation, and human rights at the Pearson Peacekeeping Centre.

On the issue of the diamond trade, one of the things that is important and that Canada should consider is to support a study of how the West African diamond trade has affected the conflict in Sierra Leone particularly. I believe there's a study going on right now on the Angolan diamond situation, but Sierra Leone has some unique aspects to its diamond trade, and it's important that we try to understand every aspect of that.

As for the small arms issue, another recommendation I would suggest is that Canada help further mobilize the international community to put pressure on countries supporting the rebels and explore ways to impose sanctions against them. In particular, as the high commissioner noted, the countries that are clearly involved here are Liberia, Burkina Faso, Libya, and the Ukraine. So certainly action should be taken in that regard.

The Chair: Okay, thank you.

Ms. Augustine.

Ms. Jean Augustine (Etobicoke—Lakeshore, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair.

High Commissioner, welcome to Ottawa and to this committee.

My compliments to my colleague for this report, which I hope we'll all have a chance to read at length.

I want to ask about the relationship between agencies such as the Red Cross—I'm just going by what I read in the press—and agencies involved in humanitarian and other kinds of assistance. If you could speak to that issue, I'd appreciate that.

Mr. John Leigh: Thank you very much, Ms. Augustine.

We've been very fortunate to have a number of international NGOs operate very successfully in Sierra Leone. The World Food Programme takes food to remote villages; World Vision does the same thing, mostly with children; and the International Red Cross gives medical aid. Medical aid is desperately needed in Sierra Leone, and the Red Cross is fulfilling part of that mission, but the Red Cross will not be able to cope. It's small, it has limited resources, and it has been drawn into some political conflict with ECOMOG in the past, but that has now been resolved.

I'll tell you something. But for the intervention of a number of international NGOs such as CARE, Catholic charities, I mentioned the World Food Programme, and so forth, Sierra Leone would be in a terrible disaster situation right now. There would have been no hope for civilians—innocent civilians brutalized for no just cause by the RUF.

So another way Canada can help is to support these organizations. They are very effective, they have high credibility locally, the people trust them, and they're willing to go almost anywhere in the country. Right now they're confined to areas where ECOMOG is in control. We're trying to talk to the opposition to allow us to reach starving citizens behind enemy lines, not only to feed them, but to administer to the medical situation. Diseases are spreading in Sierra Leone behind enemy lines; measles, influenza, and tuberculosis are beginning to show up in remote areas. We're asking the opposition to do that. But unless we have security, we will not risk sending NGOs beyond ECOMOG lines.

Thank you very much.

Ms. Jean Augustine: I also want to ask about something I feel conflicted about. You say Kosovo and Sierra Leone have similarities. In terms of the responses we see at present—the response to the Kosovo situation and the response to Sierra Leone—I'd like to ask my colleague, who has been there, what do you see as the major differences as to why the world seems to be responding differently, apart from the NATO countries?

• 1600

Mr. David Pratt: Let me start by saying there are a number of similarities in the nature of the conflicts. First of all, both are intrastate conflicts in Kosovo and Sierra Leone. Both are being responded to by regional military forces or regional alliances of military forces. In the case of Kosovo, it's NATO obviously. In the case of Sierra Leone, it's ECOMOG.

There is no question that what has been called the CNN factor has had a major role in the response to the humanitarian crisis in Kosovo. The fact that you have up-to-the-minute reporting 24 hours a day on Kosovo focuses the attention of the international community on the humanitarian needs that exist. As a result, Kosovo has been virtually deluged with all sorts of food aid and clothing. There are some shortages there as well, but certainly the refugees appear to be in a much better situation than the refugees and the displaced people in Sierra Leone.

How did that happen? Why did that happen? Well, I'm probably not the best person to provide an analysis of that. A situation occurred in January in Freetown, where two white journalists were shot: Myles Tierney and a Canadian, Ian Stewart. Mr. Tierney died as a result of his wounds in Freetown; Mr. Stewart is in the process of recovering from his wounds. That sent a message to the international media that Freetown was not necessarily a terribly safe place to be and that not a lot of people were falling over themselves to try to get to Sierra Leone to cover the story, unfortunately. The BBC was there and has provided fairly good coverage, but apart from that, the interest of the western press has not been what you would describe as excessive.

So Sierra Leone certainly has not had the focus it probably deserves in terms of the level of the humanitarian crisis that exists there. I would hope that people in the media would take more of an interest in Sierra Leone and some of the other crises around the world, because in both cases, individual people are involved and human suffering is the result.

Ms. Jean Augustine: Well, one can make a guess as to whether race or colour or any of that has anything whatsoever to do with this, but that is another discussion for another time.

I'd like to ask about the involvement of the United Nations. I know, Excellency, you've put before us several things Canada can do. Can you lay out maybe something the United Nations, whether it's the office for human rights or whatever, can do in that area?

Mr. John Leigh: Yes, Ma'am.

Canada is a member of the United Nations Security Council. Sierra Leone's case is before the UN Security Council. Canada can be very influential in that body to assist the situation in Sierra Leone. Canada can use its position there to make sure arms don't flow into Sierra Leone and to make sure—and this is very important—that the United Nations makes provision for the prosecution of war criminals in Sierra Leone. Only the United Nations has the power to set up an international court in West Africa to address the issue of crimes against humanity.

I tell you, Honourable Member, the crimes committed by the RUF against unarmed civilians, including babies, old people, and farm women, are absolutely unspeakable. The Government of Sierra Leone would like to have the the world support it in prosecuting those perpetrators. So that's one area you can work in.

Immediately, at the moment, what we need in Sierra Leone are monitors—United Nations peacekeepers to monitor a ceasefire. We're in the process of negotiations right now, and we hope they will lead to a peace treaty. Before a peace treaty can be implemented, there has to be a ceasefire. We want to make sure that ceasefire is a genuine ceasefire.

• 1605

The Libyan method is that you use a ceasefire to rearm, regroup, and strengthen your position. A ceasefire to them is a stepping stone to a higher level of carnage. Therefore, when we go to a ceasefire this time, we want to make sure it's a genuine ceasefire that will lead to demobilization. So we need United Nations monitors in sufficient numbers and strength to ensure that a ceasefire regime is implemented objectively. That's another area where the United Nations can help us.

The United Nations can also help us in addressing some of the humanitarian issues. There is the United Nations High Commission for Refugees, but it's poorly funded. The honourable member will tell you he's been to Guinea and the refugee camps and he's seen the deplorable state of affairs of those camps. Compared to Sierra Leone, the Kosovar refugees are in the Waldorf Astoria. We are in terrible condition. So I think we should ask the United Nations to upgrade its camps in Guinea.

It is causing tremendous problems for the Government of Guinea. That government has sacrificed a lot for Sierra Leone, and it's also a poor country that is just beginning to develop its resources.

So those are the areas where I believe the United Nations can help us.

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Proctor.

Mr. Dick Proctor (Palliser, NDP): Thank you very much, Madam Chair. It's a pleasure to be here.

Thank you for coming, Your Excellency.

The nub of your paper, it seems to me, is that Canada is in an ideal position to help bring the conflict to an end. You've outlined two reasons for that: humanitarian development and human security, and also the English-French aspect of this country and the comparisons there. Then you go on to talk about three areas: security assistance, diplomatic advocacy, and humanitarian aid.

I know you just talked about the United Nations and Canada being on the Security Council, but is that enough, and what other countries need to be involved or should be involved in bringing this conflict to a conclusion?

The Chair: And can I add to that? You're based in Washington, and we'd like to know what kind of interest the U.S. Congress has shown, or what kind of commitment the U.S. has made, to this end.

Mr. John Leigh: Thank you, Madam Chairman.

Thank you, sir.

Right now we're getting strong support from both the United States and Great Britain. The United Kingdom has been very supportive of ECOMOG, the elected government, and the humanitarian concerns of Sierra Leone victims. I would say the United Kingdom is number one in supporting Sierra Leone. The high commissioner in Freetown, Peter Penfold, has been very active. He's one of the heroes in Sierra Leone, because he's really got the United Kingdom very much involved in Sierra Leone.

The United States has been more supportive of humanitarian concerns than of ECOMOG. When this thing began, the United States didn't have a good relationship with Nigeria, because of the military situation over there. But over recent months, the allegiances have warmed up, and we hope that will lead to more confidence in ECOMOG.

But Britain has supported ECOMOG, the elected government, and humanitarian concerns. Only now is the United States beginning to show interest in ECOMOG. They've given aid in the past, but it was minuscule, marginal assistance—nowhere near the Kosovo thing.

For the five people executed in Kosovo—and that's a bad thing, and it should not be done—they are willing to send 1,000 planes and a proposed $6 billion budget, and the Republicans say to increase it to $13 billion. They kill 5,000 people in Sierra Leone in two weeks, and we get $3 million or $4 million from the United States. They said they're going to triple that to $12 million. It's still peanuts compared to what they're giving to Kosovo. We appreciate the aid, and we don't begrudge the Kosovars, because they are also in a terrible position, but we believe the United States can and should do more.

In the U.S. Congress, I would say the Republicans are very supportive of Sierra Leone—in my opinion, much more so than the Democrats. But there is strong Democratic support for Sierra Leone within the United States Congress. Today they are debating a resolution asking for more support from the administration, as well as naming Liberia and Burkina Faso as the people fuelling the conflict in Sierra Leone.

• 1610

So support for Sierra Leone is beginning to increase within the United States Congress, and we hope we can get a decision very shortly. The administration was proposing power-sharing, but it now understands that this is no longer a civil war and that the rebels are nothing but criminals, so we're hoping there will be more support from the United States.

Besides the United States, Canada, and Britain, the industrial democracies of the world can afford to assist Sierra Leone. Sierra Leone doesn't need $13 billion. I think $50 million can make a big difference in bringing ECOMOG to the position where it will deal decisively with the rebels. That's not a lot of money. So if you get countries of the European Union, the other Commonwealth countries, and the western industrial democracies supporting Sierra Leone, I think that will be enough, plus the aid we're getting from our West African neighbours, to do the job. But Canada's support is marginal, and we hope some consideration will be given to improving on that.

Thank you.

Mr. Dick Proctor: Thank you very much.

I have just one other question, following up on what Miss Augustine was asking, but from a different perspective.

A lot of commentators are noting and there are many references to the similarities between Kosovo and Sierra Leone. Western democracies have said, by the actions in Kosovo, that they are not going to stand for the human rights atrocities. In effect a line has been drawn in the sand there.

But it seems to me commentators are also saying that once this conflict in Kosovo is resolved, there are other spots in the world where the atrocities are equally bad. We're hearing of Sierra Leone today. I would say the two that come most frequently to mind are East Timor and Sierra Leone.

So my question, to either David or the ambassador, is this. Once Kosovo is behind us, do you think it will be irresistible to western democracies, NATO, or whomever to say they're going in to clean up Sierra Leone, East Timor, and other parts of the world where there are significant human rights atrocities?

Mr. David Pratt: I hope the situation in Kosovo will be resolved fairly quickly. I think we all hope and pray that's the case.

I can't speak to the situation in East Timor, because I don't really have that high a level of familiarity with the issues there, but in the case of Sierra Leone, where you have a situation where there are gross human rights abuses, it's important that regional organizations, such as NATO in the case of Kosovo and ECOMOG in the case of Sierra Leone, respond.

In the case of ECOMOG, where they don't have the resources necessary to complete the job and to do it quickly and with respect for human rights as well, they need support from the outside community. That could be in the form of, as I say, lethal or non-lethal support to ECOMOG. But it's a question of everyone pulling together—not just Canada, not just the United States, not just Britain, but the world community pulling together—and treating this area as a priority and getting on with the resolution of the issue.

Frankly I'm convinced that if the world community dedicated 10% of the attention it's put towards Kosovo to Sierra Leone, the matter could be dealt with in probably a question of weeks. This conflict has been going on now for eight years. It's an incredible tragedy. It's a national nightmare for the people in Sierra Leone.

Mr. Dick Proctor: Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Reed.

Mr. Julian Reed (Halton, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair.

Excellency, you've explained to us very well how the illicit diamond trade is fuelling the conflict in the whole area, but you also said something that intrigued me: diamonds have their own DNA, as you put it, their own way of being recognized as to their source. I'm wondering how difficult a chore it would be to put technology in place in various funnel spots in the world that would be able to identify this illegal trade or identify these illegal diamonds.

• 1615

It seems to me that if the trade were able to be at least slowed down, if not dried up completely, it could go a long way towards helping.

Mr. John Leigh: That's right. Thank you for your question.

I think the technology is already in place in some countries. It's a question of us using diplomacy to expand on it and begin to utilize it.

The elected Government of Sierra Leone is very weak. Sierra Leone has been in a declining state for 25 to 30 years, and from the day we were elected, we've been fighting for survival. All the guys who've been there for 30 years ganged up against the elected government so that they could continue business as usual, so we're very weak.

We cannot go to the Belgian government and begin to pressure them to use the technology to identify all the diamonds and their sources, know who the buyers and importers and sellers are, and go after them. Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States, if they agree with us, can put this pressure on so that we can identify the traders and go after their assets. If we can go after their assets, the trade will be reduced. We won't be able to dry it up, because it's impossible, but we can try to take away the profit and the incentive from those guys occupying the mines.

As long as they occupy the mines and can sell the diamonds, there will be no peace agreement, because they're not going to give those mines up. It's the same with Savimbi in Angola. He is not going to give those mines up, no matter what. You have to remove them.

Mr. Julian Reed: Thank you, Excellency.

Mr. David Pratt: It's worth mentioning as well, just as a supplementary comment, that the diamond trade in Sierra Leone has the potential to generate about $300 million to $400 million per year. You can imagine how many small arms you can buy if all of those diamonds reach the markets and are converted to hard currency. It could fuel that conflict for not just years, but generations, on a continuing basis, unless something is done to deal with the diamond trade.

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Patry.

[Translation]

Mr. Bernard Patry (Pierrefonds—Dollard, Lib.): Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

[English]

Thank you, Mr. Pratt and Your Excellency.

First of all I want to congratulate my colleague for his work. It's fabulous work and is up to date with the situation in Sierra Leone.

I have two or three very short questions.

In your comments, you talked about the security situation, the humanitarian situation, and the political situation. In the political situation, you mentioned that the United Nations Security Council has authorized the deployment of a UN observers mission to Sierra Leone. What has already been done? What was the mission, and what were the results of this mission, if it was done?

Second, do you have any chance of negotiation with these rebels, or is it going to end up in a real war?

Third, you mentioned the role of Canada and the fact that Canada is a bilingual country and is a member of the Commonwealth of Nations and also La Francophonie. Are any of these issues being dealt with in the Commonwealth of Nations? And as for La Francophonie, we're having the next Francophonie summit here in Moncton in September, so Canada, with France, could put pressure on Burkina Faso, and also Canada and France could talk to Belgium. I think you need the consensus not just of the contact group you could have over there, but also international people working together, even the Commonwealth and the Francophonie together. I don't know if it was done that way.

Mr. David Pratt: First of all, on the issue of UNOMSIL, which is the United Nations observer mission in Sierra Leone, my understanding is that UNOMSIL has its roots in the Abidjan accord, which was the initial peace agreement signed back in 1996.

Everyone thought at the time that this was going to be a good agreement. The problem was it didn't have the implementation mechanisms or monitoring mechanisms to allow it to actually work. One of the things the rebels were successful in doing at the time was to reduce the number of United Nations observers from, I think, 700 down to about 70. As a result of that, within a month or so, the peace agreement had fallen apart completely.

So UNOMSIL remains on the ground, largely in Freetown. I don't think it's managed to make its way into the interior of the country. It's essentially a group of people waiting for a job to do. They're watching the situation as far as ECOMOG is concerned and they're providing reports to Francis Okelo, the special representative of the Secretary-General, but they have yet to really fulfil the potential of their mandate.

• 1620

On the issue of negotiation with the rebels, I share what I think probably could be described as the conventional view of the Government of Sierra Leone and many observers, which is that the idea of negotiation or the possibility of power-sharing is not an option that would be acceptable to the people of Sierra Leone. In my view, it's simply not on.

At one point in its history, the RUF might have had a political platform to negotiate from in terms of opposing the corruption of the Momoh government in the early 1990s. They seemed to stand for something back then. But as the high commissioner has indicated, the RUF has been corrupted by the diamond wealth. The raison d'être is to maintain control of that diamond wealth.

As a result, they don't really have a political platform. The only document they produced was written I think in 1995 or 1996, called Footpaths to Democracy, and it was nothing but a political diatribe. There was nothing of substance there to indicate any sort of platform of governance or any firm political position.

So the word I have been using is “dialogue” with the rebels, rather than “negotiation”, because what's critical here is that you have to open up a dialogue in order to work towards a meaningful ceasefire, having the rebels relinquish control of the diamond areas, and establishing a lasting peace in Sierra Leone.

The government's two-track policy, with dialogue and negotiation on one hand, and on the other hand trying to extend the security envelope in Sierra Leone, is a solid one, but it needs more of a push from the international community as well, in what perhaps could be described as the development of a third track: the international community's involvement.

Finally, on the issue of CMAG, or the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group, which is the group within the Commonwealth that's been looking at this, Minister Kilgour attended a meeting in London not too long ago, and the issue of Sierra Leone was front and centre.

One of the recommendations I've come up with, though it's not in my report, is that Canada, as a result of its membership in both the Commonwealth and the Francophonie, try to involve France in the search for a solution to this conflict, which has both a regional and an anglophone-francophone dimension to it.

Perhaps the time has come for more coordination between the Francophonie and the Commonwealth on peace and peace-building issues. We have to start thinking in ways we haven't thought before in trying to resolve some of these crises, such as Sierra Leone.

The Chair: Thank you.

Excellency, Mr. Graham is the chair of our main committee on foreign affairs and international trade.

Mr. Graham.

Mr. Bill Graham (Toronto Centre—Rosedale, Lib.): Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Pratt and Your Excellency, for coming today. It's a very interesting report. I apologize for arriving late.

Just looking through the report, it seems to me pretty clear that the security issue has to be addressed first in the country. Until that basic need is solved, any aid or anything else is going to be disbursed or lost. So the security issue is there.

I read through the report and I've been listening to you. It's obviously an extraordinarily complex situation on the ground. I was interested to note the estimates that Burkina Faso may or may not be involved. Liberia seems to be clearly involved.

So my first question is, what leverage do we have on particularly Liberia to stop its intervention? That seems to me one security contribution that Canada and other countries could be making.

Secondly, I didn't catch your introduction, so I don't know if you had any specific proposals to deny the wealth of the diamond mines to those who are financing rebel activities in the countries, which clearly is another security contribution.

Those are my principal questions.

• 1625

In terms of security itself, do you think there should be some form of specific aid from Canada to the ECOMOG force? I know we've provided some troops in the former Republic of the Congo recently, so we do have some actual serving Canadian troops in Africa, particularly in francophone situations. So I just wondered if that was the case.

Second, I haven't had a chance to see if you made any specific humanitarian aid propositions that we should be looking at for recommendation to the ministry.

And my third question is on the basic reconstruction of the country. It seems extraordinary to read that this is a country now listed as having some of the greatest mineral wealth of the world and yet is the poorest country in the world on the UN development index. This is obviously a situation that is a result of a long history of problems. What can we do to try to re-establish the very basic conditions of civil society to enable the country to establish the benefits it could obtain from the tremendous wealth that's there?

Mr. David Pratt: Let me address your first comment with respect to the security situation. You've read the report well in reaching that conclusion, and the security situation is definitely paramount, but the humanitarian situation also can't be ignored.

One of the things I certainly feel is important is that, because the Freetown peninsula is secure, it can be used as a beachhead for humanitarian aid that goes into the interior of the country. But it's extremely important that ECOMOG be supported, both from a non-lethal and a lethal point of view, in terms of providing them with the materiel they need to extend the security envelope to the interior of the country.

We've seen in some of the most recent news reports that have been on the web—unfortunately they never seem to make their way into the newspapers, but according to the information on the web—when an ECOMOG force takes a particular town, thousands of people come from the bush into the new secure area. These people have been living in the bush for months on end. Some of them are walking skeletons. We have to be in a position to get aid to those people as quickly as possible, once areas are liberated and become secure.

On the diamond issue, His Excellency addressed that already and I made a few comments as well, but let me reiterate that it's very important that we have a real understanding of how the diamond trade works in West Africa and of the relationship between it and small arms, the countries involved, and how the diamonds go to market.

His Excellency mentioned the DNA of diamonds. I've certainly heard that. We heard when were in Sierra Leone and the region that Sierra Leonian diamonds, as well as diamonds from any other part of the world, can be traced by their country of origin. There are particular characteristics that a trained eye can determine. As luck would have it, Sierra Leonian diamonds are among the best in the world as well, which makes them a more prized commodity.

A number of recommendations are important in terms of humanitarian assistance. Shelter is obviously very important. Food aid is very important as well. The people who have had arms and legs chopped off have tremendous needs with respect to prosthetic devices. One of the suggestions I make is that Canada help build a long-term capacity to provide prosthetic devices to people in the country.

The scars on the people in Sierra Leone are going to be there for generations. When we were there, we saw a little girl at one of the amputee camps who was four years old and had had her left arm chopped off. Both of her parents had at least one of their hands cut off. It was a terrible, terrible thing to see.

• 1630

That's the sort of thing Canada could do.

As well, there's a need for treatment for people who are victims of sexual abuse. What we've seen with the RUF is that they've taken young boys and young girls, and in the case of the young girls and women, used them as sex slaves, as cooks, and as porters to carry their weapons and ammunition. These people are traumatized, and they need help, as do the amputees.

Another issue mentioned in the report, which I would be remiss if I didn't talk about, is the issue of education. The schools in Sierra Leone have been virtually destroyed. After the 1997 coup, 300 schools were destroyed. I believe around 60 schools were destroyed in the January fighting in Freetown.

The primary school-age population in Sierra Leone is, I believe, somewhere in the vicinity of about 300,000 to 400,000. Only about 10% of the children are now receiving education, and it's only for a few hours a day. So there are tremendous needs in terms of educating the children, because they're losing time. In some cases they've already lost a year, two years, or three years of education. It's a very desperate situation.

Mr. Bill Graham: High Commissioner, as you probably know, Canada is advancing in the United Nations Security Council the concept of what we call the human security agenda, which addresses conflicts of this nature and how it's civilians who are the real victims in many modern conflicts, of which this seems to be one terrible example. Do you think that at the level of the United Nations Security Council, you're seeing some appreciation of the importance of that human security agenda and getting more coalitions around being able to get concrete contributions to solving the issue? Are you getting active support at the UN level, or is it largely dependent on West Africa to help itself?

Mr. John Leigh: Thank you, Mr. Graham.

We're getting help from the United Nations, but it's really marginal. It's totally inadequate.

For example, we are aware of the work Canada has done in controlling the use of landmines. There are landmines in Sierra Leone, but I don't see any debate of that in the United Nations. The landmines are coming in from the Ukraine to Burkina Faso to Liberia to Sierra Leone. I don't see any pressure being put on those countries by the United Nations.

Sure, we could use more help. The United Nations is one avenue to use, but we cannot rely entirely on the United Nations. They are slow, they're difficult, and some decisions are subject to veto. Canada can use other organizations. They can go directly and become an observer group at ECOMOG conferences, like Britain and the United States. They can go there and have a direct hand in that. They can work within the Commonwealth of Nations. The annual conference is over there, and there's a direct organization they can work through.

Canada will make far more contributions to address these issues soonest if it uses avenues in addition to the United Nations.

Mr. Bill Graham: Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

The Chair: Thank you.

[Translation]

Ms. Debien.

Ms. Maud Debien (Laval East, BQ): Good afternoon, Your Excellency and Mr. Pratt.

We know that Canada's Minister of Foreign Affairs takes very seriously trafficking in small arms and what is called micro- disarmament. In your report, Mr. Pratt, you say that some countries, in particular Liberia, Bulgaria, Ukraine, Libya and Burkina Faso, have shipped weapons to Sierra Leone, although some of them deny that fact. You even said that a few French and Angolan nationals may be involved in arms trafficking because of the diamond trade.

Given that concern of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, what did Canada do up to now to deal with these countries that provide weapons? Maybe I should not refer to Liberia and Libya, but I think of Bulgaria and Ukraine, where Canada would certainly have a role to play. What did we do to denounce those countries that are shipping weapons to Sierra Leone?

I am very concerned by the issue of child warriors. The Kamajors in particular who support the government of Sierra Leone are using a lot of child soldiers, because of a belief that purity protects people. They use children who are considered pure and invincible because they have had no sexual relationship. That statement was made recently to a reporter of Le Monde by Hinga Norman, Supreme Commander of the Kamajors.

• 1635

I would like to know how we could deal with that problem or how the Canadian government could put pressure on the government of Sierra Leone so that the Kamajors stop using child soldiers.

[English]

Mr. David Pratt: Let me answer your second question first, on the issue of child warriors. When we were in Freetown, we did see some evidence of children who were carrying arms and who appeared to be part of the Kamajor forces. But if you read any of the reports that have come from the special representative of the Secretary-General, Mr. Okelo, you'll see he places the responsibility for child warriors squarely on the shoulders of the RUF, in terms of the number of child soldiers who have been employed and the types of activities they've been involved in. As a matter of fact, the RUF has been systematic in the manner in which they've used child warriors.

The problem that exists with respect to the Kamajors—

[Translation]

Ms. Maud Debien: RUF members are not supporting the government, contrary to the Kamajors. There is a very important difference, Mr. Pratt. The RUF is made up of rebels, and I am not referring to them but to the Kamajors who are sympathetic to the Sierra Leone government. It is a very different perspective. If we are able to do something, I think that we should first intervene with the Kamajors. No intervention would be possible, at least at the present time, with the RUF. Later on we will have to repair all damages made by the RUF, but with the Kamajors who are sympathetic to the government, I think that we could solve this problem right now.

[English]

Mr. David Pratt: Let me respond too. I'll ask the high commissioner to provide his comments as well, but let me give you my take on the situation.

In terms of the ECOMOG forces—that is, the Nigerians, the Ghanaians, the Guineans, and the Malians—we didn't see any evidence of child soldiers being used by those forces. As I mentioned, we did see some evidence of child soldiers being used by Kamajors.

The interesting thing and the most important thing to understand about Sierra Leone right now is how little control the government actually has. The government in Sierra Leone is hanging by a thread. In my opinion, it has virtually no control over the Kamajor forces. They are supporting the government. They have lent their support to the government, in terms of providing law and order in towns such as Bo and Kenema and other pockets, especially in the south of the country. But to suggest for a minute that the Government of Sierra Leone could issue a decree saying that from this point henceforth no child soldiers will be used by the Kamajor forces would be virtually irrelevant.

It's hard for a person from Canada to appreciate that, but the best way to describe the situation there is it is bordering on anarchy. The government has to take its support wherever it can get it from, but it doesn't have any control over the policies. And to the extent that policies even exist within the Kamajors, they are very loose. They are not what you would call a disciplined fighting force. There are people in the Kamajor forces who are believers in juju, black magic, and that sort of thing.

I'm sure the high commissioner will want to provide his own take on this, but there just is very little control of the situation from the government's standpoint.

• 1640

Mr. John Leigh: Thank you, Mr. Pratt. I'd like to add to what you've said. You've hit the issue.

But Madame, I believe that in what Hinga Norman was saying—he's our deputy defence minister—he was actually quoting what the rebels believe, not what he believes. I've not seen the article myself.

Let me tell you about child soldiers on the Kamajor side. They're usually orphans. Their parents have been killed by the rebels and they've been wandering around in the bush. The Kamajors go around and collect these children. There are no adequate social programs within Sierra Leone to take care of these children, so they hang around Kamajors as a protective organization.

Some of them are old enough to volunteer; they are used as porters to carry loads. But the Kamajors do not directly send them to go and fight for them. They are mostly orphans, and they are very traumatized by the whole experience. They have no relatives. They cannot go back to their villages, because they have been damaged.

We're looking for programs for these children outside the Kamajors. The Kamajors are the only ones addressing this issue.

So they look like child soldiers, but they're not. They're just wards of the Kamajors. That's what it is. That's what is happening there. It's a very difficult situation.

[Translation]

Ms. Maud Debien: What is your answer to my first question about trafficking in small arms?

[English]

Mr. David Pratt: On that point, the focus on the small arms trade in Sierra Leone, the light that has been shone on that whole issue, has been fairly recent.

I'll give you an example, and it's contained in the report. In early to mid-March, just a few weeks before our delegation arrived, we were talking to people in Freetown who indicated to us that security and intelligence sources had informed them that a planeload of arms had come in from Burkina Faso. It had stopped in Ouagadougou, the capital. The arms had been transshipped through Libya, originating in the Ukraine. They were offloaded in Burkina Faso and subsequently transported into Liberia, where they made their way into Sierra Leone.

I had the opportunity to ask this official, who will remain unnamed, about the intelligence reports. I asked him, “How did you confirm this? Was it through ground observation or do you have satellite photos? What do you have?” The answer that came back was, “We have a combination of both.” So I'm absolutely satisfied of the source of the intelligence.

As His Excellency mentioned, the international community is just beginning to focus attention on the Burkina Fasos and the Liberias, and hopefully the Libyas and the Ukraines also, because they bear responsibility. In my view, they bear some very direct responsibility for some of the atrocities that have occurred in Sierra Leone.

Mr. John Leigh: I'd like to clarify a few points for Madame.

There are no arms coming in from Bulgaria. We just used that as an example. In case arms shipments dry up in Ukraine, they'll go to some other country. Bulgaria and Romania also make small arms.

The arms from the Ukraine are of two types: legal sales by the government and sales by local Mafia in Ukraine. The government in Ukraine has told us they were not aware that their arms shipped to Burkina Faso or Libya were being diverted to Sierra Leone. They said they would look into that, and they're working with the United Nations Sanctions Committee to observe that issue. So the Government of Ukraine is forthcoming on the issue, but we still have to make sure they follow through on what they pledged.

We are also asking the Ukraine government to clamp down on criminal elements within Ukraine that are selling weapons to the rebels. They're still doing it. I just wanted to clarify that point.

Angolans are not in Sierra Leone. It's only that there is a situation in Angola similar to the situation in Sierra Leone. They both have diamond deposits, and in Angola, the opposition fellow there controls the diamond mines. After 10 years of negotiations, he's still hanging onto the mines.

We believe that's what will happen in Sierra Leone. They will never give up the mines, as in Angola. They will hang onto them until we remove them by force. That's our point with Angola.

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Martin.

• 1645

Mr. Keith Martin: Your Excellency, I'd like to follow up on the diamond issue. I had some meetings with DeBeers a little while ago and also with some other individuals involved with this, so I'd be very interested if you would be kind enough to submit to this committee any information you have on how to track diamonds. If there are particular impurities in the carbon latticework of diamonds that enable them to be traced to a particular location, I'd be very interested in seeing that. If your staff could be kind enough to submit that to the committee, that would be very educational for all of us.

Mr. John Leigh: Thank you very much. I'll try.

Mr. Keith Martin: Thank you in advance.

On the issue of negotiating with Mr. Sankoh, it appears to me there is no interest on his part in negotiating. With the diverse groups you mentioned in your intervention that make up the rebel groups, how are we going to actually get that under control? Are you proposing a much-strengthened ECOMOG that's going to engage in a ground war and somehow beat them on the ground in eastern Sierra Leone? Is that what you propose we do—an overwhelming force that goes in and does that?

And lastly, would you propose, or have you made efforts, and can we make efforts, to start a war crimes tribunal now in Sierra Leone, to start the important process you suggested so that these individuals who are committing these heinous atrocities be brought to justice?

Mr. John Leigh: Thank you for your questions.

We have not lost hope completely on Sankoh. They are still putting together their negotiating position, and we're giving them the benefit of the doubt. President Kabbah is one of the most patient men I know in this world. He is willing to walk the extra mile to make sure and doubly sure they don't want peace. So we're not completely writing off Sankoh.

My view of Sankoh is that he doesn't control the entire group of fighters. We hope that in the end he might deliver some of them, and this is why we will sign a limited peace with him.

But there's a group of rebels controlled by Charles Taylor of Liberia. Charles Taylor doesn't listen to anybody. He will do exactly what he wants. As long as he's profiting from the mines, he will not yield one inch.

The way to go about resolving the situation there is first of all to deny him the weapons. We are approaching Ukraine and whoever is supplying small arms to these people to get them to stop. The United Nations can do that and other countries can do that. They have the intelligence facilities.

So stop the arms flow to Sierra Leone. If you stop the arms flow to Sierra Leone, the war is about ended, because the rebels have no internal support. They have no structure in place, except the use of brutality. Nobody is going to come to their aid. If weapons dry up and ECOMOG is strengthened, it's going to be virtually a police operation. A few helicopters—half a dozen or 10 helicopters—can do the job. Gunships can do that job. But the key thing is to get Charles Taylor not to ship weapons into Sierra Leone. That's the issue.

On the war crimes issue, the United States government actually showed some interest in February. They sent their ambassador for war crimes, David Scheffer. He went to Freetown and he went to various hospitals. He interviewed people, and they told him exactly what they went through. He also went to the refugee camps in Guinea, and he wrote up a report.

But I don't think the United States is going to push for an actual tribunal. It may not be in their interests. It's a small country. They are busy in Yugoslavia, so they're not doing that. So we need a country that is very concerned about human development and human security to help us push this issue across, to prod the United States, to push this issue.

We believe that if the war crimes issues are not addressed sufficiently, they will be repeated someplace else. Already, rebels in Uganda were using exact RUF tactics to attack westerners in a forest there several months ago. We believe the use of rebels to attack unarmed civilians will spread throughout Africa if the war crimes issues are not resolved.

Mr. Keith Martin: Your Excellency, can you tell me how we can put pressure on both Mr. Gadhafi and Mr. Taylor, two individuals who have thumbed their noses at the international community repeatedly? I'd be very interested in how you propose we can do that.

Mr. John Leigh: We can do that first of all by cutting off the arms supply, by going to their suppliers and making sure they don't ship to them.

We can also do it by strengthening ECOMOG. Taylor is scared of ECOMOG. It was ECOMOG that brought peace to Liberia and allowed him to win the elections over there. He knows the strength of ECOMOG. If ECOMOG is strong enough, they will defeat Taylor. But the arms flow to Taylor must stop.

• 1650

If you address the diamond issue, that's another area where Canada can help. We will find the information on the diamond DNA issue and how we can work on that to dry up revenues from diamond sources.

Those are the only languages Taylor understands: force or denial of financial resources. With any other thing, he will thumb his nose at you.

Mr. Keith Martin: Thank you very much.

The Chair: Thank you.

It's 4.50 now, and we know you have to leave at 5 o'clock.

One of the problems we had is that we just received Mr. Pratt's report today, but I'm sure we'll all be reading it in great depth.

Perhaps, Mr. Graham, we can have some sort of resolution. This is not an official government policy paper. Although it's done by a special envoy, he is just a member of Parliament. Perhaps, after we go over the report, we can bring forth some sort of resolution to the main committee.

Mr. Bill Graham: This is a somewhat nervous-making precedent, when we get members of Parliament slipping in their reports to the committee and bringing in high-powered visitors to help them, Excellency. This is a very effective tool that Mr. Pratt and the minister have managed to agree on.

But you're quite right. Ms. Augustine said she thought maybe at the main committee you and she could do a resolution—

The Chair: Support the resolution, yes.

Where there's a will, there's a way. Obviously, Mr. Pratt, your will is very strong, and perhaps we'll be able to provide a way for you too.

Excellency, we're very pleased you could be with us today. The area of human rights is always so cloudy for those of us who live in this part of the world. Our life experiences are so totally different. We've all been aware somewhat of the situation in Sierra Leone. However, your presence today certainly puts another dimension to it and in fact puts a face to it. We really do appreciate your coming today.

As I said at the beginning, the committee will be doing quite an extensive study on human security in Africa, as our minister is extremely interested in helping the situation in Africa to be resolved.

Thank you very much.

Mr. John Leigh: Madam Chairman, thank you very much.

I want to thank the members of this committee one more time for allowing me to be here today and for your very interesting and probing questions.

And again, finally, my thanks to my brother, Mr. Pratt, for being very much interested in my country and for the work he has done on our behalf.

Thank you very much, everyone.

The Chair: Thank you.

And we thank you too, David.

Mr. David Pratt: Thank you, Madam Chair.

The Chair: The meeting is adjourned.