Sierra Leone

HL Deb 10 October 2000 vol 617 cc169-80

3.48 p.m.

The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean)

My Lords, with the leave of the House, I should like to make a Statement on behalf of the Government on Sierra Leone.

Before I do so, however, I should like to take this opportunity to remember the sacrifice of Bombardier Brad Tinnion, who, sadly, was killed during last month's operation, and pay tribute to the bravery of our Armed Forces, who often operate in very difficult and dangerous circumstances.

As I made clear in answering Questions in your Lordships' House last week, the Government's strategy towards Sierra Leone was set out in a Statement by my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary in another place on 6th June. That strategy remains unchanged. Our principal objective is to ensure that the people of Sierra Leone are offered a realistic prospect of stability and peace, and are freed from the violence of a brutal rebel minority. Following the Summer Recess, the Government now believe that it is appropriate that the House should be updated on our plans. However, the Government are not prepared to reveal details that might in any way undermine the security of our Armed Forces or give assistance to their adversaries.

The key to a long-term solution in Sierra Leone remains the establishment of effective and accountable government armed forces. We have sought to help the Government of Sierra Leone by establishing a series of short term training teams and, in the longer term, the UK-led International Military Advisory and Training Team.

Building on our work so far, we shall be continuing our programme of training, equipping and advising the Sierra Leone army in several areas: a series of three further training teams will be deployed to train fresh troops—a team from 1st Prince of Wales Own Regiment will deploy at the end of October for the first of these; we shall provide continuation and specialist training covering topics such as leadership and logistics; a package of equipment support for the SLA to include personal equipment for the trainees; and we shall adjust our command and control arrangements, through the provision of an operational (one star) level HQ to command the overall UK effort and to provide high level operational advice to the SLA.

The overall number of UK troops on the ground will increase from the current figure of around 300 to somewhat over 400, depending on the training under way at any one time.

A key element of our strategy is to help the Sierra Leone Army develop its ability to undertake effective operations in order to maintain pressure on the RUF. In doing this, the safety of Armed Forces personnel in Sierra Leone remains uppermost in our minds. I can assure the House that their security is, and will be, kept under constant review.

The Government also recognise the role played by UNAMSIL. We support the work of the United Nations to restore peace in Sierra Leone. We remain ready under a Memorandum of Understanding signed with the UN last year to deploy UK-based forces up to brigade level in support of UN peacekeeping operations, including Sierra Leone. This would draw from our Joint Rapid Reaction Forces. Final decisions on any deployment would of course remain with the Government. But the speed and scale of our deployment in May is a clear illustration of what we can do, should we judge it necessary and appropriate.

To speed up our ability to respond, our deployed headquarters would be capable of taking such a force under command. We are also prepared, in response to a request from the UN Secretariat, to offer staff officers to the headquarters of the UN Mission in Sierra Leone, in addition to the 15 military observers that we already have with the mission.

Britain's continued support for the people of Sierra Leone in their search for peace and stability has been recognised around the world and has been highly praised. The measures that I have announced today will build on our effort so far and will support the vital role that the United Nations is playing to bring an end to the violence and to restore peace. I commend them to the House.

My Lords, that concludes the Statement.

3.52 p.m.

Lord Burnham

My Lords, I thank the Minister most sincerely for her Statement to the House this afternoon: everything comes to him who waits. I should also totally and unequivocably underwrite her tribute to Bombardier Tinnion and, indeed, to all those who have given their lives in military operations wherever they may be.

This afternoon's Statement is most opportune because we are now at the end of the rainy season in Sierra Leone and operations may well be expected to escalate. I should further say that I totally accept that the Government should not reveal details that would give assistance to the adversaries of our Armed Forces. I hope that I shall not have to press the noble Baroness on such a point.

However, the Minister named three areas of operation in her Statement. We note that further training teams are to be sent. I hope that there will be a clear distinction between the training role and the role as part of UNAMSIL. I also hope that measures will be taken to ensure that the equipment we are providing will not fall into the wrong hands, as has happened on occasions in the past.

The command structure that was mentioned in the Statement is one thing that it would seem the Sierra Leone army cannot provide for itself. I ask the noble Baroness to tell the House what is the difference between, to command the overall UK effort", and, to provide high level operational advice to the SLA"? Indeed, what is the relationship between the British force (now to number 500) and UNAMSIL? What is the effect of the withdrawal of Indian troops? Are the British expected to pick up the tab?

Can the Minister say what United Nations is doing overall? Do not the Koreans, the Poles or the Canadians, as well as various other nations, have brigade structures that would enable them to provide a command structure in Sierra Leone? I ask the noble Baroness to look into her crystal ball, which is never easy to do. However, I hope that she may be able to assist your Lordships.

Will the Government keep control over all decisions to deploy, and over the rules of engagement, as mentioned in a Question tabled last week by my noble friend Lord Cranborne? What is the likelihood of the commitment that has been made being extended? Further—as this comes into the Statement—what constitutes a satisfactory conclusion to operations? All sides of your Lordships' House would wish to see such a conclusion and one that would allow British forces to get out.

This must not be an open-ended commitment to Sierra Leone. There is a distinction between the foreign policy framework and the precise extent of our military commitment. That distinction must be kept clear. I do not blame the Government for adjusting their actions to meet changing circumstances. But I believe that we should object to bland assurances that the circumstances are not changing. I am afraid that this Statement indicates that there is a vestige of a feeling that there may be a likelihood of extending the United Kingdom commitment. When she replies, I should be grateful if the Minister would comment on that possibility.

3.58 p.m.

Lord Wallace of Saltaire

My Lords, I thank the Minister for her Statement. Even if she looks into her crystal ball, I certainly understand that it may not be wise for her to tell us exactly what she sees in it under current circumstances. I also share the regret and sympathy of the House that we lost Bombardier Tinnion. However, we have to recognise that, in the United Kingdom's commitment to support the UN in reconstructing failed states, we may occasionally have to accept a number of casualties.

From these Benches, I offer strong support for the Government in today's decision. In disagreeing with the Conservative spokesman, perhaps I may point out that the reconstruction of weak and failed states in Africa, south of the Sahara, looks like being one of the necessary commitments that this country, in collaboration with others, will have to undertake over the next few years. We must recognise that this is not necessarily a matter of "quick in, quick out". As in south-eastern Europe, it is a long-term commitment in which we hope that one will be able to move from first-line troops, to training and then to policing. We must also recognise that it is in the United Kingdom's strongest interests to support the reconstruction of effective statehood in these states and that, if we fail to do so, the consequences will, among other things, turn up on the streets of London in the form of refugees and migrants from those states.

As Clare Short, the Secretary of State for International Development, has said on a number of occasions, Sierra Leone is a test case for the United Nations and for Britain's responsibilities as a permanent member of the UN Security Council. It is therefore entirely appropriate that the United Kingdom should provide additional staff officers—as it did for the UN operation—additional training for the army, and, if I understand the Statement correctly, back-up forces to intervene if necessary.

The Statement refers to drawing from our Joint Rapid Reaction Forces. Does this refer purely to the United Kingdom or, in the context of the European defence initiative, are discussions under way with our European partners as to whether countries other than the United Kingdom might be involved? As regards the provision of staff officers to the UN, is that purely a British offer, or are other European states involved?

The lessons of this operation must be taken into account. In the context of the Brahimi report, and other discussions under way in the United Nations, how far is the United Kingdom giving its full support to learning the lessons of Sierra Leone: the absence of decent command and control and, indeed, decent co-operation among UN forces and the weakness of the UN department of peacekeeping operations, about which we have heard a number of extremely savage criticisms over the past few months? Clearly that needs to be substantially strengthened.

4.1 p.m.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean

My Lords, I thank the noble Lords, Lord Burnham and Lord Wallace of Saltaire, for the tributes they paid to Bombadier Tinnion. It behoves us all to remember that when we deploy our Armed Forces we often ask their members to take considerable risks. There is not an armed conflict in the world that does not involve such risks.

The noble Lord said that he would not ask me to reveal details that would be of assistance to our adversaries, for which I thank him. I remind him and the noble Lord, Lord Wallace of Saltaire, that my department's offer remains open to give both noble Lords briefings in confidence, should they so wish. The noble Lord, Lord Craig of Radley, is not present at the moment, but I am happy to extend that offer to him.

The training teams which I mentioned, and to which the noble Lord, Lord Burnham, referred, are the Short Term Training Teams which we discussed in your Lordships' House last week. They are quite distinct from UNAMSIL forces. They are British teams which will be used in the way we discussed last week in order to train some thousand or so personnel from the Sierra Leone aimed forces at any one stage. We shall indeed be careful with regard to the distribution of any equipment which we make available to those armed forces.

The noble Lord also asked about the command structure. The changes to the command structure of the United Kingdom forces which I have described are distinct from the advice which may be available to the Sierra Leone armed forces. The noble Lord mentioned a figure of 500 troops. I believe that the figure will be over 400, but I am not sure that we have any confidence that we shall reach the figure of 500. However, we certainly expect to have over 400 troops on the ground at any one time. The noble Lord is right; there will have to be further discussion in the United Nations about what to do to make up the numbers of troops that will be needed under the UNAMSIL banner—if I can put it that way—as a result of the withdrawal of Indian troops.

The noble Lord enjoined me to look into my crystal ball. As the noble Lord, Lord Wallace of Saltaire, precisely foretold, I am a little reluctant to do that. As I am sure all noble Lords understand, it is dangerous to speculate on such matters when we have troops on the ground. However, I assure the noble Lord that we shall keep control of our decisions to deploy and, as the noble Lord would expect, of our rules of engagement. A decision about command structure would be taken at the time of any deployment. That would be a United Kingdom decision. I hope that follows up the point that the noble Viscount, Lord Cranborne, made at Question Time last week.

This matter is kept under constant review. I believe that the noble Lord said that he had the vestige of a feeling that there would be further deployments. I understand that many people have said that they have vestiges of feelings about further deployments. I hope that my comments have conveyed the fact that there has been no change of policy or anything that could be described as "mission creep", or any of the other journalistic terms that are used in this connection. We are consolidating the policy position which we have established.

The noble Lord asked me what a satisfactory conclusion would comprise. It would be the establishment of peace and stability in Sierra Leone; the establishment of control over the rebels in that unhappy country; and the establishment of proper control over the government forces by a democratically elected government. We are very much working to that end.

The noble Lord, Lord Wallace of Saltaire, asked some rather broader questions about our interest in supporting proper development in Sierra Leone. I agree very much with what the noble Lord said about the importance to British interests of supporting such matters as good governance in Sierra Leone, and the importance of understanding that humanitarian ideals are also vitally necessary in that unhappy country. The whole question of poverty must be addressed. Sierra Leone is one of the poorest countries in the world. Tackling poverty in that country through carefully targeted, long-term programmes to promote economic and social development is an important facet of any international effort.

I believe that the United Kingdom is contributing enormously to that effort in the training that we are providing. We have, after all, dedicated some £70 million thus far to our efforts in Sierra Leone. The package I announced today will add additional money to that sum—a further £27 million approximately. The noble Lord mentioned the JRRF and asked whether it would comprise British personnel. It is a British commitment. We made that clear in our Memorandum of Understanding last year. However, nothing stays static in these matters. As developments in Europe take place, there is no reason why we should not perhaps approach our colleagues elsewhere at a suitable time. As of today the commitment I described in the Statement is a British commitment, as are the staff officers. I believe that we are learning lessons. I believe that there are lessons for the United Nations in the way that the mission has been conducted in Sierra Leone. As has been mentioned, I also believe that there are wider issues with regard to the control of the diamond trade and the way in which that has fuelled so much of this vicious and dreadful conflict in Sierra Leone.

4.8 p.m.

Viscount Cranborne

My Lords, does the noble Baroness agree with me that historically peacekeeping missions and, indeed, training missions of the kind that we are conducting in Sierra Leone tend to last for rather longer than we would like? I refer to the operation in Cyprus which has lasted for about 30 years. We do not know how long our various commitments in the Balkans will continue.

I do not think that the noble Baroness made the next point entirely clear. If we are to have a presumed open-ended interest in putting together, as the noble Lord, Lord Wallace, suggested, failed countries in sub-Saharan Africa, is the noble Baroness clear that we have sufficient armed forces in terms of sheer numbers of bodies to be able to cope with any commitment that might arise, particularly in the light of the increasingly low morale in the Armed Forces? Those of us who know members of the Armed Forces are aware of that. It is evidenced by the increasingly worrying exit of senior non-commissioned officers and of junior officers of all ranks from all three Armed Forces.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean

My Lords, the noble Viscount said that historically our peacekeeping missions last longer than we would like. They do indeed last but they also keep the peace. They are necessary in countries where otherwise the internal civil strife leads to the atrocities that we have witnessed so unhappily taking place in Sierra Leone. I do not believe that what I have said indicates an open-ended commitment. However, I am not in a position to tell the noble Viscount that it will end at a specific time in the future because that is not realistic. We have to keep the position under constant review. I do not believe that there has been—to use the journalistic term I used a few moments ago—"mission creep". I believe it is very important indeed that the Government have kept a very firm eye on the full range of our commitments overseas.

The noble Viscount paints a very gloomy picture of morale in our Armed Forces. While I recognise that there is a problem over retention of some of our Armed Forces, I hope that the noble Viscount will be as pleased as I am that last year was the best year for recruitment in the Army for some 10 years. We have sought to address the problem of retention through a number of different means, which we have discussed in your Lordships' House previously. But I assure the noble Viscount that when we make decisions about deployments of the Armed Forces the question of what we have termed overstretch of the Armed Forces is to the forefront of our minds. We recognise that responsibility and will continue to do so.

Lord Avebury

My Lords, the Minister spoke about bringing the rebels under control. Will the noble Baroness confirm that the clauses in the Lomé agreement which refer to total disarmament and demobilisation of all non-state armed forces still apply? Will she confirm that the objective is to demobilise and disarm the whole of the RUF so that it no longer presents a threat to the state? Is not the ultimate objective of training the armed forces of Sierra Leone that they will, if necessary, be able to undertake offensive actions against the RUF in the north and diamond-producing areas if it is not possible to get it to lay down its arms voluntarily?

Will the Minister also say something about the status of the so-called civil defence forces, the Kamajors? Will they ever be reintegrated into the regular armed forces of Sierra Leone; or will there continue to be, as there have been in the past, two different sets of armed forces in parallel with the danger of conflict between them which that implies?

Can the noble Baroness say something about the work of the sanctions committee? She mentioned the need to stop the trade in illicit diamonds. Perhaps she will confirm that at a recent meeting in Geneva some new measures were agreed by the diamond marketing companies of the world to try to prevent these illicit diamonds from reaching world markets. Can the noble Baroness say something about the committee? It was established under the auspices of the United Nations. We gave evidence to it on 31st July about the nature of this trade and about allegations in particular which we made concerning the involvement of the Liberians. Has there been any progress in gaining the cooperation of President Taylor in stopping up the traffic which was alleged to go via Monrovia; and in preventing illicit supplies of arms coming from Liberia and reaching the RUF in the field?

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean

My Lords, the Lomé agreement is designed to deliver lasting peace in Sierra Leone. It provides for the permanent cessation of hostilities, as the noble Lord indicates. It also provides for disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration of all ex-combatants, and for the creation of effective and democratically accountable armed forces to protect the country in the future and the international peacekeeping force to supervise that process. It is implicit in that if we are training the legitimate forces in Sierra Leone, which will be under the control of the democratically elected government, we are training them for a purpose. That is to keep order in their own country. If that means engagement with the RUF, I am afraid that that is what is implied. But it is our firm desire that the RUF will understand that they mean business and that it will see that its own interests lie in a peaceful future for its country.

The noble Lord asked about integration of other parts of armed groupings within Sierra Leone. Our primary task at present is to try to get the Sierra Leone army on to the right footing. We are far from that at present. That is why Her Majesty's Government have put forward these extra resources which I have described to your Lordships today in order to accelerate that process. But having a firm base for those armed forces, the ways in which others who may wish to take to arms can be dealt with will be a consideration. I believe that the important issue in the first instance is the Sierra Leone armed forces.

The noble Lord asked about the issue of diamonds. As I believe I mentioned to your Lordships last week, the United Kingdom has been a key mover in what has been described as the Kimberley process—a process led by South Africa—which has recommended an international rough diamond certification scheme. We have also been doing our best through the United Nations Security Council ban on the import and export of Sierra Leone rough diamonds not certified by the Government of Sierra Leone. The noble Lord is right. There are problems with those outside Sierra Leone who perceive their own interests in perhaps not getting that diamond trade under control. There is growing international pressure on Liberia, on President Taylor, to close down its links with the rebels in Sierra Leone in this respect.

I know that the noble Lord has a wealth of information at his fingertips over Sierra Leone. As he knows, there is a great deal of detail around these issues which we shall be happy to discuss.

Lord Richard

My Lords, I realise that it is my own fault that I am not clear but I should be grateful for clarification.

The Minister announced two things. First, that there will be an additional 100 (or thereabouts) British trainers to train the Sierra Leone army. Secondly, I think that my noble friend said that there would now have inevitably to be discussions in New York as a result of the withdrawal of the Indian contingent, that the British Government will participate in those discussions with the secretariat in New York, and that we shall be making provisional arrangements internally in the structure and control of our Armed Forces here so that if we wished to make a contribution to the UN force, as emerges from those discussions in New York, we should be in a position to do so.

I hope that that is right because the British are extremely good at peacekeeping. It is refreshing that in recent years the United Nations has moved away from the old convention: that the permanent members of the Security Council did not engage in peacekeeping exercises. Our Armed Forces are particularly good at this task. I hope that if the UN thinks it right, and we think it right, the Government will be in a position to respond.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean

My Lords, my noble friend is right in part. Without repeating the Statement, perhaps I may run over the main points. First, starting after the deployment at the end of this month which I described, we are running three more training teams for the Sierra Leone army on the same syllabus we have been running since early June.

Secondly, we are continuing the specialist training that we have described under the British-led organisation IMATT. Thirdly, we are providing funding for a further package of equipment. That is important to the Government of Sierra Leone. Fourthly, we are establishing an operational level headquarters in Sierra Leone to ensure effective command and control of the UK effort. Those are four important points.

The noble Lord is right about the Joint Rapid Reaction Force. We stand by our Memorandum of Understanding to deploy a rapid reaction force of up to brigade size. We are also prepared to step up our contribution to the UN mission in Sierra Leone by offering a number of staff officers.

I did not want simply to agree with the noble Lord, because he understandably overlooked some key points from the Statement. I thank him for his comments about our peacekeeping prowess. We have much to be proud of on that. Wherever I go around the world, British peacekeeping expertise is rightly admired and very much wanted in areas of difficulty.

Earl Attlee

My Lords, I remind the House that I have a somewhat peripheral interest, but following the comments of my noble friend Lord Cranborne and of the noble Lord, Lord Wallace of Saltaire, can the Minister say, in percentage terms, what level of operations the British Army can sustain in the long term over several years?

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean

My Lords, as I suspect that the noble Earl would expect, I shall have to seek further advice on that. I suspect that the figure would vary from time to time. At times we have had high levels of deployment. At the height of the Kosovo crisis, our deployment of our Armed Forces was well over 40 per cent. I am happy to say that it is now 20 per cent less than at that time.

The noble Earl's question is understandable, but it may be difficult to answer because of the indications that that might give about our military strength to those who might not be too unhappy to exploit such information. If I can give the noble Earl any further help, I shall of course write to him.

Lord Mackie of Benshie

My Lords, I should like to ask the Minister a few questions about the United Nations force. There is no doubt that the British forces have been competent and efficient and are responsible for what level of order there is in that country today. What about the United Nations forces? They have been pathetic. They seem unable to defend themselves and large numbers of prisoners have been taken by the rebels. Are the orders being changed? Is there any hope of a competent peacekeeping and peacemaking force emerging from the United Nations?

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean

My Lords, the noble Lord's judgment on the United Nations forces in Sierra Leone is a little harsh. There has been widespread deployment by a number of different countries, which have been prepared to commit considerable numbers. A number of countries in the region have, understandably, been foremost among those who have deployed troops. I shall be happy to let the noble Lord have details of those numbers.

I agree with the noble Lord to the extent that there is now an issue about increasing the number of troops available to UNAMSIL. The United Nations has made it clear that it is looking for an increase in the numbers. The current shortfall has been exacerbated by the Indian authorities declaring that they wish to withdraw in due course. That is not a surprise. They always said that their involvement was time-limited.

They have also helpfully said that they will dovetail their withdrawal from Sierra Leone with the arrival of new contingents.

We should be careful about leaping to judgments on the operation of the forces in Sierra Leone. We wish them well and believe that they are a power for good in that country. They are there to demonstrate the interest among the international community in securing peace in Sierra Leone.

Baroness Park of Monmouth

My Lords, first, what commitment have we made to the UN under the Memorandum of Understanding? As I remember it, we have said that we will put up to a brigade at the disposal of the United Nations. Can we have an assurance that our troops will not be under United Nations command? Secondly, the UN's Brahimi report makes it clear that the unfortunate troops on the ground have to look to a command structure of about five people in New York operating until five o'clock on any day. Does not that make it even more important that we know what the mandate is?

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean

My Lords, under the Memorandum of Understanding the rapid reaction capability could consist of a joint force headquarters with strategic communications support, together with transport, helicopters and medical units. I have already said that it could be of brigade size and could have logistic and administrative support assets. I hope that the noble Baroness understands that there are sound reasons why I cannot give a full breakdown of every part of the JRRF. A decision about the command structure would be taken at the time of deployment. I assure the noble Baroness that it would be a United Kingdom decision.

The Earl of Sandwich

My Lords, one of the measures of insecurity in countries such as Sierra Leone is the number of internally displaced people. Will the noble Baroness confirm that the number of displaced people in the care of voluntary organisations and Churches has diminished, particularly around Freetown and the other centres? Does she have any breakdown of that number?

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean

My Lords, I do not have a breakdown of that number, but I assure the noble Earl that, with other development partners in the European Union, we are continuing to provide substantial support to meet the continuing humanitarian needs of the Sierra Leonean refugees. The noble Earl understands that we need to consider not just the number of refugees who have gone to neighbouring countries, but the number of individuals who are internally displaced within Sierra Leone. Such support is being channelled through the relevant UN agencies, such as the UNHCR and the international non-governmental organisations and their local partners. I shall try to get some figures for the noble Earl, but it is very difficult to get firm data about what is happening across Sierra Leone, because our troops are concentrated in particular places. However, I shall try my best to ensure that what information we have is made available.