   |
|
afrol.com, 21 December - After rumors of a split within the Sierra Leone terrorist group, further fueled by contradictional messages from the group about their interim leader's willingness to accept the Abuja ceasefire, RUF officials yesterday told afrol.com the rumors were a product of sensationalist journalism, but admitted "an isolated incidence of insubordination". afrol.com yesterday took contact with Jim Scott, a spokesman of the RUFP, the political arm of the RUF terrorists occupying half of Sierra Leone. The afrol.com redaction has not been willing to print RUF views at an earlier stage, as they are believed to be propaganda by a group terrorizing the Sierra Leonean population in a war over the country's rich diamond resources. Now, however, the contradictional news and views ticking in from different RUF sources demanded the questioning whether there is a split within the powerful group. Jim Scott represents the RUFP and is editor of the party's website, were a sensational press statement, claiming to quote RUF interim leader Issa Sesay, was released one week ago. The statement quotes Sesay saying that he is "ordering that the UNAMSIL 'observers' [UN peacekeepers] be barred from entering RUFP fields of operations until certain conditions have been met." Sesay the day before had assured the leaders of the UN troops that they would be allowed to enter, which also was a a condition in the Abuja ceasefire. Several media have speculated in the authenticity of the RUFP website and thus the statement. One journalist even claims the site only represents imprisoned RUF (ex-?) leader Foday Sankoh, which was forced to cease leadership to his trustee Sesay after imprisonment. Several sources, including the United Nations, claim that Sesay later has said that the "statement had not been authorized or issued by the RUF leadership." After asking Mr Scott about his reaction to the UN claims that the statement had not been authorized by Sesay, the "RUF Administration (Volunteers)" answers that it is indeed authentic. "Since our sources spoke directly with the General [Sesay] in advance of preparing the Official Press Statement we stand by the release. Since our sources have not spoken with the General subsequent to the release of the Official Press Statement we have no reason to withdraw the Official Press Statement." The question of UN deployment of peacekeepers on RUF-occupied territory is seen to be one of the key issues in the Abuja ceasefire, as it was in the previous Lomé Peace Agreement. The Lomé Peace basically broke down after the RUF did not let UN peacekeepers into their areas, where these could have interfered with the diamond exploitation. Several sources also claim that Sesay has not had any intention of letting UN troops accessing RUF-held territory in the first place. Last month, afrol.com reported about RUF-dissidents in Liberia, among them RUF representatives to the Abuja negotiations, which claimed that Sesay had refused to accept the terms negotiated in Abuja. These sources also claimed that there was a split within the RUF regarding the will to peace, Sesay being one of the hardliners. Our sources in the 'RUF Administration' yesterday confirmed the view that the RUF "delegation sent to Abuja did not perform well. Compounding this fact was the lack of any useful communications equipment between the General and the delegation." Probably referring to the earlier mentioned delegation member still in Liberia, they report that "the highly placed insubordinate member of the delegation has subsequent to Abuja been reassigned." The source therefore concludes with "an isolated incidence of insubordination," saying that calling this 'a split' is rather "more sensational reading". Dissident RUF sources in Liberia, however, go further in claiming a split between two wings. Commander Brigadier-General Moris Kallon is said to sail up as a new strongman. Kallon supposedly supports the Abuja ceasefire along with most of the rebels, wanting peace. Further, Sesay reportedly has "excommunicated" several leading members of the RUF for supporting "the peace line" of Brigadier-General Kallon. Further speculations go towards the possible split between the leader in the field, Issa Sesay, and the imprisoned leader, Foday Sankoh. After Sankoh's imprisonment, a new leader had to be selected. Officially, Sesay took the full leadership responsibility of the RUF, although it was generally expected that Sankoh would keep some control from within prison. Lately, however, Sesay has been referred to as an interim leader, even by the RUFP, which reportedly has caused the general great anger. The 'RUF Administration' however told afrol.com that "sources who know both Sankoh and Sesay assure that the two men have a bond of loyalty which is not likely to be shattered easily." Sankoh himself chose Sesay as his successor - or as the RUF's 'interim leader', as the 'RUF Administration' says. Their version is "that Sankoh was forced to name a successor. As the Head of his Armed Forces, he named as his interim leader, Issa Sesay and this appointment applied solely to the resumption of the implementation of the Lomé Peace Agreement." Is there a split in the RUF, then? It is too early to conclude, but there are clear signs of a split, although our source downplays them to "an isolated incidence of insubordination". A split between "hardliners" and "followers of the Abuja ceasefire" seems the most likely possible split, and the great question is in which wing Sesay is to be found, or if he is trying to find ground between these wings. A further important question is the identity of the source claiming to speak for the RUF. There is no doubt that they have close ties to the RUF or a fraction within the RUF. Actually, there is little reason to believe that they do not represent the RUF leadership, although they admit difficulties in maintaining contact (many leaders being imprisoned, other in battle). If they represent a fraction, they are probably closest to (ex-?) leader Sankoh. This, however, does not necessary mean they are opposing Sesay, but rather work to keep him within "the hardliners". Asked to whom they are closest, they answer that "if pressed, we would respond to your question by stating that the website is close to both - the two men share the same goals for the Lomé, the party and the country."
|
