[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 6]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 8505]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                     PROSPECTS FOR PEACE IN GUINEA

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH

                             of new jersey

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, March 29, 2007

  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, with so many important and 
often vexing challenges competing for our attention throughout the 
world, it seems that the tendency in Congress is to focus our attention 
on a crisis only after it has evolved into an unmitigated disaster. 
Fortunately, that was not the case last week, when the Subcommittee on 
Africa and Global Health held a hearing on prospects for peace in 
Guinea.
  This hearing presented us with an opportunity to discuss not only our 
strategic, humanitarian, human rights, and economic interests in 
Guinea--particularly as speculation about President Lansana Conte's 
political future and the potential for even greater conflict mounts--
but also to consider how the United States Government has positioned 
itself to respond to threats and mitigate crises before they have spun 
out of control.
  The stakes are high. Western Africa historically has been beset by 
political instability and violence, where conflict in one country 
spills across borders and threatens the region as a whole. This has led 
to massive displacements, refugee flows, the proliferation of small 
arms and light weapons, and the perpetration of some of the most 
heinous human rights atrocities known to man. If we fail to capitalize 
on the opportunity to address transformative, stabilization and 
reconstruction needs in support of a democratic transition in Guinea 
today, I fear that we may be headed for a much wider regional crisis 
down the road.
  Experts have been warning for years that the ``ground was quaking'' 
in Guinea. Widespread dissatisfaction with the autocratic rule of an 
aged and ailing Conte, coupled with economic decline, high inflation, 
political cronyism and corruption, has led to periodic episodes of 
unrest in Conakry. However, the union-led strikes of December 2006 
through February 2007 took on a new dimension. For the first time since 
the country obtained independence in 1958, Guineans across the nation 
have taken to the streets en mass, demanding change and refusing to 
accept half measures.
  Through solidarity, the unions, opposition parties and civil society 
gained strength, and in the end, they succeeded in exacting critical 
concessions from the government. But while this symbolizes a 
significant victory, the hardest part is yet to come.
  While the naming of the new consensus prime minister, Lansana Kouyate 
on February 27th is a significant step forward, the office of the Prime 
Minster is not constitutionally protected and Conte has a record of 
breaking agreements. In addition, substantial resources are urgently 
needed for economic and social programs that will address the root 
causes of social unrest and shore-up popular support for the Prime 
Minster. History has shown that Conte is unlikely to share power in a 
meaningful way, and the longer he keeps his hand on the tiller in his 
authoritarian style, the more likely a renewed and destructive 
political crisis will emerge.
  That said, it is widely speculated that--one way or another--Conte 
will not finish his term in office. His health is extremely poor and 
his power appears to be waning. Even the African Union and the Economic 
Community of West African States, which typically shy away from 
criticizing one of their own in public, have condemned Conte's violent 
response to protests and have suggested that this may be the 
appropriate time for him to step down. Experts are no longer talking 
about IF Conte will leave office, but WHEN and under what conditions he 
will leave.
  Still, Conte has not designated a successor and, in fact, has 
sidelined a number of individuals who appeared poised to succeed him. 
The President of the National Assembly, who would be the successor to 
the President under the terms of the Constitution, is widely unpopular. 
It has been widely suggested that a military takeover may be the only 
option for a ``soft landing'' should Conte die in office or retire to 
his farm.
  However, I would strongly contend that a military takeover in Guinea, 
no matter how ``temporary'' it is intended to be, should NOT be 
considered an appealing option. The military is divided along 
generational and ethnic lines. Neither Guineans nor the international 
community should assume that the military is a cohesive group capable 
or willing to deliver a smooth transition to a democratic, civilian-led 
government.
  While the responsibility for fostering an environment of peace and 
security in Guinea rests with Guineans, the United States is in a 
unique position to help facilitate a non-violent, democratic resolution 
to this crisis. Guineans remember the fact that it was the United 
States who came to their aid when Guinea was attacked by the 
Revolutionary United Front rebels from Sierra Leone, with the support 
of former Liberian President Charles Taylor. We also have invested 
heavily in peace in Liberia, and have credibility in the region. Guinea 
is a predominantly Muslim country which is favorably disposed to the 
United States. The time to help is now . . . before the crisis spirals 
out of control.

                          ____________________