Peacebuilding and Natural Resource

Governance After Armed Conflict

Michael D. Beevers
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/peacebuilding-and-natural-resource-governance-after
-armed-conflict-michael-d-beevers/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Weapons and the law of armed conflict 2nd Edition

Boothby

https://textbookfull.com/product/weapons-and-the-law-of-armed-
conflict-2nd-edition-boothby/

Detention in non-international armed conflict 1st

Edition Hill-Cawthorne

https://textbookfull.com/product/detention-in-non-international-
armed-conflict-1st-edition-hill-cawthorne/

Liberal Peace and Post-Conflict Peacebuilding in Africa

1st Edition Patrick Tom (Auth.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/liberal-peace-and-post-conflict-
peacebuilding-in-africa-1st-edition-patrick-tom-auth/

Homophobic Violence in Armed Conflict and Political

Transition 1st Edition José Fernando Serrano-Amaya

https://textbookfull.com/product/homophobic-violence-in-armed-
conflict-and-political-transition-1st-edition-jose-fernando-
serrano-amaya/
Exploration and Production of Oceanic Natural Gas
Hydrate: Critical Factors for Commercialization Michael
D. Max

https://textbookfull.com/product/exploration-and-production-of-
oceanic-natural-gas-hydrate-critical-factors-for-
commercialization-michael-d-max/

Building Sustainable Peace: Timing and Sequencing of

Post-Conflict Reconstruction and Peacebuilding 1st
Edition Brown

https://textbookfull.com/product/building-sustainable-peace-
timing-and-sequencing-of-post-conflict-reconstruction-and-
peacebuilding-1st-edition-brown/

Practitioners' guide to human rights law in armed

conflict 1st Edition Daragh Murray

https://textbookfull.com/product/practitioners-guide-to-human-
rights-law-in-armed-conflict-1st-edition-daragh-murray/

Arctic Marine Resource Governance and Development 1st

Edition Niels Vestergaard

https://textbookfull.com/product/arctic-marine-resource-
governance-and-development-1st-edition-niels-vestergaard/

The Nature of Peace and the Morality of Armed Conflict

1st Edition Florian Demont-Biaggi (Eds.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-nature-of-peace-and-the-
morality-of-armed-conflict-1st-edition-florian-demont-biaggi-eds/
 Michael D. Beevers

P E A C E B U I L D I N G A N D

N AT U R A L R E S O U R C E

G O V E R N A N C E A F T E R

A R M E D C O N F L I C T

Sierra Leone and Liberia

Peacebuilding and Natural Resource Governance
After Armed Conflict
 Michael D. Beevers

Peacebuilding
and Natural Resource
Governance After
Armed Conflict
Sierra Leone and Liberia
Michael D. Beevers
Department of Environmental Studies
Dickinson College
Carlisle, PA, USA

ISBN 978-3-319-63165-3    ISBN 978-3-319-63166-0 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63166-0

Library of Congress Control Number: 2018944587

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2019

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of
translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval,
electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now
known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information
in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the
­publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to
the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The
publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
­institutional affiliations.

Cover image: © Lee Karen Stow / Alamy Stock Photo

Cover design: Tjaša Krivec

Printed on acid-free paper

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
To the people of Liberia and Sierra Leone…
 Preface and Acknowledgments

This book emerged over time. In the late 1990s, I served as a Peace Corps
volunteer in Niger, West Africa. I was far from the wars in Liberia and
Sierra Leone, but I distinctly remember listening to BBC and Voice of
America reports about the role diamonds were playing in those conflicts.
Several years later, I was in graduate school at the University of Washington
when the literature linking the environment and natural resources to
armed conflict was arguably at its intellectual peak. The more I read, how-
ever, the more I kept thinking about my time in the Peace Corps where it
appeared, to me at least, that environmental challenges actually brought
the people of my little community together, rather than divide them. It
was around this time I picked up a copy of Environmental Peacemaking
edited by Ken Conca and Geoffrey Dabelko that was not only skeptical of
the idea that environmental change triggers war and insecurity, but argued
quite the opposite that environmental cooperation could serve to reduce
environmentally linked violence and be a catalyst for peace. This was an
intriguing (and subversive) idea and one that I felt deserved further study.
I wanted to investigate the plausibility that certain environmental or natu-
ral resource management initiatives could reduce violence and instability,
and perhaps even spin off positive outcomes for peace. As I pursued my
doctoral degree, I thought there was no better place to examine this prem-
ise than in Liberia and Sierra Leone, where diamonds, timber and other
resources were widely believed to have fueled war, and where paradoxically
diamonds, timber and other resources were widely believed to be vital for
peacebuilding. Of course, my fieldwork took me in directions I had not
imagined, and this book goes on to tell a much more complicated story

vii
viii PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

than the one I had conjured up in my head. One focused on how interna-
tional peacebuilders came to understand the links between natural
resources, armed conflict and peace, and the limits of policy interventions
that stressed a skewed “security and market” approach.
It goes without saying that the ideas that fill this book did not originate
in a vacuum. I owe a significant debt of gratitude to the long list of people
who have influenced my thinking. Although I cannot list them all here,
please know I am more than grateful. I would like to give special shout out
to Ken Conca who since my days at the University of Maryland has served
as an adviser, mentor and colleague. Thanks, Ken. Geoffrey Dabelko,
Richard Matthew, Carl Bruch, Erika Weinthal and Virginia Hoefler have
provided encouragement and insight along the way. I have also had many
fruitful discussions about the topic of this book at workshops and have
benefited from feedback after presentations at Duke University’s Nicholas
School of the Environment and the annual meetings of the International
Studies Association and American Political Science Association. Finally, I
am indebted to the people of Liberia and Sierra Leone, as well as practitio-
ners and organizations around the world working at the interface of peace-
building and natural resources, who have talked to me openly and with
passion.
This book could not have been completed without financial support
received from a variety of sources. Early fieldwork was funded through the
United States Institute of Peace’s Jennings Randolph Peace Scholarship
program and a fellowship from the Harrison Program on the Future
Global Agenda at the University of Maryland. I benefited greatly from a
sabbatical year as a Visiting Research Professor at the Strategic Studies
Institute of the United States Army War College. Dickinson College also
provided me research funds that have been vital to my work.
Several of the ideas presented in this book have appeared in a preliminary
form in other publications. I started to develop my thinking as it relates to
natural resource governance in Liberia and Sierra Leone in a chapter enti-
tled “Forest Resources and Peacebuilding: Preliminary Lessons from
Liberia and Sierra Leone” that appeared in Päivi Lujala and Siri Aas Rustad,
eds., High-Value Natural Resources and Post-Conflict Peacebuilding (New
York: Routledge, 2012). Initial thoughts in Chap. 5 about international
intervention in Liberia’s forest sector appeared as “Peace Resources?
Governing Liberia’s Forests in the Aftermath of Conflict” in International
Peacekeeping (vol. 22, no. 1, 2015: 26–42). The ideas presented in Chap. 8
that compare interventions in Liberia and Sierra Leone build on work that
 PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
   ix

first appeared as “Governing Natural Resources for Peace: Lessons from

Liberia and Sierra Leone” in Global Governance (vol. 21, 2015: 227–246).
Finally, some of my ideas in Chap. 8 regarding the role of narrative in shap-
ing natural resource governance in post-conflict settings were hinted at in
“Forest Governance and Post-Conflict Peace in Liberia: Emerging
Contestation and Opportunities for Change” in The Extractive Industries
and Society (vol. 3, no. 2, 2016: 320–328). The anonymous reviewers at
Palgrave Macmillan gave me excellent comments and the editorial team,
including Anca Pusca and Katelyn Zingg, have been very helpful in guiding
this book to press.
Of course, I could not have completed the book without the support of
my family. I have spent months and months in the field and many, many
hours away from home writing and otherwise preoccupied with the con-
tent and publication of this book. Karen, Crosby and Cassidy, thanks for
your patience, understanding and love. I hope this book does you proud.
 Contents

1 Introduction   1

Part I Natural Resources, Armed Conflict and Peacebuilding  17

2 International Peacebuilding: Origins, Development

and Strategies  19

3 Natural Resources: A Catalyst for Conflict and Peace?  39

Part II Conflict, Forests and Peacebuilding in Liberia  63

4 From Settlement and State Consolidation to Civil War

and “Conflict Timber”  65

5 International Intervention and Post-Conflict Forest

Governance  87

xi
xii Contents

Part III Conflict, Diamonds, Minerals and Peacebuilding

in Sierra Leone 121

6 Colonialization and One-Party Rule to Civil War

and “Conflict Diamonds” 123

7 International Intervention to Govern Diamonds

and Minerals 145

Part IV Transforming Conflict Resources into Peace

Resources in Liberia and Sierra Leone 181

8 The Limits of Securing and Marketizing Natural

Resources and a Way Forward 183

Index 221
 List of Maps

Map 1 Liberia. Source: CIA ­https://www.cia.gov/library/

publications/resources/cia-maps-publications/Liberia.html64
Map 2 Sierra Leone. Source: CIA https://www.cia.gov/library/
publications/resources/cia-maps-publications/map-downloads/
SierraLeone_Physiography.jpg/image.jpg122

xiii
 CHAPTER 1

Introduction

In 2008, I landed in Liberia to examine first-hand that country’s efforts to

reform its forest sector. Only a few years earlier, the news filtering out was
that the long and violent civil war, which had killed and maimed hundreds
of thousands and displaced virtually the entire population, was fueled by
natural resources. Rebel groups, led by warlord Charles Taylor worked
with extractive companies throughout the 1990s to export hundreds of
millions of dollars annually from diamonds, iron ore, rubber and timber,
with the profits being used to wage war. After Taylor became Liberia’s
president in 1997, he used neighboring Sierra Leone’s lucrative diamond
trade and the plunder of Liberia’s forests to fund conflict and instability in
the region. International actors began to take notice, and by 2000, the
United Nations had placed sanctions on Liberian diamonds (mostly origi-
nating in Sierra Leone) and logs and timber products from Liberia in an
effort to end those wars.
Once the conflict ended in 2003, international peacebuilders demanded
comprehensive reform of the forest sector owing to the role timber played
in the conflict and exercised substantial influence in the pace and nature
of the reforms, provided technical support and even oversaw revenue col-
lection and the issuance of concessions. International peacebuilders
believed firmly that forest governance reforms were not only needed to
ensure timber and timber revenues did not trigger another armed conflict
but were required if timber was to help consolidate peace. Indeed, by the
time I arrived, things had changed dramatically and the tone was one of

© The Author(s) 2019 1

M. D. Beevers, Peacebuilding and Natural Resource Governance After
Armed Conflict, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63166-0_1
2 M. D. BEEVERS

optimism. The sanctions on Liberian timber had ended, the government

was now in control of forest areas, a review of past timber concessions had
been conducted and a barrage of new laws and regulations governing the
country’s vast tropical forests had been passed. These laws and regula-
tions recognized the community and conservation values of forests but
due to the perceived significance of timber extraction to Liberia’s post-
conflict recovery were “timber centric.” The laws and regulations
addressed community participation in forest-related decisions, but the
emphasis was on the issuing of new timber contracts and creating a system
to ensure revenue from the sector was managed transparently. In short,
reconstituting the timber industry was a priority, and word was that within
a year or so timber extraction would be creating jobs, stimulating eco-
nomic recovery and alleviating poverty. Progress seemed to be at hand.
What I discovered as time went by and my visits to Liberia got more
frequent was that although the most egregious features of Liberia’s
resource plunder had been addressed and steps to improve revenue trans-
parency were going in the right direction, efforts to reform forest gover-
nance were progressively contentious, and maybe even counterproductive
for peacebuilding. The anticipated revenue, employment and community
benefits of timber extraction had not materialized, and companies awarded
concessions frequently failed to honor their contractual obligations and
were found to have violated Liberian law. In fact, timber extraction was
effectively put on hold. Disagreements with communities also were perva-
sive, and issues related to land ownership, user rights and public participa-
tion were a source of deep-seated tension. Community contacts frequently
told me that “little had changed” despite almost a decade of forest reform
and the government, with the support of international peacebuilders,
were repeating mistakes of the past. How could this be?
Fast forward to Sierra Leone where in 2009 I began fieldwork to under-
stand post-conflict natural resource governance and the impact of resource
management on peacebuilding. The conflict in Sierra Leone, similar to that
in Liberia, was linked to natural resources, specifically diamonds. Rebel
groups fought to control mining areas and smuggled diamonds to finance
the fighting, and as the war continued a system of collusion emerged
between rebel groups, rogue government officials and other combatants to
share millions in diamond revenue. International attention to the issue led
to UN sanctions on diamonds, and eventually the Kimberley Process
Certification Scheme (KPCS) was developed to curtail the ­so-­called “con-
flict diamond” trade and verify that diamonds on world markets did not
originate in conflict zones.
 INTRODUCTION 3

Not surprisingly, the idea that diamonds helped fuel the conflict led
international peacebuilders to prioritize diamond sector reform after open
hostilities ended in 2002. This resulted in numerous laws, regulations and
policies largely directed and shaped by international peacebuilders, to
manage the trade in alluvial diamonds and ensure they helped to fund
post-conflict recovery, and did not reignite violence. Reforms included
increased monitoring of mining areas, crackdowns on illegal mining activi-
ties and the implementation of the aforementioned KPCS. These efforts
were accompanied by less vigorous attempts to address concerns of dia-
mond miners and mining communities that were historically marginal-
ized. Sierra Leone also began, again with significant influence of
international peacebuilders, to devise a plan to restart industrial mining
operations (i.e. rutile, iron ore and kimberlite diamonds) and grant con-
cessions to mostly foreign mining companies. Compared to the diamond
sector, industrial mining was thought to be substantially more profitable
than alluvial diamonds and therefore better able to kick-start an economic
recovery.
Little did I know until I started to examine the mining sector in more
detail and spend time with the people and communities involved in min-
ing that a host of problems had surfaced, or more accurately resurfaced.
Contracts between mining companies and the government were repeat-
edly negotiated in secret and without stakeholder or community input—
both contravening Sierra Leonean law. Contracts regularly contained
generous tax and royalty payments that deprived the country and com-
munities of revenue, and contained clauses that exempted companies from
responsibility for social and environmental impacts. These disputes were
paralleled by clashes between mining companies, mining communities and
miners that over the last several years resulted in harassment, injury, human
rights abuses and even death. Despite substantial international interven-
tion and concrete reform of Sierra Leone’s diamond and industrial mining
sector, I kept hearing about a “lack of progress,” and people involved
directly in mining echoed the same feeling that “they are getting poorer
than [they] used to be.” Again, I asked how this was possible.
Certainly, the international spotlight had brought attention to the role
natural resources can play in fueling armed conflict. International inter-
ventions made it harder for rebel groups to access resource revenues and
curtailed the outright looting of natural resources. Yet, a closer look
revealed that progress was offset by mounting problems, and many of the
problems looked almost identical in both countries. The negotiating of
4 M. D. BEEVERS

resource contracts with timber companies in Liberia or mining companies

in Sierra Leone proved to be troubling and their commitment to revenue
transparency and accountability open for debate. Disputes between local
communities, whether in timber producing areas of Liberia or mines in
Sierra Leone, were on the rise. Gains in human development were also
modest in both countries, and adequate food, water, shelter, sanitation
and health care remained out of reach for a vast majority of people. Put
simply, the expectation that natural resource exploitation would result in
improved livelihoods or appreciable development outcomes had not been
fulfilled. What accounted for the perceived or genuine “lack of progress”
when it came to natural resource governance in Liberia and Sierra Leone?
What explained why, despite substantial international intervention and
tens of millions of dollars, efforts to reform natural resource governance in
both countries were mired in controversy and contention? These ques-
tions propelled this work forward.

Peacebuilding and Natural Resource Governance

Over the last two decades, natural resources emerged as a significant inter-
national peacebuilding priority (UNEP 2009; UNSG 2009, 2010; World
Bank 2011). This was due to a growing body of scholarship, bolstered by
documentation from non-governmental organizations and reports in the
media and advocacy campaigns, that natural resources played a role in
sparking and fueling civil conflicts around the world, including in places
like Angola, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Cote d’Ivoire, Sierra
Leone and Liberia. Studies have estimated that between 1970 and 2008
between 29 and 57 percent of all civil conflicts involved natural resources,
and since 1990, 18 armed conflicts were fueled by natural resources (Rustad
and Binningsbø 2012; UNEP 2009, 11). Put more bluntly, resources have
been “associated with dozens of armed conflicts, millions of deaths, and
the collapse of several peace processes” (Lujala and Rustad 2012, 6).
Although there is considerable debate about the precise links between
natural resources and armed conflict, several explanations came to domi-
nate during the 1990s. First and foremost was the idea that civil conflicts
were driven by the potential revenues from natural resources, which pro-
vided rebel groups (or aspiring rebel groups) with profits and conflict
financing. International actors came to see the main relationship between
resources and civil conflict as connected to “lootable” resources. Such
explanations assumed that civil wars were the product of “greed” by armed
 INTRODUCTION 5

bandits rather than politically motivated “grievances” long associated with

civil wars (Collier and Hoeffler 2000). While the illegal exploitation of
natural resources played a role in civil conflicts, it was often not the only
cause or even the main cause (Ballentine and Sherman 2003; Ross 2004;
Fearon 2005). Regardless, the so-called conflict resource narrative was
important to elevating the issue of natural resources and armed conflict and
getting it onto the international policy agenda. Strategies pursued by inter-
national peacebuilders to end conflicts included interventions by UN
peacekeepers, UN sanctions, revenue-sharing strategies and commodity-­
tracking schemes. Peacekeepers were seldom deployed to resource-rich
areas, but they were sometimes mandated to help governments restore
control over natural resource areas and prevent illicit extraction. Another
approach, often floated by peace negotiators, sought to address the prob-
lem of resource revenues by promising combatants control of resource-­rich
territory or government positions that manage natural resources in
exchange for peace. UN sanctions were imposed on natural resources
believed to be funding conflict. The sanctions banned the import or export
of a resource, be it oil, timber, minerals or diamonds, in an effort to stem
flow of revenues to rebel groups. Between 1992 and 2005, the UN imposed
sanctions on timber, diamonds and oil in Angola, Cambodia, Liberia, Sierra
Leone, Angola and Cote d’Ivoire. Finally, commodity-­tracking schemes
were designed to reduce the chances of illegal exploitation and smuggling,
and increase the odds that revenues will end up in state coffers. The
Kimberley Process Certification Scheme, for instance, required participants
to certify that diamond exports did not originate in conflict zones.
International peacebuilders also came to view natural resources as an
important component of peacebuilding. Armed conflict severely disrupts
economies, intensifies poverty and destroys infrastructure. Natural
resources can help spur economic recovery, create jobs, address poverty
and provide a source of public revenue. Rising incomes and more
employment opportunities were thought to improve human well-being
and make people less inclined to rebel (Bannon and Collier 2003, 8).
Post-conflict development was also considered vital because, as studies
have shown, entrenched poverty and weak economic growth—together
with poor governance—produce a “conflict trap” (Collier et al. 2003).
International peacebuilders have come to assume that “development
brings peace” (Paris 2004). As a result, foreign direct investment and a
business-friendly environment have become fundamental to peacebuild-
ing. Of course, the existence of valuable natural resources has been found
6 M. D. BEEVERS

to lead to the resource curse. The resource curse, which emerged in the
broad academic literature in the late 1990s, suggested that resource-
dependent countries, particularly those that are weak economically, tend
to be more corrupt, less accountable, more economically weak and
impoverished, and more authoritarian, increasing the risk of armed con-
flict (Ross 2003, 2015). Since states emerging from armed conflict have
notoriously weak institutions and poor and fragmented governance
structures at all levels, the chances of corruption and malfeasance
increase. To address the “resource curse,” and ensure revenues are not
squandered, international peacebuilders have intervened to promote
specific governance reforms. Peacebuilders encourage governments to
review resource contracts to ensure they are legal, promote social and
environmentally sustainable practices, and grant favorable financial terms
to the government. Peacebuilders emphasize revenue distribution and
allocation mechanisms to ensure that finances collected from natural
resources go to the government and local entities including communities
in resource producing areas. Ostensibly, these mechanisms are designed
to safeguard the revenue that is required for investments in post-conflict
development. International interventions to enhance revenue transpar-
ency, government accountability and codes of conduct for extractive
companies or put another way “good governance” is deemed essential.
The Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) is an interna-
tional measure, for example, that requires governments to account for
natural resources revenues paid by companies and that companies pub-
lish what revenue they have paid to the government.
Given the substantial attention to natural resources by peacebuilders
over the last two decades, it is not surprising that there is a growing body
of scholarship assessing the effectiveness of measures and policies to address
resources in post-conflict settings (Bruch et al. 2016; Lujala and Rustad
2012; Le Billon 2012; UNEP 2009). This is an important and timely
development because the vast and growing peacebuilding literature has
failed to scrutinize in any detail the role of natural resources in consolidat-
ing peace. At the same time, however, the scholarship scrutinizing the links
between natural resources and armed conflict has not addressed how those
same resources might shape peacebuilding (Collier et al. 2008). I would
argue that a look at the emerging scholarship points out that we know
much less than we think about peacebuilding and natural resource gover-
nance. Recent studies, for example, suggest that armed conflict is 40 per-
cent shorter when natural resources are involved (Rustad and Binningsbø
 INTRODUCTION 7

2012). Attempts to govern natural resources after armed conflicts have

also been characterized as being of “limited success,” or as “generally
unsatisfactory” (Lujala and Rustad 2012; Le Billon 2012). Moreover, it
has also been documented that some interventions designed to improve
resource governance have had consequences that, at worst, “may create
new grievances that reignite conflict or cause new, low-level conflicts”
(Rustad et al. 2012, 613). This book is an attempt to better understand the
complex and high-stakes issue of peacebuilding and natural resource gov-
ernance in the aftermath of armed conflict.

The Argument
A range of explanations has been put forth for why natural resource gov-
ernance often fails or is unsatisfactory after conflicts end. The most com-
mon suggests that weak state institutions and inadequate governance
make things “messy” and “complex.” Without effective state institutions,
not only is democracy and economic recovery perceived to be challenging,
but so too is effective natural resource governance. Moreover, without
state institutions, establishing sound governance structures, including
legal and regulatory reforms designed to manage the resource base and
revenues, will be difficult. Poor outcomes are also routinely blamed on a
lack of capacity—human, technical, financial—that constrains govern-
ments from managing resources sustainably or enforcing laws and regula-
tions that make overharvesting, accelerated extraction, resource
degradation and environmental mismanagement common and wide-
spread. Finally, there is a sense that endemic corruption among govern-
ments and other elites is leading to mismanagement and abuses of power
that at best, results in unsustainable resource use and poor development
outcomes, and at worst, offers the potential for renewed conflict. The list
above is not exhaustive, but the dominant narrative tends to suggest that
international peacebuilders are doing their part, but that mostly internal
concerns—weak institutions, inadequate laws and regulations, a lack of
capacity and poor governance—make it difficult for countries to leverage
their natural resources for peace. This book argues that strategies pursued
by international peacebuilders share a portion of the blame.
I show that international peacebuilders active in Liberia and Sierra
Leone overwhelmingly pursued a policy agenda that promoted securitiza-
tion and marketization of natural resources. Securitization, in this context,
refers to international interventions designed to consolidate state authority
8 M. D. BEEVERS

over natural resources through, among other things, legal and regulatory
reforms. Such a strategy is based on the idea that in the absence of a strong
central government authority, state institutions and “good governance”
natural resources will be overexploited and mismanaged. The govern-
ment’s inability to control natural resources and the associated revenues
increases the risk of renewed conflict and threatens international security.
Marketization, on the other hand, refers to increasing resource extraction
for the purpose of export-led growth. This idea, heralded by peacebuilders,
suggests the resource trade will promote economic development and pov-
erty alleviation by attracting investors, yielding revenue essential for
rebuilding infrastructure and procuring basic services, and providing
much-needed jobs. Economic growth is perceived as essential for securing
peace because rising incomes are thought to improve the lives of the popu-
lation and make people less likely to rebel against the government. In
short, through securitization and marketization, “conflict resources” could
be transformed into “peace resources,” and in the process, peace could be
strengthened and consolidated.
I find that the exclusive focus on securitization and marketization have
had detrimental effects on the ground in both countries. The book illus-
trates that, although international peacebuilders have been essential to
ending resource plunder, interventions skewed toward securitization and
marketization have been largely ineffective at harnessing resources for
broad-based development, and at worst, counterproductive for peace-
building in Liberia and Sierra Leone. They are ineffective because they
place practically all of the emphasis on keeping resource revenues out of
the hands of rebel groups (or potential rebel groups) and corrupt govern-
ment officials, ostensibly to reduce the likelihood of renewed armed con-
flict and increase the likelihood that revenues will be used to fund
development priorities. However, the prominence of these interventions
has rendered invisible issues connected to the land tenure, environmental
protection and sustainable livelihoods. Environmental challenges related
to water, sanitation, shelter, food and energy supplies have been largely
overlooked, and in some cases, efforts to secure and extract resources have
paradoxically impeded the ability of local people to meet their livelihood
needs. The interventions have the potential to be counterproductive
because they mirror pre-war governing arrangements in which patronage,
corruption, exclusion and exploitation took root, and are thus aggravating
tensions around natural resources. In Liberia, for example, forests were to
be secured and managed by the government to avoid further exploitation
 INTRODUCTION 9

by rebel groups. However, there has been a historical resistance on the part
of local communities to accept the government as the “master of the land.”
For most of Liberia’s history, the state has been predatory and established
laws and regulations designed to enrich a small cadre of elites, the conse-
quence of which led to exclusion and deprivation. In Sierra Leone, the
renewed efforts to crack down on illegal mining in order to ensure dia-
monds cannot fund renewed conflict threaten to restrict access to liveli-
hoods in ways reminiscent of the past.
Ultimately, I suggest that dominant narratives shaped and skewed the
universe of possible international interventions to govern natural resources
in Liberia and Sierra Leone, and that these interventions, and in fact the
choices of peacebuilders, had consequences on the ground. A set of per-
suasive narratives about the links between natural resources, armed conflict
and peacebuilding strongly influenced the kinds of interventions pursued
by international peacebuilders. The book illuminates how international
peacebuilders came to understand the armed conflicts in Liberia and Sierra
Leone in a certain way, and this helped to frame both the problem and the
policy responses deemed legitimate. The dominant narrative that the con-
flicts were being fought for purely economic reasons, for example, brought
to the forefront specific understandings of how natural resources and
armed conflict were linked, while at the same time marginalizing other
potential explanations. Peacebuilders came to view the problem decisively
in terms of conflict resources rather than linked to historical grievances.
Likewise, the conventional wisdom linking resource extraction to peace
and development led peacebuilders to prioritize and pursue certain strate-
gies and interventions, and to minimize and overlook other possibilities.
International interventions could have concentrated on addressing land
ownership issues that long festered in Liberia and Sierra Leone, endowed
communities with the authority to govern and manage resources accord-
ing to their desired needs or attempted to construct a developmental
model that does not rely on intensive resource extraction. However, these
interventions went against the dominant narratives and were therefore not
considered or taken seriously among international peacebuilders.
Indeed, dominant narratives can be hard to alter, but there is evidence that
in both countries the discourse is being contested and policies that stress
securitization and marketization called into question by local people and
advocacy groups. In Liberia, the privileged status of timber extraction to
post-conflict development is being examined and an emerging counter-­
narrative regarding “community rights” is gaining traction. Likewise, in
10 M. D. BEEVERS

Sierra Leone, communities and their national and international counterparts

are contesting the idea that simply reforming laws and regulations in the min-
ing sector will reduce the likelihood of conflict and build peace. In fact, these
groups suggest that such practices do little to reduce people’s vulnerability
and actually work to fuel resentment. The contention highlights deeper
struggles related to governing natural resources in the aftermath of conflict.

Methods
To understand how international peacebuilders worked to reform natural
resource governance, and by extension to illustrate how certain ideas came
define problems and shape interventions, the book draws on a multitude of
interviews in Liberia and Sierra Leone between 2008 and 2015. I con-
ducted at least 155 interviews with “international peacebuilders” including
officials from the UN and its agencies, staff of international organizations,
international non-governmental organizations and activist networks,
embassy and national development representatives, personnel and leaders
of industry groups and consultants. I also interviewed Liberian and Sierra
Leonean government officials, civil society actors, journalists, community
groups and other individuals. I talked with several interviewees on multiple
occasions or visited them over an extended period. Most of the people I
interviewed chose to be anonymous to shield themselves from personal or
professional risk and speak openly. For this reason, interviewees in the book
are identified only by their occupation or status and the year the interview
took place.
I spent considerable time in Monrovia, Freetown and other cities. I
interviewed community members and had informal conversations with
people affected by natural resource extraction in Grand Bassa, Rivercess,
Gbarpolu and Grand Cape Mount districts in Liberia, and Kono, Kenema,
Bo, Moyamba, Tonkolili and Bombali districts in Sierra Leone. I conducted
interviews in Washington, DC, New York and Brussels. In addition, I draw
on my involvement in a UN Environment Programme mission to Sierra
Leone in 2009 to conduct a technical assessment concerning the links
between the environment, conflict and peacebuilding, and gained tremen-
dous insights from interviews and discussions on that trip (UNEP 2010). My
research draws on observations conducted over a period of over seven years
in Liberia and Sierra Leone, including the development of laws, regulations
and policies related to natural resources, the state of living conditions in
certain areas and how resource extraction has played out at local, national
 INTRODUCTION 11

and international levels. I attended numerous meetings and forums, and

was on hand for internal deliberations, from which I gained considerable
insight into natural resource governance. I supplemented my interviews
and field data with an extensive array of documents, including papers,
reports, memorandums, news articles and scholarly works. On several occa-
sions, I was granted access to draft memos, email exchanges, meeting min-
utes and other private information that was helpful to my research under
the condition that I did not divulge the sources.
Finally, it is important to note that throughout the book, I make spe-
cific claims about “international peacebuilders,” “local people,” “commu-
nities,” “national government officials,” “international advocacy groups”
and the like. Such claims no doubt are a simplification and hide the range
of opinion and thought that exists in each of these groups. It gives the
perception that there is consistency in terms of opinion and thought when
there is not. Wherever possible I try to represent the diversity of ideas and
actions within each group. Like comparable studies dealing with this
methodological issue, I hope that the contribution in terms of theory and
policy will more than make up for the loss of detail.1

The Structure of This Book

In chapters that follow, I examine natural resource governance in Liberia
and Sierra Leone, and I document the emergence and elaboration of the
ideas about natural resources, armed conflict and peacebuilding and how
narratives were used to justify specific interventions. I underscore that
despite some positive and important outcomes, these interventions, which
emphasize securing and marketizing natural resources, are limited, inef-
fective and in some ways counterproductive for peacebuilding. The book
asks why international peacebuilders have tended to privileged certain
ideas and discourses over others. With that in mind, the book is divided
into four parts.
Part I of the book discusses natural resources and international peace-
building. Chapter 2 recounts the evolution of international peacebuilding
over the last two decades. It reviews the early years of peacebuilding,
which was more narrowly conceived and marked by failures, and a “sec-
ond generation” of peacebuilding characterized by broadened objectives
and an influx of international actors. The chapter then examines the two

1
This paragraph paraphrases insights from Autesserre 2010, 35.
12 M. D. BEEVERS

grand strategies that underpin peacebuilding operations—liberalization

and statebuilding. This review places natural resource governance after
conflict in the context of failed states and peacebuilding. Chapter 3 sur-
veys the rise of the environmental security discourse in the 1990s and
illustrates how these ideas led to growing attention to “conflict resources”
as an explanation for civil conflict. I show how international peacebuilders
increasingly intervened to end conflict by addressing conflict resources
and their revenues. The chapter, then, turns to the interventions created,
promoted and established by international peacebuilders to leverage natu-
ral resources for peace. It underscores the prevailing ideas among peace-
builders about natural resource extraction, including the significance for
post-conflict economic recovery, and the importance of establishing new
laws and regulations, and helping to implement the tenets of “good
governance.”
Part II of the book delves deeply into the Liberian case study. Chapter 4
begins with an overview of Liberian history from the country’s settlement
in 1822 until the start of Liberia’s civil war. I focus on the changing politi-
cal, social and economic dynamics of state formation and consolidation,
paying particular attention to the control of land and natural resources that
lie at the heart of Liberia’s history. I provide an account of Liberia’s civil
war and close the chapter with the focus on resource-based explanations for
the conflict. I illustrate that international actors initially ignored natural
resources altogether and gravitated toward other explanations for the con-
flict, but over time the discourse became dominated by a conflict resource
narrative, specifically, the idea that timber extraction and looting of the
country’s forest resources were the key factors that fueled and prolonged
the conflict. Chapter 5 examines the interventions pursued by international
peacebuilders to govern Liberia’s forest resources in the aftermath of the
conflict. I detail how intervention strategies were, initially, concerned with
“securing” forests via sanctions on timber exports, reviews of timber
concessions and enhanced state authority over forests. That emphasis
changed as peacebuilders subsequently framed the biggest threat to
Liberia’s peace and security as poverty and the lack of economic growth.
From this point forward, international peacebuilders emphasized timber
extraction and the “marketizing” of Liberia’s forests. The chapter ends by
showing that after more than a decade of efforts to govern Liberia’s forests
remain problematic and deeply contentious, and have not progressed as
international peacebuilders predicted.
 INTRODUCTION 13

Part III of the book examines the case of Sierra Leone. Chapter 6
reviews Sierra Leone’s historical trajectory from British rule until the eve
of the civil war in 1990. I highlight the economic, political and social
landscape that helped form Sierra Leone, paying particular attention to
how diamonds and minerals, and other natural resources, played a role in
the country’s development. I detail Sierra Leone’s civil war and in doing
so emphasize in narratives about the war, including the emergence of the
“conflict diamonds” that gained prominence with international actors.
Chapter 7 looks in depth at efforts by peacebuilders to govern Sierra
Leone’s diamonds and minerals. Much like Liberia’s forests in the chapters
before, I show that peacebuilders emphasized interventions to “securi-
tize” and “marketize” diamonds and minerals for the purpose of building
peace. However, those efforts have thus far failed to live up to expecta-
tions and have resulted in tensions and violence.
In the final part of the book, Part IV, I describe how international
peacebuilders active in Liberia and Sierra Leone pursued an almost identi-
cal strategy to transform “conflict resources” into “peace resources” vis-à-­
vis “securitization” and “marketization” of natural resources. Securitization
and marketization stress, on the one hand, extracting natural resources for
economic growth, development and revenue generation and, on the other
hand, instituting good governance provisions to ensure the resources are
not exploited and the revenues do not reignite conflict. While the worst of
the resource plunder is over in no small part due to these interventions, the
skewed approach to natural resource governance, I argue, is limited in its
ability to establish deep-seated, positive forms of peace. I illustrate in Chap. 8
how securitization and marketization in many respects recreate the condi-
tions that historically fostered contention and violence around natural
resources in Liberia and Sierra Leone, and this runs to risk of exacerbating
tensions. In addition, the myopic focus on “high-value” natural resources
led peacebuilders to overlook elements of the environment that are linked
to resource extraction and livelihoods and necessary for reducing vulnera-
bilities and insecurities required to foster genuine development and peace.
Finally, I underscore how securitization and marketization raise expecta-
tions in ways that can, at best, understate slow and steady progress and, at
worst, generate resentment that can be used to undermine peacebuilding.
Given the focus on securitization and marketization, the question
emerges as to why peacebuilders overwhelmingly supported these reforms.
In the remainder of Chap. 8, I illustrate how the reforms of securitization
and marketization were perceived as the most effective, and even the only,
14 M. D. BEEVERS

strategies for governing natural resources in the context of peacebuilding.

I argue this is because of a persuasive set of narratives about the links
between natural resource, armed conflict and peacebuilding that helped to
frame both the problem and the policy responses that were appropriate.
This explanation brings to the forefront why natural resource governance
looks like it does and explains how ideas shape policy on the ground.
Looking forward, the chapter lays out a set of practical recommendations
for strengthening natural resource governance for peacebuilding that goes
beyond Liberia and Sierra Leone. It suggests that peacebuilders should
question simple assumptions about natural resources, conflict and peace
and incorporate more local voices in the peacebuilding project; strengthen
rights-based approaches to resource governance; and leverage opportuni-
ties for environmental peacebuilding.

References
Autesserre, Séverine. 2010. The Trouble with the Congo: Local Violence and the
Failure of International Peacebuilding. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Ballentine, Karen, and Jake Sherman, eds. 2003. The Political Economy of Armed
Conflict: Beyond Greed and Grievance. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
Bannon, Ian, and Paul Collier, eds. 2003. Natural Resources and Violent Conflict.
Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Bruch, Carl, Carroll Muffett, and Sandra S. Nichols, eds. 2016. Governance,
Natural Resources, and Post-Conflict Peacebuilding. New York: Earthscan.
Collier, Paul, and Anke Hoeffler. 2000. Greed and Grievance in Civil War. In
World Bank Paper. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Collier, Paul, V.L. Elliot, Håvard Hegre, Anke Hoeffler, Marta Reynal-Querol,
and Nicholas Sambanis. 2003. Breaking the Conflict Trap: Civil War and
Development Policy. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Collier, Paul, Anke Hoeffler, and Måns Söderbom. 2008. Post-Conflict Risks.
Journal of Peace Research 45 (4): 461–478.
Fearon, James D. 2005. Primary Commodity Exports and Civil War. Journal of
Conflict Resolution 49 (4): 483–507.
Le Billon, Philippe. 2012. Wars of Plunder: Conflicts, Profits and the Politics of
Resources. New York: Columbia University Press.
Lujala, Päivi, and Siri Aas Rustad, eds. 2012. High-Value Natural Resources and
Post-Conflict Peacebuilding. New York: Earthscan.
Paris, Roland. 2004. At War’s End: Building Peace After Civil Conflict. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
 INTRODUCTION 15

Ross, Michael L. 2003. The Natural Resource Curse: How Wealth Can Make You
Poor. In Natural Resources and Violent Conflict, ed. Ian Bannon and Paul
Collier, 17–42. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
———. 2004. How Do Natural Resources Influence Civil War? Evidence from
Thirteen Cases. International Organization 58 (1): 35–67.
———. 2015. What Have We Learned about the Resource Curse? Annual Review
of Political Science 18: 239–259.
Rustad, Siri Aas, and Helga Malmin Binningsbø. 2012. A Price Worth Fighting
For? Natural Resources and Conflict Recurrence. Journal of Peace Research 49
(4): 531–546.
Rustad, Sira Aas, Päivi Lujala, and Philippe Le Billon. 2012. Building or Spoiling
Peace? Lessons from the Managment of High-Value Natural Resources. In
High-Value Natural Resources and Post-Conflict Peacebuilding, ed. Päivi Lujala
and Siri Aas Rustad, 571–621. New York: Earth.
UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme). 2009. From Conflict to
Peacebuilding: The Role of Natural Resources and the Environment. Geneva:
UNEP.
———. 2010. Sierra Leone: Environment, Conflict and Peacebuilding Assessment.
Nairobi: UNEP.
UNSG (United Nations Secretary-General). 2009. Report of the Secretary-­
General on Peacebuilding in the Immediate Aftermath of Conflict.
A/63/881-S/2009/304. New York: United Nations.
———. 2010. Report of the Secretary-General on Peacebuilding in the Immediate
Aftermath of Conflict. A/64/866-S/2010/386. New York: United Nations.
World Bank. 2011. World Development Report 2011. Washington, DC: World
Bank.
 PART I

Natural Resources, Armed Conflict

and Peacebuilding
 CHAPTER 2

International Peacebuilding: Origins,

Development and Strategies

The Cold War was characterized by ideological struggle and a policy of

nuclear deterrence. However, this period was also defined by a dramatic
reshuffling of the international system as the process of decolonization led
to new sovereign states. The UN Charter with 51 signatories in 1945 bal-
looned to three times that by the early 1990s. The idea that all “peoples”
were part of sovereign states that should be left to govern themselves with-
out the influence of outside states, or the UN itself, defined the era.
Consistent meddling in the dealings of other countries was indeed stan-
dard practice in the international system, but the UN went out of its way
not to intervene militarily or politically in the internal affairs of other
countries. States were subject to periodic disruptions such as coup d’états
or civil war during the 1960s and 1970s, but the suggestion that states
“fail” or be unable to govern themselves was an “anathema to the raison
d’être of decolonization and offensive to the notion of self-determination”
(Helman and Ratner 1992/1993, 4). If the UN had sought to intervene
in newly independent states, it would have been viewed as a sovereign
intrusion. The United States and Soviet Union, both veto members of the
UN Security Council, would not have approved such interference in their
spheres of influence. When instability or civil strife did occur, the super-
powers competed to control the situation in strategically important places.
Even in states that did not pose any strategic problem, the prospect of
reaching agreement on the UN role was virtually impossible due to
­ideological divides. The UN did get involved in the deployment of mili-
tary observers or patrolling the buffer zones, but the UN was prohibited

© The Author(s) 2019 19

M. D. Beevers, Peacebuilding and Natural Resource Governance After
Armed Conflict, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63166-0_2
20 M. D. BEEVERS

from interfering in the domestic affairs of the target state. In other words,
the UN Charter combined with the Cold War and decolonization
restricted activities of the UN and other international organizations.
Intervention in newly independent states was considered unnecessary
because of the power of modernization and the idea that post-war eco-
nomic development plans were the recipe for international peace and pros-
perity. For the West, the foundational model was the Marshall Plan, which
rebuilt Europe and Japan after World War II by focusing on assistance to
establish market democracies. The superpowers, along with members of
the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD),
contributed substantial development and humanitarian aid to Third World
states for this purpose. Likewise, UN agencies, along with the interna-
tional financial institutions (IFIs), most notably the World Bank and
International Monetary Fund (IMF), administered billions of dollars in
grants and loans to foster economic development in developing states.
The situation changed dramatically with the end of the Cold War as
state interests changed, beliefs about the purpose of intervention were
transformed and new opportunities opened up for international organiza-
tions. Since the United States and Soviet Union (and later, Russia) were
unwilling to get involved in countries not considered vital to their imme-
diate security interests, demands on the UN to address long-standing con-
flicts or “failed states” increased dramatically. Almost overnight, the UN
and other international actors became engaged in the domestic affairs of
states and revolutionized “peace operations.” In 1989, the UN sent a mis-
sion to Namibia to disarm combatants, prepare the country for its first
democratic elections and draft a new constitution. In 1991, new peace
operations were launched in Angola, El Salvador and Cambodia that
involved organizing for elections and human rights monitoring. The fol-
lowing year, the UN deployed to Bosnia and Somalia in the midst of civil
conflict and to Mozambique to lay the groundwork for elections.
The conventional prohibitions on UN “meddling” in the sovereign
affairs of states were being superseded by new norms of international
intervention institutionalized to manage a growing number of civil con-
flicts and failed states, primarily in the developing world. Peacekeepers in
Bosnia and Somalia, for example, were authorized by the UN Security
Council to use force for more than self-defense, and in Cambodia, the UN
took over administration of the state for a short time during the transition.
A consensus emerged among foreign policy establishment that civil con-
flicts and failed states were a significant threat to international security.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
little such things are noticed here I will give the
particulars as near as I could get them. There were
five or six men stopping together in a sort of shanty.
Two of them were speculators, and had some
money, corn bread, &c., and would not divide with
their comrades, who belonged to their own company
and regiment. Some time in the night one of them got
up and was stealing bread from a haversack
belonging to his more prosperous neighbor, and
during the operation woke up the owner, who seized
a knife and stabbed the poor fellow dead. The one
who did the murder spoke out and said: “Harry, I
believe Bill is dead; he was just stealing from me and
I run my knife into him.” “Good enough for him,” says
Harry. The two men then got up and straightened out
“Bill,” and then both lay down and went to sleep. An
occupant of the hut told me these particulars and
they are true. This morning poor Bill lay in the hut
until eight or nine o’clock, and was then carried
outside. The man who did the killing made no secret
of it, but told it to all who wanted to know the
particulars, who were only a few, as the occurrence
was not an unusual one.
April 28.—Dr. Lewis is still getting worse with
scurvy and dropsy combined. Limbs swollen to
double their usual size—just like puff-balls. Raiders
do about as they please, and their crimes would fill
more paper than I have at my disposal.
April 30.—Very small rations given to us now. Not
more than one-quarter what we want to eat and that
of the poorest quality. Splendid weather, but too
warm; occasional rains. The Flying Dutchman (Wirtz)
offers to give any two at a time twelve hours the start,
and if caught to take the punishment he has for
runaways. The offer is made to intimidate those
thinking to escape. Half the men would take the
consequences with two hours start.
May 1.—Warm. Samuel Hutton, of the 9th Mich.
Cavalry, died last night; also Peter Christiancy and
Joseph Sargent, of Co. D, 9th Mich., have died within
a few weeks. Last evening 700 of the 85th New York
arrived here. They were taken at Plymouth, N.C.,
with 1,400 others, making 2,100 in all. The balance
are on the road to this place. Wrote a letter home to-
day. Have not heard from the North for over six
months. Dying off very fast.
May 2.—A crazy man was shot dead by the guard
an hour ago. The guard dropped a piece of bread on
the inside of the stockade, and the fellow went inside
the dead line to get it and was killed. The bread
wagon was raided upon as soon as it drove inside to-
day and all the bread stolen, for which offense no
more will be issued to-day. As I write Wirtz is walking
about the prison revolver in hand, cursing and
swearing. The men yell out “Hang him up!” “Kill the
Dutch louse!” “Buck and gag him!” “Stone him to
death!” &c., and he all the time trying to find out who
it is insulting him so. “I vish I find out who calls me
such insulting vords, I kill the dam Yankee as soon I
eat my supper!” And every few minutes a handful of
dirt is thrown by some one. Wreaks his vengeance
by keeping back rations from the whole camp.
May 3.—A rebel battery came to-day on the cars,
and is being posted around the stockade. Ever since
my introduction to Andersonville they have been
constantly at work making their prison stronger, until
now I believe it is impossible for a person to get
away. Notwithstanding, there are men all the time at
work in divers ways. Rebel officers now say that we
are not going to be exchanged during the war, and as
they can hold us now and no fear of escape, they
had just as soon tell us the truth as not, and we must
take things just as they see fit to give them to us.
Tom McGill is well and hearty, and as black as any
negro. Over 19,000 confined here now, and the
death rate ninety or one hundred.
May 4.—Good weather. Gen. Howell Cobb and
staff came among us to-day, and inspected the
prison. Wirtz accompanied them pointing out and
explaining matters. Gen. Winder, who has charge of
all the prisoners of war in the South, is here, but has
not been inside. Gen. Cobb is a very large and
pompous looking man. None of the men dare
address his highness. Three men out of every
hundred allowed to go out after wood under a strong
guard.
May 5.—Cold nights and warm days. Very
unhealthy, such extremes. Small-pox cases carried
out, and much alarm felt lest it should spread.
May 6.—Six months a prisoner to-day. Longer than
any six years of my previous life. It is wonderful how
well I stand the hardships here. At home I was not
very robust, in fact had a tendency to poor health; but
there are not many in prison that stand it as well as I
do. There are about eighty-five or ninety dying now
per day, as near as I can find out. Of course there
are stories to the effect that a hundred and fifty and
two hundred die each day, but such is not the case.
Have a code of reasoning that is pretty correct. Often
wonder if I shall get home again, and come to the
conclusion that I shall. My hopeful disposition does
more for me than anything else. Sanders trades and
dickers around and makes extra eatables for our
mess. There is not a hog in the mess. Nearly every
day some one is killed for some trifling offense, by
the guards. Rather better food to-day than usual.
 May 7.—A squad of Yankees taken outside to-day
on parole of honor, for the purpose of baking meal
into bread. George Hendryx is one of the number,
and he will have enough to eat after this, which I am
glad of. I could have gotten outside if I so chose, but
curious to write down I don’t want to go. George says
he will try and send in something for us to eat, and I
know he will, for a truer hearted fellow never lived.
May 8.—Awful warm and more sickly. About 3,500
have died since I came here, which is a good many,
come to think of it—cooked rations of bread to-day.
We get a quarter of a loaf of bread, weighing about
six ounces, and four or five ounces of pork. These
are small allowances, but being cooked it is better for
us. Rebels are making promises of feeding us better,
which we hope they will keep. There is nothing the
matter with me now but lack of food. The scurvy
symptoms which appeared a few weeks ago have all
gone.
May 9.—Many rebels riding about camp on
horseback. I listened to an animated conversation
between an officer and two of our men. Mr. Rebel got
talked all to pieces and hushed up entirely. He took it
good naturedly, however, and for a wonder did not
swear and curse us. It is a great treat to see a decent
rebel. Am lonesome since Hendryx went outside.
Men are continually going up to the dead line and
getting shot. They do not get much sympathy, as
they should know better.
May 10.—Capt. Wirtz very domineering and
abusive. Is afraid to come into camp any more. There
are a thousand men in here who would willingly die if
they could kill him first. Certainly the worst man I ever
saw. New prisoners coming in every day with good
clothes, blankets, &c., and occasionally with
considerable money. These are victims for the
raiders who pitch into them for plunder. Very serious
fights occur. Occasionally a party of new comers
stick together and whip the raiders, who afterward
rally their forces and the affair ends with the robbers
victorious. Stones, clubs, knives, sling shots, &c., are
used on these occasions, and sometimes the camp
gets so stirred up that the rebels, thinking a break is
intended, fire into the crowds gathered, and many
are killed before quiet is again restored. Then Wirtz
writes out an order and sends inside, telling he is
prepared for any break, etc., etc. No less than five
have died within a radius of thirty feet in the last
twenty-four hours. Hendryx has a sore arm and in
turning over last night I hurt it. He pitched in to me
while I was in a sound sleep to pay me for it. Woke
up in short order and we had it, rough and tumble.
Tore down the tent poles—rolled around—scaring
Lewis and all the rest. I am the stoutest, and soon
get on top and hold him down, and keep him there
until he quiets down, which is always in about five
minutes. We have squabbles of this sort often, which
don’t do any particular harm. Always laugh, shake
and make up afterwards. The “Astor House Mess,” or
the heads rather, have gently requested that we do
our fighting by daylight, and Sanders very forcibly
remarked that should another scene occur as
happened last night, he will take a hand in the
business and lick us both. Battese laughed, for about
the first time this summer. He has taken quite a shine
to both Hendryx and myself. In the fore part of to-
day’s entry I should have stated that Hendryx has
been sent inside, they not being quite ready for him
at the cook-house. He is a baker by trade.
May 11.—Rainy weather and cold nights. Men
shiver and cry all night—groan and “holler.” I lay
awake sometimes for hours, listening to the guards
yell out “Post number one; ten o’clock and all’s well!”
And then Post No. 2 takes up the refrain, and it goes
all around the camp, every one with a different
sounding voice, squeaky, coarse, and all sorts. Some
of them drawl out “H-e-r-e-’s y-e-r m-u-l-e!” and such
like changes, instead of “All’s well.” Rumors of hard
fighting about Richmond, and the rebels getting
whipped, which of course they deny.
 May 12.—Received a few lines from George
Hendryx, who again went out to work on the outside
last night. Wirtz with a squad of guards is about the
camp looking for tunnels. Patrols also looking among
the prisoners for deserters. A lame man, for telling of
a tunnel, was pounded almost to death last night,
and this morning they were chasing him to administer
more punishment, when he ran inside the dead line
claiming protection of the guard. The guard didn’t
protect worth a cent, but shot him through the head.
A general hurrahing took place, as the rebel had only
saved our men the trouble of killing him. More rumors
of hard fighting about Richmond. Grant getting the
best of it I reckon. Richmond surrounded and rebels
evacuating the place. These are the rumors. Guards
deny it.
May 13.—Rainy morning. We are guarded by an
Alabama regiment, who are about to leave for the
front. Georgia militia to take their places. Making
preparations for a grand pic-nic outside, given by the
citizens of the vicinity to the troops about to leave. I
must here tell a funny affair that has happened to
me, which, although funny is very annoying. Two or
three days before I was captured I bought a pair of
cavalry boots of a teamster named Carpenter. The
boots were too small for him and just fitted me.
Promised to pay him on “pay day,” we not having
been paid off in some time. We were both taken
prisoners and have been in the same hundred ever
since. Has dunned me now about 1,850 times, and
has always been mad at not getting his pay. Sold the
boots shortly after being captured and gave him half
the receipts, and since that have paid him in rations
and money as I could get it, until about sixty cents
remain unpaid, and that sum is a sticker. He is my
evil genius, and fairly haunts the life out of me.
Whatever I may get trusted for in after life, it shall
never be for a pair of boots. Carpenter is now sick
with scurvy, and I am beginning to get the same
disease hold of me again. Battese cut my hair which
was about a foot long. Gay old cut. Many have long
hair, which, being never combed, is matted together
and full of vermin. With sunken eyes, blackened
countenances from pitch pine smoke, rags and
disease, the men look sickening. The air reeks with
nastiness, and it is wonder that we live at all. When
will relief come to us?
May 14.—A band of music came from Macon
yesterday to attend the pic-nic. A large crowd of
women were present to grace the occasion. The
grounds on which the festivities were held lay a mile
off and in sight of all. In the evening a Bowery dance
was one of the pleasures enjoyed. “The Girl I Left
Behind Me,” was about all they could play, and that
very poorly.
May 15.—Sabbath day and hot. Would give
anything for some shade to lay in. Even this luxury is
denied us, and we are obliged to crawl around more
dead than alive. Rumors that Sherman is marching
towards Atlanta, and that place threatened. Kilpatrick
said to be moving toward us for the purpose of
effecting our release. Hope he will be more
successful than in his attack on Richmond. Rebels
have dug a deep ditch all around on the outside of
the wall to prevent tunneling, and a guard walks in
the bottom of the ditch. Banghart, of my Regiment,
died to-day.
May 16.—Two men got away during the night and
were brought back before noon. (Was going to say
before dinner.) The men are torn by the dogs, and
one of them full of buck shot. A funny way of escape
has just been discovered by Wirtz. A man pretends
to be dead and is carried out on a stretcher and left
with the row of dead. As soon as it gets dark, Mr.
Dead-man jumps up and runs. Wirtz suspecting the
trick took to watching, and discovered a “dead man”
running away. An examination now takes place by
the surgeon before being permitted out from under
guard. I hear a number of men have gotten away by
this method, and it seems very probable, as dead
men are so plenty that not much attention is paid to
them.
May 17.—Had a funny dream last night. Thought
the rebels were so hard up for mules that they
hitched up a couple of grayback lice to draw in the
bread. Wirtz is watching out for Yankee tricks. Some
one told him the other day that the Yankees were
making a large balloon inside and some day would
all rise up in the air and escape. He flew around as if
mad, but could find no signs of a balloon. Says there
is no telling what “te tam Yankee will do.” Some
prisoners came to-day who were captured at Dalton,
and report the place in our possession, and the
rebels driven six miles this side. Kilpatrick and
Stoneman are both with Sherman and there are
expectations of starting out on some mission soon,
supposed to be for this place. Nineteen thousand
confined here now and dying at the rate of ninety per
day. Philo Lewis, of the 5th Michigan Cav., can live
but a day or two. Talks continually of his wife and
family in Ypsilanti, Mich. Has pictures of the whole
family, which he has given me to take home to them,
also a long letter addressed to his wife and children.
Mr. Lewis used to be a teacher of singing in Ypsilanti.
He is a fine looking man naturally, and a smart man,
but he must go the way of thousands of others, and
perhaps myself. One of his pupils is here confined.
Philo Lewis must not be confounded with F. L. Lewis,
the member of our mess. The latter, however, cannot
live but a short time unless relief comes. Fine
weather but very warm. The sandy soil fairly alive
with vermin. If this place is so bad at this time of the
year, what must it be in July, August and September?
Every man will die, in my estimation, but perhaps we
may be relieved before then. We’ll try and think so
anyway. New prisoners die off the fastest.
May 18.—We have some good singers in camp,
and strange as it may seem, a good deal of singing is
indulged in. There are some men that are happy as
long as they can breathe, and such men smoothe
over many rough places here. God bless a man who
can sing in this place. A priest comes inside praying
and chanting. A good man to come to such a place.
Performs his duty the same to small-pox patients as
to any other. Shall try and find out his name. Some of
the wells dug by the Yanks furnish passable water,
an improvement anyway on swamp water. Well water
in great demand and sells readily for such trinkets as
the men have to dispose of. Rebels building forts on
the outside. Rebel officers inside trying to induce
shoemakers, foundrymen, carpenters and wood
choppers, to go out and work for the Confederacy. A
very few accepted the offer. Well, life is sweet, and
can hardly blame men for accepting the offer; still, I
don’t want to go, neither do ninety-nine out of every
hundred. The soldiers here are loyal to the cause.
May 19.—Nearly twenty thousand men confined
here now. New ones coming every day. Rations very
small and very poor. The meal that the bread is made
out of is ground, seemingly, cob and all, and it
scourges the men fearfully. Things getting continually
worse. Hundreds of cases of dropsy. Men puff out of
human shape and are perfectly horrible to look at.
Philo Lewis died to-day. Could not have weighed at
the time of his death more than ninety pounds, and
was originally a large man, weighing not less than
one hundred and seventy. Jack Walker, of the 9th
Mich. Cavalry, has received the appointment to assist
in carrying out the dead, for which service he
receives an extra ration of corn bread.
May 20.—Hendryx sent me in to-day from the
outside a dozen small onions and some green tea.
No person, on suddenly being lifted from the lowest
depths of misery to peace and plenty, and all that
money could buy, could feel more joyous or grateful
than myself for those things. As the articles were
handed in through the gate a crowd saw the
transaction, and it was soon known that I had a friend
on the outside who sent me in extras. I learn that a
conspiracy is being gotten up on the outside, in
which Hendryx is at the head, and they will try and
overpower the guard and release the prisoners. If
Capt. Wirtz only knew it, he has a very dangerous
man in George Hendryx. Cram full of adventure, he
will be heard from wherever he is.
May 21.—Still good weather and hot, with damp
nights. Dr. Lewis lingers along in a miserable state of
existence, and scurvy and dropsy doing their worst.
His old mess-mates at the 9th Michigan regimental
head-quarters little think of their favorite, story-telling,
good fellows’ condition now. We take as good care of
him as possible under the circumstances. Two men
shot to-day by the barbarians, and one of them has
lain all the afternoon where he fell.
May 22.—No news of importance. Same old story.
Am now a gallant washer-man. Battese, the
Minnesota Indian, learn’t me in the way of his
occupation, made me a wash board by cutting
creases in a piece of board, and I am fully installed.
We have a sign out, made by myself on a piece of
shingle: “WASHING.” We get small pieces of bread
for our labors. Some of the sick cannot eat their
bread, and not being able to keep clean, give us a
job. Make probably a pound of bread two or three
days in the week. Battese says: “I work, do me good;
you do same.” Have many applications for admission
to the firm, and may enlarge the business.
 May 23.—Rains very hard. Seems as if the
windows of Heaven had opened up, in fact the
windows out all together. It’s a grand good thing for
the camp, as it washes away the filth and purifies the
air.
May 24.—Sherman coming this way, so said,
towards Atlanta. It is thought the cavalry will make a
break for us, but even if they do they cannot get us
north. We are equal to no exertion. Men busy to-day
killing swallows that fly low; partly for amusement,
but more particularly for food they furnish. Are eaten
raw before hardly dead. No, thank you, I will take no
swallow.
May 25.—One thousand new prisoners came to-
day from near Petersburg, Va. They give us
encouraging news as to the termination of the spring
campaign. Gen. Burnside said in a speech to his
men that Petersburg would be taken in less than a
month or Mrs. Burnside would be a widow. Every one
hopeful. Getting warmer after the rain. Our squad
has a very good well, and about one-quarter water
enough, of something a trifle better than swamp
water. Man killed by the raiders near where we slept.
Head all pounded to pieces with a club. Murders an
every day occurrence.
 May 26.—For the last three days I have had nearly
enough to eat such as it is. My washing business
gives me extra food. Have taken in a partner, and the
firm now is Battese, Ransom & Co. Think of taking in
more partners, making Battese president, appointing
vice presidents, secretaries, &c. We charge a ration
of bread for admittance. Sand makes a very good
soap. If we could get hold of a razor and open a
barber shop in connection, our fortunes would be
made. We are prolonging Lewis’ life by trading for
luxuries to give him. Occasionally a little real meat
soup, with a piece of onion in it, etc. Am saving up
capital to buy a pair of shears I know of. Molasses
given us to-day, from two to four spoonfuls apiece,
which is indeed a treat. Anything sweet or sour, or in
the vegetable line, is the making of us. We have
taken to mixing a little meal with water, putting in a
little molasses and setting it in the sun to sour. Great
trouble in the lack of vessels in which to keep it, and
then too, after getting a dish partly well soured, some
poor prisoner will deliberately walk up and before we
can see him drink it all up. Men are fairly crazy for
such things.
May 27.—We twist up pieces of tin, stovepipe, &c.,
for dishes. A favorite and common dish is half of a
canteen. Our spoons are made of wood. Hardly one
man in ten has a dish of any kind to put his rations of
soup or molasses in, and often old shoes, dirty caps
and the like are brought into requisition.
Notwithstanding my prosperity in business the scurvy
is taking right hold of me. All my old acquaintances
visit us daily and we condole with one another. Fresh
beef given us to-day, but in very small quantities with
no wood or salt to put it into proper shape. No one
can very well object to raw beef, however. Great
trouble is in getting it to us before being tainted, I
persistently let alone meat with even a suspicion of
rottenness; makes no difference with nearly all here.
We occasionally hear of the conspiracy of outside
paroled Yankees. Time will tell if it amounts to
anything.
May 28.—No more news. It really seems as if
we’re all to die here. My mouth getting sore from
scurvy and teeth loose. New prisoners coming in
every day and death rate increasing. I don’t seem to
get hardened to the situation and am shuddering all
the time at the sights. Rainy weather.
May 29.—Sabbath day but not a pleasant one.
Nearly a thousand just came in. Would seem to me
that the rebels are victorious in their battles. New
men are perfectly thunderstruck at the hole they have
got into. A great many give right up and die in a few
weeks, and some in a week. My limbs are badly
swollen with scurvy and dropsy combined. Mouth
also very sore. Battese digs for roots which he
steeps up and I drink. Could give up and die in a
short time but won’t. Have got living reduced to a
science.
May 30.—Another thousand came to-day and from
the eastern army. Prison crowded. Men who came
are from Siegel’s corps in the Shenandoah Valley.
The poor deluded mortals never heard of
Andersonville before. Well, they hear of it now.
Charlie Hudson, from some part of Ohio, took his
canteen an hour ago and went to the swamp for
water. He has not returned for the very good reason
that he was shot while reaching up under the dead
line to get the freshest water. Some one has pulled
the body out of the water on to dry land where it will
stay until to-morrow, when it will be piled with
perhaps forty others on the dead wagon, carted off
and buried like a dog. And this is the last of poor
Charlie, who has enlivened us many an evening with
his songs and stories. The Astor House Mess is very
sad to-night.
May 31.—A rebel came inside to-day and enquired
for me, in the tenth squad, first mess. I responded,
wondering and fearful as to what they should want
with me. Was happily surprised on going to the gate
to see Hendryx with something in his hand for me.
Seemed thunderstruck at my appearance and said I
was looking bad. He was looking better than when he
went out. Had brought me luxuries in the shape of
ginger bread, onions and tea, and am happy. Geo. is
a brick. Says it is against orders to send anything
inside but he talked them over. Was afraid the raiders
would waylay me before reaching the mess but they
did not.
June 1.—Reported that the 51st Virginia Regt. is
here for the purpose of conducting us north for
exchange. Believe nothing of the kind. Prisoners
come daily. E. P. Sanders, Rowe and myself carried
our old friend Dr. Lewis to the hospital. He was
immediately admitted and we came away feeling
very sad, knowing he would live but a short time. The
sick are not admitted until they are near death, and
then there is no hope for them. Rainy day.
June 2.—Another dark, stormy day. Raiders
playing the very devil. Muddy and sticky.
 Battese, the Minnesota Indian.

June 3.—New prisoners say that an armistice has

been agreed upon for the purpose of effecting an
exchange, and negotiating for peace. It may be so,
and the authorities had good reasons for allowing us
to stay here, but how can they pay for all the
suffering? And now some negro prisoners brought
inside. They belong to the 54th Massachusetts.
Came with white prisoners. Many of the negroes
wounded, as, indeed, there are wounded among all