Like the 166th Independence Day orator Cllr. Varney Sherman, Dr. Dougbeh Chris Nyan begins by recognizing the efforts of the forefathers of Liberia to “bravely” declare independence and the medical doctor points out the fact that Liberia was not colonized—a singular profile he thinks needs to be echoed as the nation celebrates 169 years of independence.
Our Forefathers
While Liberia endured a period somewhat referred to as the Colonial Period (1820-1839), Dr. Nyan is not incorrect, as “colonial” in the Liberian historical context is dissimilar to that of all other African counties—Nigeria, Angola and Guinea, for instance. However, since that singular profile of having no colonial master has actually turned out to be a curse rather than a blessing, Dr. Nyan emphasis and historical reference is nothing more than mediocre and does not warrant a boast.
History tells us that among others it was particularly a diplomatic rift between the Commonwealth of Liberia and Great Britain that led to the Republic of Liberia today. Independence would not have been declared in 1847 had British vessels agreed to pay tariff to the Commonwealth of Liberia. It was an immature move to empower the would-be Liberian state to handle all aspects of affairs, not a decision made from meticulous pondering of laying all of the necessary foundation for nation-building.
It is no mere historical irony that the United States took 15 years to recognize Liberia though it was accordingly based on an advice of the American Colonization Society (ACS) that independence was declared. Dr. Nyan himself makes the point, paradoxically though, even clearer when he references the erasure of the “little democratic footprints” when the coup d’état toppled the government of President William R. Tolbert on April 14, 1980.
Our forefathers declared independence but from the clear, blue sky, insufficient to put the nation on a path of everlasting prosperity, despite conflict being in the nature of humankind. Today, prosperity is bleaker than it ever was back then. Not even 14 years of civil war and, before that, bevy of tribal and ethnic conflicts have been able to alter that.
Liberia Today, Tomorrow
All previous Independence Day orators have been careful choosing their words in evaluating the current course of nation-building under the leadership of President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf. Dr. Nyan does the same but not void of smartly executed biases or at least sympathy with the current administration.
First, he begins with an array of questions on what we have achieved thus far and what we could do better. Then he works out a math to find the difference of years between 1989 and 1847 (142 years), seeking the sympathy from the nation to for the efforts of the current administration. “We inflicted [maximum] damage on ourselves in so short a time. So, how long do we think it will take us to rebuild a country and bring it back to its prewar status?” He asks rhetorically. Furthermore, he makes himself an optimist, seeing progress halfway achieved.
Here, Dr. Nyan paints a picture that because Liberia destroyed all it built in 142 and it would certainly take a good period of time or at least more than two six-year terms to achieve genuine progress. He sides, indirectly though, with the grand alibi of this administration that progress will come gradually, amid the replication of the mistakes of the past—loss in the fight against corruption, failure to provide basic social services, unemployment, the failure to achieve genuine healing and reconciliation and many others.
His rebuke of a relapse to another round of civil war might have received the loudest cheers inside the Centennial Memorial Pavilion in Monrovia and in radio land nationwide; nevertheless, it is superfluous to rebuke the recurrence of a civil war that just cannot be today.
The 1990 (1989) civil war and all of the subsequent fracases did not come about due to a mere fact that Charles Taylor and other warlords wanted power or wealth. The wind of the civil war had been blowing right at the formation of the nation, and the political and social variable s of the 1970s and 1980s only kindled the country, parched by the discontents of majority of Liberians one way or the other.
Unlike 1989, the political and social setting of 2016 onwards makes it unspeakably impossible for another full-scale civil war. Liberia’s peace cannot be threatened by anyone. The Cold War that ended the administration of President Tolbert has ended, disputes within the Mano River Union that fueled war in the sub-region in the 1990s have been resolved, successful coup d’état now face adversaries in global technological advancement, and then people themselves are no more ignorant and amnesiac to the repercussions of a civil war.
Indeed, peace was what Liberians yearned while the guns were sounding but the peace they yearn for now is more than the momentary quietude of the sounds of gunshots. Liberia is not a tranquil solitude of contented hearts and reposed minds. Yes, the orator creates welcoming metaphors to send his message of peace across but this makes no difference, except for mere rhetorical purpose. The point missed was how will the “syringes be the guns and solution be the bullets”.
Education
Dr. Nyan should be credited for his view on the Liberia education system. He does not agree that students are the key problem. He points out the systemic problems with which the sector is faced. His comment that “We must ensure that teachers teaching our children are themselves well-trained to be in the classroom” validates his understanding of the problem. He is a hundred percent correct that Liberians are smart people and can do even better than what some expatiates are being hugely paid to do here.
His opposition to an ongoing plan to render the education system to a public-private partnership epitomizes his sympathy with the system. Education is not only essential to nation-building because it empowers citizens to sustain their families, but also that it is an indispensible medium through which citizens can be taught nationalism, patriotism and responsibilities to country and humanity. His emphasis on technical and vocational education brings in marketability and empowerment, a message that has been lingering for generations yet still unheard.
Dr. Nyan’s recommendation of a functional education system can just not be more than a focus on teachers’ training, a strategy to attract Diaspora Liberians through good salaries, facilities and working condition. A dollar spent on teachers’ welfare and training will be like millions in measuring the benefit to the system.
However, the only point the orator misses here is that he mistakes 2016 figures for 2010 as the figure he quotes to be stats from UNESCO are the same with the United Nations Institute for Statistics for Liberia for this year. For instance, it has Liberia’s 54.47% for overall youthful literacy rate and 64.66% for male and 43.97 for female. The orator cites the approximations of 64.7% for male and 44% for female, with an overall youthful literacy rate of 54.5%, as being for 2010, not 2016. It is impossible that all of the figures would be the same, even with a difference of six years between 2010 and 2016.
The Liberian Identity
Perhaps, all of the previous Independence Day orators have spoken about this most important subject: IDENTITY. Dr. Elwood Dunn in 2012 spoke about the creation of a Liberian society of the humanities and recognition and preservation of Liberia’s “triple heritage” as a means of securing the country’s cultural identity. Dr. Sakui Malakpa in 2008 had spoken about a revisit of national symbols and the renaming of Monrovia, among other things as a means of discovering the true Liberian identity.
Here, Dr. Nyan scores his lowest grade by wrongly citing unity as a means of achieving national, cultural identity. He says: “If there is none we can really point out to, then we need to mobilize around the spirit of unity.” Countries unite based on cultural identities—heritage, history, language and arts. Liberia is certainly no exception. But the medical doctor says Liberia should first form an identity by uniting.
He puts the cart before the house. It is true that no country progresses with disunity but it is actually countries’ identities that unite them, not unity identifying countries. In the case with Liberia, we have not been able to hinge our unity on our cultural identities so we remain divided and will never make progress if such condition persists. We must celebrate the true Liberian way of live, know our history and reckon with our past, revere our true heroes, and then glory in the common people. This is the choice, not a choice.
Democracy and the Rule of Law
The argument Dr. Nyan make with multiparty democracy is reducible to a one between quality and quantity. He argues that a horde 20 political parties is healthy for the country’s democracy. This is an ensuing argument across political debates, intellectual forums and street talks and the orator brings it to the fore.
Number of political parties general in any country would mean no harm to that country’s democracy. It is not the specific case of Liberia that undermines aforementioned argument. The orator stresses that parties must be based on democratic values and ideal general concept of institutionalization. This is the point. Many political parties in Liberia are even less than three years old. Many other that contested the general and presidential elections of 2005 and 2011 are non-existent. Naming them would trivialize this candid, national discourse.
Even if we wouldn’t want to compare the political system of the populous nation of the United States of 323 million people to that of Liberia with 4.5 million, the parties queuing for the 2017 polls would by far lesser than 20 had they been formed on ideological lines, rather than personal interest.
That is the difference. It is impossibly difficult to have 20 political parties based on varying political ideologies but it is as easy as getting a mobile phone to register a party whose aims and objectives are to make an individual president or a president-maker. It is easy to have a horde of political parties merging on ideological lines than a merger of just two parties formed on personal, political interest.
Dr. Nyan’s eschewing of election-oriented violence is laudable. Pre or post-elections violence can be equally devastating though different from a civil war as the one in 1990. As we have seen with the 2007-2008 post-elections violence of Kenya, Liberian must be aware of the ramifications of their actions in 2017 as they did in 2011 and 2005.
Having made his point on violence, the orator then endeavors to advise the opposition community against cynicism for criticism. “Your contribution to the transformation of this country requires opposition political parties to constructively critique the government…in a mature way, using facts and evidence (not innuendos),” he says. This statement is not diplomatic; it is not fair. It paints the picture that opposition political parties do not use facts and evidence and do not advance a way forward.
We cannot say what specific political parties have proffered what specific ways forward for Liberia, as this is no place for public relations. There are many there have been. Such statement is most likely to play to the propaganda of the current administration—the cliché of “lazy argument and all of that. This probably unintentional bias takes away from the orator whose judgment is likened to an impartial judiciary.
Corruption
Though corruption is the chief vice eating up the fabric of Liberia, Dr. Nyan takes the least time on the matter. He is not in for fire play. He is hopeful like the general Liberian public that the ongoing case involving senior officials of the Government of Liberia and Sable Mining over US$958,000 turns a new page in the fight against corruption. He proposes “sincerity be our guns and honesty be our bullets” but falls short of suggesting how these uncommon virtues will first be cultivated in the Liberian society. His apparent fear to delve deep into this contentious subject matter robs him of the real opportunity to deliver anything more than a rhetorical device.
Retuned Liberians
As he himself is a Liberian living in the Diaspora, Dr. Nyan praises the efforts of Liberians who have come back home from abroad because “It takes sacrifices leaving the luxury of Europe and America, Australia and other advanced countries to come to contribute to the rebuilding process of our country”. This statement is very problematic for practical reasons.
Frist, Diaspora Liberian should be encouraged to come home but not necessarily putting Liberia’s recovery to their mercy. Yes, patriots make sacrifices for their nations but these sacrifices are not just the primary decision to leave another country to return to their birthplaces. It is only the final result of their contribution to their countries that qualifies the sacrifices. In this Liberian instance, sacrifices cannot be returnees’ decision to come back home but what they do while finally home to a broken down country.
Second, the orator does not categorize these returnees as in the public or private sector. He has already called on the government to make the education sector attractive for Liberian professionals abroad to return, so it is safer to presume he largely means the public sector. Now, we cannot accept that “luxury” is an absolute terminology. It is relative, as well as transferrable. Luxury can be improvised and transferred. No one can contest that top position in government does not pay and no one can deny that there aren’t lots of other benefits attached to these positions—free cars and gasoline, for instance. Prestige and power plays a part here also. This is not what an average Liberian or bulk of the Liberian people, who live under less than US$1.90 cent, enjoy. These returned Liberians form part of the privileged few. So, who is actually sacrificing?
And third, putting returned Liberians under the impression that returning home is a sacrifice is risky. Within the first three to four years of the first term of President Sirleaf, it became a cliché that top officials of government who had returned home to serve in the government to claim that they had come home to sacrifice. It backfired after some began being sacked after involvement in corruption scandals. If it were true that they came to sacrifice, why haven’t they gone back since the so-called sacrifices they came to make are not being appreciated? Is their quest to become president and lawmakers an extension of their selfless projects?
The Anti-Ebola Hero
As a medical doctor, Dr. Nyan is most vocal on the health system and advances a hodgepodge of recommendations that will set the sector on a path for lasting effectiveness and efficiency. Liberia’s health profile is dilemma, not just a problem. It has the most staggering doctor-to-patient ratio in the world of about 19,000 patients to a doctor. It has a damning maternal mortality rate of 993 deaths per a 100,000 births and an average expectancy of 54 years and it was only 2015 that a mental health policy was drafted, with the country literally a dungeon for the mentally ill.
During the heat of the Ebola crisis in 2014 and 2015, Dr. Nyan alongside other Liberians in the Diaspora rallied the support of the United States Congress, the Chinese government and other governments in ending the outbreak. His work with the Ebola Natural History Study, that seeks to reveal of the mystery of Ebola as a means of sustaining the battle against the deadly disease, is patriotic. It needs not be overemphasized the humanitarianism of his advocacy of the presence of a disease control and prevention center in the West African sub-region as a sustainable move to curb possible future outbreaks of Ebola and other infectious diseases, as well as expediency of his call for the training of healthcare workers including at the postgraduate level.
Also, his assertion of presenting Liberia a real proximity to the creation of a new corps of medical professionals is not just a dream, for he himself is an inventor of a test that detects microbes that cause diseases in 10 to 40 minutes. With such laboratory breakthrough, as many as nearly 5,000 people could not have died of Ebola here. The Government of Liberia should at cost bring in his to form an integral fight against infectious diseases because of its medical significance and primarily because of its Liberian identity.
Nevertheless, Dr. Nyan holds a patriotic duty to Liberia apart from being “prepared” to make available his microbial invention to his country and other parts of the sub-region. He is a member of the Progressives, radical politicians and prodemocracy activists who heralded the era of multiparty democracy in Liberia beginning from the late 1970s. The Progressives deny being part of any conspiracy or the coup d’état that killed President William R. Tolbert on April 12, 1980 though they had led a peaceful an unaccustomed protest that turned violent a year ago in 1979—the Rice Riot.
Dr. Nyan does not regret being a Progressive as do other members of the league of radical men and women, but does not speak of his role in the new Liberia he claims to have helped model. Apart from his willingness to make available his laboratory invention—under agreed commercial terms and conditions—he does not say anything firm. It could have been the best part of his oration had he announced that he would be getting a one-way ticket to Liberia to help develop a sector that Liberia’s recovery hugely depends on.
A scientist of his caliber would not only provide leadership for the health sector but also inspire a cultural change for many to pick up careers in the medical field, wherein the number of Liberian specialist doctors could increase. This would be a better choice of preventing hundreds of lives than the role he played in the 1970s as a prodemocracy activist, at the brink of the civil war that killed an estimated 300 thousand people.
Religious Tolerance and Gender Equity
Dr. Nyan’s decry of religious tension and embrace of religious tolerance is not contestable, as tolerance, diversity and democracy go together. Just that Liberians are amnesiac but we have had religious violence here where lives were lost and properties destroyed. First, it was the Christian-Muslim violence in 2004 and then the violence between the two religious groups of people in Lofa County in 2010 over the death of a woman. His call for a “one and only Republic of Liberia” cannot be said any better. The proposal for a Christian state is like playing with fire, and it is laudable that the orator points out that in his oration.
The same goes with the orator’s advocacy for the rights of women and girls. In the age of gender equity, it is obscure that women and girls are treated as second to men and boys. Despite the gains of this administration in the area of gender equity, the orator’s echo of gender sensitivity is not unnecessary. The female gender still faces a number of challenges. Rape, for instance, remains a dilemma amid strong laws and concerted efforts. Liberia is one of just three countries in West Africa that has not banned female genital mutilation (FGM) though the practice had been proven to be harmful to women’s reproductive health. Female enrollment, the orator, a father of four girls himself, makes the point very strongly as he does with the importance of civil society and freedom of speech and the press.
Surprisingly, the orator brings into his oration an ensuing argument among him and other users of Facebook, making a parody of a charitable conversation they had. He explains that he had suggested that a traditional weaving device used in Ethiopia be modernized and that two other Facebook users disagreed with him. They, according to him, had suggested that the device remained in its traditional state in order to preserve the Ethiopian culture.
Dr. Nyan expresses frustration over the stagnation of the African continent in a period of technology. Then he finds an epitome in the genuine argument of the Facebook users and blames the lack of development on such thought regime. But is his reckoning of their argument factual?
It is incomprehensible that Dr. Nyan speaks about technological advancement of the textile industry more than two centuries after the Industrial Revolution when. Does the fact that spinning wheels were replaced by spinning mules mean that the former is non-existent and non-essential? Certainly not at all! What the Facebook users were saying was that such tradition of Ethiopian traditional weaving should still thrive—even in this age of technology—for even an equally important reason. Preserving the tradition is in relevance to antiquity, something that tells us more about our forefathers and how they live, something that tells us whence we come.
The fact is we need to glory in our cultural heritage because it drives a nationalism, innovation and meritocracy. We primarily need these ideals to invent machines to improve society like Eli Whitney in the United States with cotton gin, Samuel Crompton in England with spinning mule and Alessandro Volta in Italy with electric battery.
Dr. Nyan’s analogy of a typewriter and a computer is even more incorrect. Typewriter is still being preferred in some quarters—the security sector, for instance, where it is used to record intelligence and information that cannot be hacked into. Moreover, typewriter still has a niche: it does not depend on electricity, which remains scarce in most parts of Liberia and is better to have typewriters than to take your works to a commercial a desktop publisher. And because it has the same pattern keypad pattern with a computer it can be used for typing practical.
A point that could be made in this portion of his oration is the importance of the government to support innovation and preserve Liberian arts and culture as a way of encouraging technological advancement. Why did the Germans use the Vai Script to codify their intelligence in the World War II? Why aren’t Liberians using the Vai Script to communicate in the first place?
Why aren’t there many Liberian books, especially after the civil war? Why is it said that if one wants to hide anything from a typical Liberian he should write it in a book? Why the education system a “mess”? Why patriotism is scarce here? And why there is so much corruption and growing mistrust in the public system? The adage says: “You must sit on an old mat to ply a new mat.”
Individuals will always have talents like Dr. Nyan has done but appreciation for good things in general should be should first be acculturated through governmental or government-supported programs. Government must create the environment where talents can thrive in every sector for the improvement of society. Government is more development-oriented than any individual and government is the only entity that has all the legal rights to drive development. Anyone or any other entity must be authorized by government some way or the other.
During the Ebola epidemic, a Liberian, Louis Cealeh, invented a hand-washing device wherein the hand washer uses his or her foot to press down a motor-attached peddle that sends water through a tube into a faucet to easily wash and rinse his or her hands. It prevents one from touching the faucet to open and close it. Sadly, this invention, which could be used to promote hygiene in addition to the prevention and spread of Ebola, is only present at the Ministries of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, and at some banks in and around Monrovia. Isn’t it possible to have so much of these devices to help sustain a hygiene culture whose lacking leads to several waterborne diseases? Talents and innovation wither here, while politics thrives as if all of the 4.5 million people water it every morning.
About The Author:
James Harding Giahyue is a Stringer with Reuters news agency and a fellow of New Narratives, a group supporting African journalists report Africa. He has worked as a reporter and editor with several Liberian newspapers including the National Chronicle, Insight and The Catalyst. Also an aspiring writer, Giahyue has interest in Liberian arts culture and history, as well as sports, tourism and the environment. Email: [email protected]/ +231-886464195.