A society cannot develop in the absence of adhering to the basic tenets of nation-building. The concept of developing a pluralistic society must be planned with an exceptionally higher degree of consideration for the rising complexities of the state and the needs of the people. Development is an economic construct with growth connotations; this concept applies and utilizes technical knowhow and available resources to spur economic growth and advance the standard of living in that location.

By Ansu O. Dualu, Contributing Writer

The drive for a higher quality of life must be balanced against sound policies that fit the times and aspirations of the people. Note, however, that this endeavor to develop must be balanced against time tested economic and developmental principles that have worked in countries with similar challenges as ours. Liberia’s aspirations must be met with Liberian centered solutions.

Setting Developmental Standards

To practicalize your developmental theories, leaders must strategically recruit the best and brightest of its citizens, especially those who have mastered their craft and upped their expertise to production levels. Setup a committee entirely dedicated to head-hunting the best Liberian Professionals from around the world – pay them competitively but tie their compensation to production and targeted output.

Development is entirely about producing results that benefit the society at large; it has nothing to do with loyalty or “party discipline”. Focus your efforts on your plans and how to achieve them – understand that there is campaigning and there is governing; the latter must take precedence far above everything else. Governing is an inclusive action; it aims to promote and accommodate a peaceful coexistence of different groups with competing interests. 

Moreover, your developmental standards must be tailored to our local conditions; do not blindly employ foreign methodologies simply because they appeared to work in other countries. There must be an infusion of local cultures and traditions for any strategy to work. A Liberian Think Tank comprising of experts must approve and ensure developmental concepts meet the “Local Benchmark Test” before implementation. 

The first step to begin fixing Liberia is to clearly define a National Development Master Plan that must be followed by successive administrations. Enshrine this into laws, ensuring no president can alter these national plans in a major way without legislative approval. New administrations can make minor changes and the national legislature can improve on these plans provided they align with the overall developmental vision defined in the original documents. The national plan must detail and clearly define sustainable infrastructural goals and systems for education, health care provision, roads, railways and transportation, security, sanitation and water supply, energy and electrification, national economic structure, telecommunication, industrialization, geopolitical strategy, etc. This should be our national roadmap that guides our development. There must be a forceful commitment to the national developmental agenda; new administrations should have little to no discretion on already set national plan. These guidelines must be strictly followed.  

Demarcate regional blocks for targeted development. Create regional economic zones with local plurality. Utilize and improve local knowhow to build and market locally available and produced commodities. Promote regional specializations in specific areas and grow those areas to develop local infrastructure. Your ideas must be generated locally by local people who truly understand and can clearly define their needs. 

Macroeconomic Stability

Monetary and fiscal policies are primarily meant to reduce volatility, enhance market efficiencies, and provide a stable platform to promote economic growth. However, the type of indicators used to gauge macroeconomic stability to include price fluctuations, interest rate volatility, growth in real GDP, current account changes, health of government finances, employment volatility, taxes, etc., must be closely monitored to avoid the inefficiencies that cause a collapse in that economy. Remember, economic stability is the absence (and control) of excessive fluctuations in domestic market forces. Authorities must design policies that ensure constant production levels and a balance in market forces to avoid inflation and uncontrolled market variations.

Part of a government’s job is to maintain a balance in market forces while at the same time growing the economy for the betterment of a large majority of its people. To achieve that growth, administrators of government must implement a proven strategy that has passed the local benchmark test, but at the same time infused with sufficient innovation to be on par with the times – there must be a design of strategy that considers a whole host of things that are in line with time-tested economic principles.

Take for example where the country is and where it should be given available resources and options:

• Has the government considered its current unemployment numbers and the social vulnerabilities to its bottom line?
• How is it contrasting its exports and import against our balance of trade?
• Has the government adequately factored in the informal economy and how it impacts the overall domestic market – how does it intent to bring it into the formal sector for accountability and tax purposes?
• What are the short-term and long-term valuations – do they fit in the overall grand strategy?
• Has it taken local capacity into account and do local people possess the expertise for the government growth strategy it plans on implementing?
• What are the barriers to entry and access to capital – are interest rates competitive? 

Consider that your goal is to maintain an increasing rate of economic growth and output, higher income, and a higher standard of living for your people, increased revenue, stable inflation, and low unemployment. All your decisions must be weighed against these measures while at the same time ensuring efficient government utilization of available resources. Know that people cannot rise above their capabilities; continuous education and training are vitally important for growth.

 Increase and direct a huge portion of your tertiary education budget towards targeted, hands-on skill development across the country; limit degrees in social sciences such as political science, sociology, etc. The intent here is to develop the specialized skillset required to get the kind of results and the human capacity development the country needs to begin true development. Organize this strategy in a way that proportionally supports each region and its need for growth. Track and measure growth in the regions and adjust accordingly.     

Create and implement regional economic strategy with specializations suitable for each region of the country – establish local diversification plans that support your overall national vision. Design plans in a way that ensures each region is specialized in certain markets/commodities while at the same time developing synergy amongst the various regions to achieve oneness of purpose. Think of it as a division of labor, or in our case a division of specialization as described by Adam Smith in “The Wealth of Nations”.

Expand regional financial institutions – banks, increase government subsidies to ensure easy access to capital. Promote competition especially in areas with the greatest opportunities; discourage monopolies and limit political influence in the free market system. Let fair competition guide and strengthen the process. Your goal here is to build a robust system that can withstand the tests of time but at the same time making each region a self-sustaining, economic hub.  

Moreover, diversifications will help counter against national inflation, create a strategically balanced economy with regional support and ensure we gradually limit our reliance on the extractive side that has never helped the country in any meaningful way (Read “Close the Mines in Liberia: All of Them). Keep in mind that developing countries without strong and independent governing institutions are always on the receiving end of the negative effects of extractive industry to include poverty and inequality, environmental degradation, dispossession and the loss of livelihood, violence, never-ending conflicts, etc.

Nevertheless, government macroeconomic strategy details should outline how it intends to gradually limit importation and expand exportation of regionally produced commodities. There must be realistic timeframe to halt all importation of food products such as rice, flour, sugar, poultry, fish, and other “everyday items” that can be locally produced. This strategy must include the development of new industries and the beginning stages of manufacturing; make sure we entirely control and own the process. Deregulate regional restrictions, increase women participation; ensure local administrators make most of the decisions for their locales. The people must own the strategy for it work – tie it to their identity!

The Simple chart below will give you a better insight on the different areas to focus your policy strategy; nation-building and economic development must be an intentional endeavor, and a continuous process that is guided by expert hands.

Policies for Nation Building and Economic Development

Strategic economic development plans must focus on generating market understanding, convergence of skills and specialization, revitalization, and policy positioning. The national vision must be pursued in oneness to get the maximum effect and the transformation that is needed for development. National self-sufficiency and true economic independence can only be attained if there is a uniformity of purpose across the country. Call a nation-wide “Coop” (cooperative) to build the country!

Law and Justice

Institutional governance is the one surest way to build a pluralistic and economically balanced society (Read “Institutional Governance is the only Hope for Liberia”)! Outside of law and justice, we will have nothing but a collapsed system and a kleptocratic arrangement like the one we see being manifested in Liberia today.

To achieve economic vibrancy, the rule of law must be the central pillar in all policy design. Everything must be built around our reliance on judicial independence and strict adhering to the rules that ensure stability in an equitable fashion.  Liberia stands zero chance for economic transformation if decisions are not guided and protected by the rule of law. To get the process of nation building to work, there must be total citizen involvement – all hands on deck.   

The issue of corruption and the chaos that follows can only happen in a location where the rule of law is only on paper and not enforced. Define a serious anti-corruption agenda that is administered with total independence – this includes full prosecutorial powers, constitutionally granted to an anti-graft institution that entirely controls its own affairs with its own court headed by five judges. There should be no jury trials for corruption cases, except where special, strict standards are established for jurors in these cases. Our country is too poor with a very high illiteracy rate, most potential jurors will not understand the full ramification of these cases. However, document all such cases in the public domain including television coverage. Limit the frequency for appeals to the supreme court, except in cases where it is obviously clear the judicial guidelines were not followed.

Get ahead and prevent theft of state resources by expanding financial transparency measures, heavily scrutinize the awarding of public contracts, strengthen both your political and financial institutions, assess the depths of corruption and how to counter it. Institute political financial reforms with total openness for all public offices without restrictions except in the cases of national security, employ more technology in the fight against corruption, and push to have a system that is governed by independent institutions.

Know that the lack of law enforcement and corruption threaten national security and economic development; by default, they increase poverty numbers, limit opportunities, weaken democracy, and deny our children any hope for a meaningful future. Furthermore, corruption limits and, in some instances, denies the country of every possible economic advantage. For these fixes to work, the rule of law must be aggressively enforced without fear or favor!

. ____________________________________________________

References:

Lee, K. Y. (2000). From Third World to First: The Singapore Story: 1965-2000. United States. HarperCollins Inc.

Smith, A. (1776). The Wealth of Nations. London, England. W. Strahan & T. Cadell.

Acemoglu, D. & Robinson, J A. (2012). Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty. New York. Crown Publishing Group.

About the Author: Mr. Dualu is the author of a series of articles that focus on finding solutions to some of Liberia’s pressing national issues. Some of those papers include “Common Sense Economics for Liberia”, “A Guide to Increasing Liberia’s $500M National Budget to Over $2B in Ten Years” and “Leveraging Liberia’s Resources to Lift the Pro Poor Agenda”. The author works as a financial professional out of Massachusetts.   

The civil war has since ended but the horror and remnant of the macabre war still remain rife on the minds of many Liberian who witnessed the events that brought Liberia at the cul-de-sac of bloodshed and nadir of man’s inhumanity to man. Our people were dislocated in shantytown living horrible existence and shameful life.

They marched through the sub region with a badge of shame and were treated as if they were children of a lesser god. The war did not only destroy the lives of 250, 00 Liberians but also usher in a paradigm shift that borders on the scramble for job, corruption, and vices that hinder the engendering of “African egalitarianism as eloquently espoused by Mwalimu Julius K. Nyerere.

In 2005 the Liberian state took a monumental dramatic U-turn from the dungeon of civil insensitivity to the height of peaceful leapfrog, by ushering a democratic transition which led to the election of Madame Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, the first elected female President. That election was fiercely contested by Liberians from all strata of the social divide.

Liberians then taught that that singular democratic endorsement of Madame President would have opened the vista of opportunities for all Liberians irrespective of their religiosity, ethnicity, political persuasions and social background. Whether the charge has been kept or upheld rightly is an analysis we have to do in order to either vindicate ourselves from the charges of political miscalculation or to exonerate ourselves from the trappings of wrongdoing. Again both analysis must be baptized in the ocean of fact and truth-telling that are the guiding principles for the various forms of discourses.

This glorious land of liberty has failed to live the true meaning of its existence since the inception of the Ellen-led administration. Apologists of this regime will argue that the people are enjoying unprecedented freedom of speech, construction of roads, etc. One is not arguing against those hard facts but what one is essentially asserting, is that if you were to do a scrupulous juxtaposition of the gains made by this regime against the odds of it, individuals imbibed in the virtue of objective reasonableness will aver that the nation’s progress is being precluded by the logjam of corruption, malfeasance, sadistic cruelty and ideological bankruptcy.

Political duplicity, moral turpitude, dastard prebendalism remain the ideological citadel on which this government is built. The people are living in Bantustan void of any cultures, norms, savvy societal core values. Thinking about the future of their children, foreshadowing a better future for Liberia, don’t resonate with the people anymore. The people gradually understand that their forward march is illusive and hallucinatory until a government with an ideology that will bring them into the centrefold of history is given the leadership magistracy of the state.

Our population is in desperate need of food, water, medicine and fundamental social amenities that guide the existence of the people and improve their living standard. Their livelihood is compared to that of the Middle Ages and the Stone Age when the civilization of humanity did not make a tremendous leapfrog into a better realm. Harnessing a better future for themselves remains a dream like the dream of ‘Alice in wonderland.’

What we see nowadays in our political architecture is the reverse of the ‘Social Contract Theory,’ the theory that is the covenant-in-chief between the governed and the government. This collective bargain agreement is not being implemented by the government, a tragedy that is allowing the people to put on the regalia of poverty as a badge of honor. This sad state of affairs is beginning to raise many uncomfortable questions and is giving rise to the search for the hypothesis that will inform the decision of the people.

The existence of every society—its failure and success is predicated on the economic foundation of its people. The growth of the country must not only be measured by its GDP increase whether single or double digits but must be looked at from the perspective of the two twin evils in economics—inflation and unemployment. Let the growth be a reflection of the improvement in the people’s livelihood and let it reflect their socio-economic mobility. But the statistics of romantic economies from the Bretton Woods institution is predicated upon the benchmarks set by them in contrast to the fundamental reality in many countries. Theirs is a modelled tailored on perfunctory growth. That is the reason why their growth indicators do not resonate with the reality in most countries, especially African countries.

Our economy is in total shamble and what we see nowadays is the remnant of a wrong panacea for a putrid illness. This prescription, like its predecessors, continues to keep us in the visual cycle of poverty and economic paralysis. Our future continues to look bleak and the people are beginning to show apathy for the status quo.

Man’s inhumanity to man is what this model breeds. As, if the forced laboring of our people on plantation in America and the West indies was not enough, the reintroduction of such tendency is the fulcrum on which the economy is built. The imperialists have come into our country and reintroduced that which revolutionaries struggled against in the past. Our people have been bundled up in mines and concessions under precarious circumstances and horrible conditions.  They are at the lowest ebb of the economic ladder and the highest echelon of poverty yet our government prides itself as the only establishment in the annals of this nation that has brought a 16 billion Foreign Direct Investment into it.

Economic growth in the republic is not measured by the opulence or upward mobility of the people but rather by the investment portfolio in it. We have been bombarded by the mantra of unprecedented investment but in true it is a cosmetic deodorization of the economic menace that continues to imprison the people. Like the ‘’open Door Policy” of Tubman that did not address the fundamental economic reality of this country, the economic policy of this government further expose the lethargy of a system that cannot endure into the future.

Like Marikana is to South Africa, the Niger delta is to Nigeria, so Yekepa and Butaw are to Liberia. As the question of wage slavery rings true in Marikana, so the question of salary disparity remains the biggest questions at concessions in our country. The people who are the owners of the land have been treated with indignation. Their shrine destroyed, their farmland disfigured and their culture destroyed.

Whether we accept it or not, unarguably the current outlook of our society is the dominant philosophy of the bourgeoisie and the bias of the society we live in. This concept can be understood based on the ruling class, through its control of the orthodox media, press, pulpit mosque, etc., justifies this system of inequality and exploitation as the ‘natural form of society’. And, the ruling class further posits that such structure is the design of God, and any attempt to reverse it is tantamount to the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit and sacred catechism of God – Even though this is a colossal lie and massive distortion of the truth.

Even our opposition political parties have not demonstrated the will to usher in the much needed transformation the country is thirsty for. Nowadays our opposition politicians feed on sectarian rhetoric, tribal bigotry and parochial schism that are devoid of the apropos issues that continue to wreck the very existence of the people. Most of them have not presented a simple manifesto to the people outlining their plans to redeem the state and how they will engender wholesale economic transformation like the one that has taken root in Botswana, the Asian Tigers/Dragons, etc.  Some do not even have a simple manifesto to offer yet they want to be entrusted with the power of the state.

Like the bourgeoisie in its revolution against the moribund feudal society, challenged and confronted the conservative ideas of the conservative ideas of the feudal aristocrats; therefore the Liberian students, working class, in its fight to enthrone the people’s dictatorship that will end wage slavery and labor exploitation,  must annihilate its own oppressor, the capitalist class, and engender a society which leit motif will firmly be rooted in Pan Africanism: African nationalism, scientific socialism and continental unity.

About the Author:
Alfred P. B. Kiadii is a student of the University of Liberia who studies Political Science and Public Administration. He is an ardent disciple and follower of the philosophical construct and the Pan-Africanist ideological construct of Dr. H. Boima Fahnbulleh, Jr, Osagyefo Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, Mwalimu Julius K. Nyerere, Gamal abdel Nasser, Dr. Edward Wilmot Blyden. Furthermore, he is the Director of the Bureau of Information, Press, Outreach and Mobilization of the Liberia National Students union (LINSU). He is a convinced young men who believe in the potency of the people to make history.

This month marks the 42nd anniversary of the Carnation Revolution (CR) or Rose Revolution (RR) in Portugal and the 36th anniversary of the People’s Redemption Council (PRC) Revolution in Liberia.

Two Cataclysmic Events That Shook Africa and Europe

Both events were military putsches that ended 2 entrenched regimes in Africa’s oldest independent republic and one of the most powerful European signatories to the Berlin Conference of 1884-1885 that carved out Africa for colonialism.

Portugal’s occurred on April 25, 1974 and overthrew a system that had existed for 48 years; while Liberia’s triumphed nearly six years later on April 12, 1980 and extinguished Liberia’s GOP (grand old party), the True Whig Party (TWP) that survived for 112 years.

Both countries had political systems that were controlled by a small group of elites. In Portugal, the political system was controlled largely by the Estado Novo (New State) that was influenced by ‘social Catholicism’ and ‘integralism’. The New State had emerged after the May 28, 1926 coup d’état in Portugal and its leader were António de Oliveira Salazar (1932-1968); and later by Marcelo Caetano (1968-1974).

Economically, under the Estado Novo regime, the country’s economy grew by 5.6% annually. This was because “the regime encouraged and created conditions for the formation of large business conglomerates. The regime maintained a policy of corporatism that resulted in the placement of a big part of the Portuguese economy in the hands of a number of strong conglomerates, including those founded by the families of António Champalimaud (Banco Totta & Açores, Banco Pinto & Sotto Mayor, Secil, Cimpor), José Manuel de Mello (CUF – Companhia União Fabril), Américo Amorim (Corticeira Amorim) and the dos Santos family (Jerónimo Martins)” (READ MORE).

In Liberia, the TWP had consolidated power from 1868 and was controlled by the small Americo-Liberians who were descendents of the free and manumitted slaves who founded the country in 1847. At the time of the coup, these settlers were said to number less than 5% throughout the country.

According to Carl Patrick Burrowes (Kadallah Khafre), “in the nineteenth century the Americos rapidly inserted themselves as a comprador class between the Indigenes of the interior and the international market. They created and dominated the Liberian state. Access to the state and an ability to manipulate its administrative, fiscal, legal and military resources became central to the process of Americo exploitation…” (as quoted by Quentin Outram, p. 18).

These tiny Americo-Liberians that held political power became fronts for big companies such as Firestone, Liberia-American-Swedish Mining Company (LAMCO), the Liberia Mining Company, the National Iron Ore Company, (NIOC) and Dutch Liberia Mining Company (DELIMCO) who managed the Bong Mining Company. In fact, President William V. S. Tubman and the American, Landsdell Christie, owned the NIOC. Under Tubman’s leadership, Liberia and Japan experienced the fastest growing economies in the world. Yet, Liberia could not sure much physical development like Japan.   Thus, the phrase ‘growth without development’ became associated with his leadership.

Both Liberia and Portugal experienced similar situations in terms of the curtailing of personal freedoms, freedom of the press and labour union. Under the dictatorship, the Portuguese secret police, Polícia Internacional e de Defesa do Estado (PIDE), were responsible for hundreds of persecutions, especially of hose considered opponents of the regime. These perceived opponents were reportedly tortured, imprisoned (sometimes in concentration camps in Portuguese African colonies) or murdered in cold blood. Pro-workers labour unions were not allowed to operate.

Similarly, in Liberia, there were the secret agents of the National Bureau of Investigation or the National Security Agency and the Liberia National Police who were planted throughout the country to spy on opponents – real or imagined. In Liberia, under Tubman these secret agents were known as Public Relations Officers and under his successor, William R. Tolbert, Jr., they were simply called agents and were even serving as taxi drivers.

Under Tolbert, “Criticism of the administration was tolerated within the context of the party, but elsewhere free expression was curbed. The police employed a large ring of informers to report on suspected dissidents. Outspoken opponents lost jobs or suffered from public defamation and, if they persisted, were arrested, imprisoned, and tortured” (READ MORE).

In terms of foreign policy, both countries were markedly different on the eves of the coups. In Portugal, the Estado Novo rejected global cooperation in the fight against ridding the world of poverty and promoted the policy known as ‘proudly alone’; and was wholly involved in upkeeping the remaining Portuguese colonies in Africa – Guinea-Bissau (Portuguese Guinea), Angola, Cape Verde, Sao Tome and Principe and Mozambique.

But in Liberia, the government was a founding member of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) which metamorphosed into the African Union; and was an active participant in the decolonization of Africa. The country gave sanctuary to people fighting for political freedom such as Nelson Mandela, Roye Smith, Mariam Makeba and Vuz Makeh, all from South Africa; and Philemon Hue from Zimbabwe. In fact, Nelson Mandela passed through Liberia on his way to seek support from African countries before going back home where he was arrested. Surprisingly, Liberia hosted Stokely Carmichael (also known as Kwame Toure), a member of the radical Black Panther Party of the United States of America. Stokely who was married to Mariam Makeba used to frequently visit Liberia and stopped at Gettylue Flora Park, not far from St. Joseph Catholic Hospital in Congo Town.

The events that led to the coups in the two countries were similarly. In Portugal, though the economy though had grown in terms of gross domestic product by 56.4%, nearly half of that amount was spent on the country’s wars in Africa. Talking about how much of the country’s national cake was spent on fighting foreign wars, the online article, Carnation Revolution, says in 1973, “…Portugal’s per capita GDP had reached 56.4 percent of the EC-12 average (though the figure is necessarily dampened by the 40% of the budget that went to African wars)” (READ MORE)

Moreover, nearly a million refugees from these African colonies had settled in Portugal and were a strain on an economy dedicated to war machines. The raw materials from these colonies that spurred the Portuguese economy were no more going to Portugal nor sent to other Western metropoles.  Portugal was no longer largely clinging to its status of ‘self-sufficiency’.

This was partly because the OAU had launched an international campaign across the world against Portugal’s continuous subjugation of Africans in these colonies and had called for Western countries to carry out disinvestment in these Portuguese African colonies, Zimbabwe (then Rhodesia) and South Africa. The campaign had succeeded at the UN and the Non-Alignment Movement (NAM) and in Western countries. Consequently, many companies in these Western countries began to pressure Portugal, Great Britain and the United States to link the freedom of blacks to doing business as part of the decolonization efforts.

Commenting on Salazar’s ideology and how it contributed to the demise of Portuguese rule in Africa, Wikipedia writes:

“His reluctance to travel abroad, his increasing stubbornness against delivering the colonies to the Marxist movements endorsed by the African Unity Organization, his blind will to fight the so-called “winds of change” sponsored by the superpowers (USSR, U.S.), and his refusal to grasp the impossibility of his regime outliving him, marked the final years of his tenure….In order to support his colonial policies, Salazar adopted Gilberto Freyre’s notion of Lusotropicalism, maintaining that since Portugal had been a multicultural, multiracial and pluricontinental nation since the 15th Century, if the country were to be dismembered by losing its overseas territories, that would spell the end for Portuguese independence. In geopolitical terms, no critical mass would then be available to guarantee self-sufficiency to the Portuguese State” (READ MORE).

Furthermore, many of Portugal’s best sons who were conscripted in the army were dying on foreign soils. They were facing the bullets in these far away territories from Portugal and were extremely tired of fighting a proxy way. Hence, on April 25, 1974, a section of the enlightened members of the Armed Forces Movement (MFA) who had largely plan the coup in Portugal’s African colonies launched their CR in Lisbon and set up the National Salvation Junta (NSJ).

This is how Robert S. Pastorino, Commercial Attaché (1974-77) at the US embassy in Lisbon described the events, “There was real jubilation in the streets the first few weeks. It’s still known as the Revolution of the Carnations, and is famous for its civility. I have a wonderful picture of my son, who was six years old, standing in between two young Portuguese soldiers. They’re holding rifles, each with a carnation in the barrel and they’re smiling. Steve is there holding a sign saying ‘Viva Portugal’. From the outside [of the country] it appeared different from what we saw inside. I don’t think Washington really recognized what was happening in the beginning” (READ MORE).

Similarly in Liberia, the economy had declined. The cost of Liberia main mineral exports, iron ore and rubber, had dwindled on the world market. Synthetic rubber had begun to replace natural rubber and iron ore was no more in demand. The first company to fold up was LMC in Tubmanburg, Bomi County.

In spite of Tolbert’s pan-Africanist policy, corruption and nepotism were also widespread in the Tolbert led TWP regime. Sanford Ungar argues that as far back as 1980, Liberia was among the leaders of corruption in Africa. He wrote in the June 1981 edition of The Atlantic Magazine about the Tolberts and the government:

“In the field of corruption, Liberia became a genuine leader in Africa and the Third World. Under Tubman’s benign despotism, there were apparently some limits. It is an old saw of Liberian politics that ‘When Tubman stole a dollar, he would give ninety cents back to the people,’ in the form of food or minor amenities; as for Tolbert, ‘He would return ten cents.’ Tolbert ‘didn’t let a crumb drop from the table,’ says one American businessman. ‘He got everything.’ So did his son, Adolphus B. Tolbert, a lawyer, and they set an example for many other Americo-Liberians in and out of government.

“Tolbert’s daughters were not overly sensitive to conflicts of interest either; one, an assistant minister of education controlled the sale of all textbooks in Liberia. Another, a representative in Monrovia for the World Health Organization, was in the pharmaceutical business. The President himself was thought to have as much as $200 million stashed away in the United States. The Tolbert family’s greed was a key factor in the downfall of a system that might otherwise have survived for another generation.

“Documents… trace the sale to foreigners, especially Germans, of dozens of Liberian diplomatic passports (which would permit people to travel around the world without having their baggage opened or inspected). In one instance, a woman paid half a million dollars for her title of ‘financial consultant’ to Liberia and for other unspecified favors. One man paid $150,000 for an eight-year appointment as Liberia’s honorary consul in Rome. Others established ‘foundations’ in their own names in Monrovia, to which they would send ‘contributions’ whenever they wanted something from the Liberian government.

In an extraordinary letter, handwritten on an airplane, Adolphus Tolbert told a European business associate who had recently been in Liberia: ‘I expect to meet you in London during the first week in June to discuss the gold, diamond, and uranium project … Bring along the Rolls-Royce … Please transmit the balance on that amount given to me last night. Also send the papers for the two cars… Make sure that a secretary is awaiting my arrival in London…’ Astonishingly, the Tolberts kept photocopies of the passports they sold, issued receipts for the payments, and in some cases even made videotapes of the transactions”(READ).

In terms of nepotism, President Tolbert had several relatives by blood and marriage in government on the eve of the coup. Below is just a hint of the widespread nepotism that prevailed under him.

William R. Tolbert – President
Victoria A. Hoff Tolbert – Wife, First Lady
Frank Tolbert – Brother, Pro Tempore of the Liberian Senate
Adolphus Benedict Tolbert – Son, Representative/Chair of the Foreign Relations Committee
Christian Tolbert Norman – Daughter/Deputy Minister for Instruction, Ministry of Education and controller of elementary-secondary school textbooks in the country
Lawrence Norman – Son-in-law/Deputy Minister, Ministry of Public Works
Whilemina Tolbert Holder – Daughter/Chief Medical Officer of Liberia
Burleigh Holder – Son-in-law/Minister of Defense
Edward David – Brother-in-law (brother of Victoria Tolbert)/Mayor of Monrovia
Frank Stewart – Brother-in-law (husband of Charlotte Tolbert, sister)/Director of the Budget
Jehu Richardson – Son-in-law/Captain of Air Liberia
Tonia King – Son-in-law/Deputy Commissioner of the Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization
Johnny Wisseh McClain – Nephew/Deputy Minister of Information, Culture and Tourism

As for the men in arms, though the soldiers were not involved in an internal or external war, they were tired of being mere body guards of Liberian bigshots. Commonly called, nooks, these soldiers who metamorphosed from the Liberia Frontier Force (LFF) to the Armed Forces of Liberia (AFL), were often looked down on and denigrated and felt the pinch of the economic downturn.

The previous year (1979), the men and women of the AFL refused to shoot at unarmed civilians during the Rice Riots of April 14. Thousands of Liberians had demonstrated against the proposed increase in the price of rice, the country’s staple, as suggested by the then agriculture minister Florence Chinoweth. In an effort to stop the protesters, police under the late Col. Varney Dempster, were ordered by the justice minister to shoot on site any demonstrators. Over 100 persons were killed and several other hundreds were incarcerated throughout the country. Among those killed was University of Liberia (UL) student Irene Nimpson.

Two days before the first anniversary of the Rice Riots, a section of the AFL led a popular coup that overthrew the Americo-Liberian led TWP regime. The 133 year settler regime tumbled as if an earthquake had struck. Thousands of citizens took to the streets of Monrovia and jubilated hailing the soldiers and chanting ‘native woman born soldier, Congo (a misnomer for Americo-Liberia) woman born rogue.’

In terms of deaths when each coup struck, only 4 persons died in Portugal. And these were not killed by the soldiers who led the CR but by members of PIDE defending the overthrown regime of Caetano. In Liberia, it is largely believed that some 22 persons died, 9, including President Tolbert and close associates on the night of the event; and 13 were summarily executed on the Barclay Training Center beach after being tried by the Special Military Tribunal.

Both the Portuguese and Liberian coups had far reaching effects. The Cr saw the end of the last vestiges of colonialism in Africa as Mozambique, Angola, Guinea-Bissau and Cape Verde being declared independent states in Africa. The military takeover sent shivers in Europe and the US because of the series of nationalizations of private property (land and houses) and several industries. The fear was that a similar situation could also occur in Europe with social movements taking control and reaping the gains for the poor masses who were experiencing widening inequalities.

“These nationalizations of land and industry were what many workers had been waiting for, and a law banning economic sabotage legitimized factory occupations as well as the occupations of agricultural land. The commissions sought to institutionalize themselves into the factory structures and took control over the process at the grassroots level….

“When government passed a law stating that all empty houses were to be registered so they could be rented out within 120 days, neighborhood commissions and activists registered the apartments themselves. When the 120 days were up—again due to the local governments lack of resources—the commissions went ahead and occupied the houses, distributing them in accordance to need. This second wave of occupations also led to the setting up of neighborhood clinics, daycare centers and assembly halls” (In Memoriam: Portugal 1974, (READ MORE).”

In Portugal itself, the CR restored civil liberties, released political prisoners and democratized the political space. Members of the NSJ retreated to private life and left the running of the country to politicians. Their action “was eventually recognized as the event that triggered the ‘third wave’ of democratization, a phenomenon that was to transform politics throughout the world” says Arch Puddington in Remembering Portugal (READ MORE).

Today, Portugal is a very stable democracy and member of the European Union (EU) and its economy is steady, though it suffered from the financial crisis of 2008. Wikipedia, quoting several sources in 2015, says Portugal’s GDP was $197.510 billion; GDP rank 42nd (nominal) / 49th (PPP); GDP growth 1.5%; GDP per capita $18,984, $27,734 (PPP); and average net salary €984 per month; and stands at the 23rd place concerning ease of doing business in the world (READ MORE).

The coup in Liberia was not welcomed, especially by other long time established leaders in West Africa, especially so when Tolbert at the time of his death was Chairman of the OAU. Moreover, Tolbert had been a founding member of ECOWAS. At an ECOWAS summit in Togo, the Liberia coup leader, Samuel K. Doe, was turned back.

In Liberia, the PRC rule ended the marginalization of nearly 95% of the population and made people conscious that every evil system has to end one day. But unlike the NSJ, the military men in the PRC formed a milivilian (combination of military and civilian) regime and metamorphosed themselves into the National Democratic Party of Liberia (NDPL) after the regime leader, Samuel K. Doe, visited Egypt and met with President Anwar Sadat and his National Democratic Party. Doe rigged the 1985 presidential elections from the remnants of TWP who bundled themselves as the Liberia Action Party (LAP) and Unity Party (UP). Human rights abuses and corruption became very rampant like the regime they overthrew; thereby, institutionalizing many similar vices found under the TWP.

In 1990 amid the widespread human rights abuses across the country, mismanagement of the economy and curtailing of personal freedoms, including freedom of speech, members of the overthrown TWP found an ally in Charles Taylor and his National Patriotic Front of Liberia (NPFL). On December 24 that year, the NPFL with massive support from remnants of the TWP launched a war that led to Doe’s capture and gruesome murder in September 1991.

In 1997 Taylor won elections but in less than a year, his regime became dictatorial more than Doe. Curtailing of personal freedoms, including freedom of expression and movement and massive human rights abuses, including killings, were the order of the day. Taylor turned his back on his financial, moral and military supporters and began a personal agenda that included destabilizing West Africa to perhaps initiate a West African Reich and install himself as fuehrer.

Another civil war was started in 2003, this time largely by former supporters of Doe who created two warring factions to kick him out of office. These were the Liberians United for Reconciliation and Democracy (LURD) led by Sekou Conneh and Movement for Democracy in Liberia (MODEL) led by Yaya Nimely. Both factions reportedly had the blessings of 2 governments of the Mano River Union (MRU) states – Guinea and Cote d’Ivoire. Guinea allegedly backed LURD and Cote d’Ivoire allegedly supported MODEL.

In 2005, remnants of the TWP in UP led by Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf assumed power. Today, according to Wikipedia, Liberia’s GDP is  $2.719 billion (PPP); GDP rank 185th; GDP growth 8.3%; GDP per capita $700 (PPP); and ranks 151 in terms of ease of doing business in the world. Corruption remains very rampant in the country (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Economy_of_Liberia).  Among the top 10 most corrupt countries in Africa, Liberia ranks second says the Transparency International (TI) in its 2015 corruption index.

References:
António de Oliveira Salazar, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Ant% C3% B3nio_de_Oliveira_Salazar, (retrieved April 9, 2016).
Arch Puddington, Remembering Portugal’s Carnation Revolution, https:// freedomhouse. org/ blog/remembering-portugals-carnation-revolution, (retrieved April 10, 2015).
Carnation Revolution, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnation_ Revolution (retrieved March 30, 2016).
Economy of Liberia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Liberia (retrieved April 8, 2016)
Economy of Portugal, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_ of_Portugal, (retrieved April 8, 2016).
Kenneth Maxwell (June 1974), “Portugal: A Neat Revolution”, New York Times, http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1974/06/13/portugal-a-neat-revolution/.
Quentin Outram (1997), The Lessons of Liberia: An Analysis of the Liberian CPE 1989 – 1997 (A Report Commissioned by the Department for International Development, London).
Sanford Ungar (June 1981), “Liberia: Liberians Are Still Waiting to See Whether Their Lot Will Improve Under Master Sergeant Doe,” The Atlantic Magazine; the article can also be found on http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1981/06/liberia/376303/.
The Carnation Revolution: A Peaceful Coup in Portugal, http://www. huffingtonpost.com/adst/the-carnation revolution_ b_8208322.html, (retrieved December 1, 2015).
Tiago Matos, In Memoriam: Portugal 1974, http://new-compass. net/articles/memoriam-portugal-1974 (retrieved December 2015).
Tolbert Presidency, http://www. Global security.org/military/library/ report/1985/liberia_1_tolbertpresidency.htm (retrieved April 11, 2015).

S. Kpanbayeazee Duworko, II, Contributing Writer

This is a crucial year for democracy in Africa. Six countries have already held presidential elections in 2016, and 11 more are preparing for elections. African leaders have the opportunity to advance democracy and cement their legacies by establishing the conditions for peaceful transitions of power. Their actions will determine democracy’s trajectory across the continent and around the world.

Already, some leaders have set the right tone through free, fair, and timely elections. Others, however, are not listening to the will of their people or the requirements of their constitutions. In March last year, Nigerians, against all odds, went to the polls and in an unexpectedly free and credible election voted in an opposition candidate for the first time in their history.

In December, I was honoured to represent the United States at the inauguration of President Roch Marc Kabore in Burkina Faso. The election process – widely judged to be free and fair – was a tremendous success and reflected the desire of the Burkinabe people for change. Former President Compaore had been in power for 27 years until a 2014 peaceful uprising when the people said, “No more!”

Last month, the people of the Central African Republic, a country emerging from a devastating civil war, embraced democratic change and voted in a peaceful presidential election. The interim president paved the way for the transition, the losing candidate respected the results, and the winning candidate pledged to unify the country.

In several countries, however, we’ve seen leaders self-servingly attempt to disregard or amend their constitutions in order to stay in power. It is precisely this resistance to change and reluctance to play by the rules that leads to resentment and instability.

Take Burundi, for example. President Pierre Nkurunziza ignored the objections of many Burundians, including many in his own party, and decided last year to run for a third term, in violation of the Arusha peace and reconciliation agreement that had been the foundation for stability for over a decade. Since then, the country has been racked by violence, which has led to hundreds of deaths and displaced more than a quarter of a million people, and its economy has crumbled due to the resulting instability.

I must make it clear that the United States respects the right of a country’s citizens to amend their constitutions through legal means. But we do not support those in power changing constitutions or ignoring peace agreements purely as a means of extending their own tenure: this undermines the institutions of democracy and the democratic process.

As President Barack Obama said in his historic address to the African Union last year, “sometimes you’ll hear leaders say, well, I’m the only person who can hold this nation together. If that’s true, then that leader has failed to truly build their nation.” Successful leaders work to foster the development of a strong civil society and institutions that can support the peaceful transitions of power; that is the way to long-term stability.

Let me also be clear about where we stand: we promote peaceful and regular leadership transitions globally, not just in Africa. In fact, we have grappled with leadership transitions right here in the United States. Our first president, George Washington, started an informal tradition of presidential term limits by refusing to run for a third term. The only American president to serve more than two full terms in office was Franklin D. Roosevelt before and during World War II. That length of service, however, prompted debate about the wisdom of presidents remaining in power beyond two terms, and we amended our Constitution in 1951 to limit presidents to two terms.

Similarly, the election of Thomas Jefferson, our third president, marked the first transfer of power to the opposition – and that was a bitterly contested election. Yet, at the end of the day, the party in power accepted the results and President Jefferson peacefully took over to become one of our most successful and productive presidents.

Throughout our history, regular leadership transitions have brought in new ideas, new voices, and new policies that have helped us create a stronger, more inclusive democracy. My experiences in Africa convince me that Africans feel the same way about democracy. At its core, democracy is about the will of the people, and the people believe in transitions. Just last year, Afrobarometer reported that an overwhelming 75 percent of African citizens surveyed favored executive term limits.

We hope that more African leaders will embrace life after the presidency. I recently visited the Carter Center in Atlanta in the U.S., where I marveled at what former President Jimmy Carter has accomplished in the 35 years since he left office, working tirelessly around the world to advance human rights, promote democracy, build peace, eradicate disease and reduce conflict.

Some former African presidents have set excellent examples. Former President Festus Mogae of Botswana stepped down in 2008 following two terms in office and received the Mo Ibrahim Prize for Achievement in African Leadership. He launched and chairs the Champions for an AIDS-Free Generation, a group of former presidents and influential African leaders who are working to end the AIDS epidemic, and is leading efforts to end the violence in South Sudan.

Former Ghanaian President John Kufuor also relinquished power in 2008 after two terms. He founded the John Kufuor Foundation, which is working to advance effective leadership, good governance and socioeconomic development in Africa. There are other examples that former presidents can lead a long, productive life. That’s the type of leadership we admire, and the type of leaders the people of Africa deserve.

The United States will continue to promote peaceful, democratic transitions of power in Africa. We will do this because we believe they provide opportunities for Africans to enjoy democracy, peace and prosperity, and bring stability across the continent. Transitions in power have served the United States well, and they will do the same for Africa.

Linda Thomas-Greenfield, as the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Africa, is the Obama administration’s top diplomat on African affairs.