Liberia, its Poverty Recovery Strategies and Failures, and why Its Pro-poor Agenda will Fail if Lacked Future Perspectives
The Quest for Economic Reform and Liberation 1871 - 2017
By Robert Quiminee
i
Abstract
This article does not in any way strive to condemn any economic recovery plans in
Liberia, all have been penned with the hope of restituting poverty with prosperity, but
nearly all remain a plan, strategy and a goal yet to take its significance course and effect
the ordinary Liberians, rather have only restituted and benefited a few Liberians with the
majority striving in poverty, surviving on less a $1US dollar a day. This article is penned
not really as a model or an economic recovery policy, but seeks to challenge current
policy makers, and make stakeholders cognizance that the struggles to bring economic
freedom is not new; even at the height of the dictator Charles G. Taylor and the pearl of
the depression of Samuel K. Doe; they both have the greatest economic recovery plan for
Liberia than many of the democratic civilian leaders, accept William Richard Tolbert Jr.,
who was killed with Liberia’s greatest recovery plan. This article seeks to highlight
economic recovery and reform policies, particularly the ones concern with the poor
Liberians from the 1st Republic of 1869 to the 2nd Republic of 2017; Liberia, its Poverty
Recovery Strategies and Failures, and why it Pro-poor Agenda will fail if Lacked Future
Perspectives; and it quest for economic recovery and liberation from 1871 – 2017.
ii
Acronyms
NGOs – Non Governmental organizations
ACS - American Colonization Society
CIA – Central Intelligent Agency
PRO – Public Relation Officers
PAL – Progressive Alliance of Liberia
MOJA – Movement of Justice in Africa
U.S. – United States
PRS – Poverty Reduction Strategy
PRSP - Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers
NOCAL – National Oil Company of Liberia
IPC - International Poverty Centre
UNDP - United Nations Development Program
UN – United Nation
NTA – National Transit Authority
JFK – John Frederick Kennedy
LD – Liberian Dollar
PRC – People Redemption Council
iii
Contents
Abstract
Acronyms
Table
Introduction 1
History, Democratic Origin and Divisive Policy of Liberia 3
“Road” Roye’s Economic Recovery Policy and failures 5
“Operation Production” Tubman’s Integration Economic Reform Policy and
Failures 7
“Mat-to-Mattress Policy” Tolbert’s Economic Reform Policy and Failures 10
“The Green Revolution” Doe’s Economic Reform Policy and Failures 13
“Vision 2024” Taylor’s Ambiguous Economic Reform Policy and Failures 17
”Poverty Reduction Strategy” Ellen’s Economic Reform Policy and failures 21
“Pro-poor Agenda” Weah’s Economic Reform Policy, and why it will Fail if Lacked
Future Perspective 26
Reference 38
1
Introduction
Liberia is a unique country, with a proportional representation of natural resources
(rubber, river, rain forest, ocean, island, lake and rich soil) and mineral resources (sand,
rock, gold and diamond) are few to mention. It is a nation with a unique significant
influence to lobby in the global community and bring aid and capital home as money or
equipment. They have done that through strategies and good styles of sampling writers
and pursuance of good, relevant and demanding policies in the name of the “poor
Liberians”, like the Poverty Reduction Strategy and the Pro-poor Agenda, even though
both are not Liberian inventive ideals, but they were, or are borrowed, and penned well to
meet our demands and our current economic situations; thus appealing to the Global
Community for aid. However, these policies covert with implementation, either with the
issue of dishonesty, or the practical aspects these very documents are borrow from are
applicable in our society, but may just lack little innovation to stabilized the poverty
condition of our nation, and as the result policies seem to be doing nothing at all. This
attributes to poor implementation and dishonesty. For example, how can you adopted
modern agricultural practices from Pakistan; adopted the people policy paper from their
country and bring it here in Liberia, but left the tractors and the working gears in Pakistan
and expect such policy to work here? Are you stupid? Another area of attention is that we
have also strive to start with what we have, notwithstanding we have not fully been
independent as a nation and government in doing that; in fact NGOs have helped us in
our endeavors, because our policy implementations have always met practical resistance
due to the lack of support from government. But there are just two elements to make a
policy work effectively:
❖ Think small and start small, and
❖ Think big and start with big equipment
In it nutshell, you either start with what you have or you do bigger investments in what
you already have. The Weah led ‘Pro-poor Agenda’ will be a difficult path, if even
2
notified and acknowledged that it will be a difficult path, and it second facial feature is
pending unclear, of course it will fail if it will not observe and understand the factors
responsible for the failures of recovery policies toward the poor and why the pro-poor
agenda will failed if lack future perspectives, issues that this paper about to address.
3
History, Democratic Origin and Divisive Policy of Liberia
Joseph Jenkins Robert, Liberia’s first President hailed from the mulattoes, the highest
educated group of the pioneers. Instead of building a state of unified political idea, they
established a Party named “True Liberian party” also called Pro-Administration party.
Who were the false Liberians? The preferred unifying nationalistic name if I may
suggest for this early Liberian party, could have been “the Liberian People’s party”
instead of exulting yourself as “True Liberian.” This name suggests a divisive policy that
hinders the progress of Liberia. The dark-skinned settlers reacted by forming the Anti-
Administration party or the Whig party, later the True Whig party; this means that the
ideologies of the two political parties were coins on propagating strategies to undermine
and subjugate each other to nothing instead of thinking about carving reforms and taking
practical measures to connect the gap between the rich and the poor. The dark-skinned
Liberians fought for political power from 1847 – 1877. Why they succeeded?
Well, in 1845 a ship took some Africans from the Congo Basin carrying them to Europe
as slaves. The idea for slavery was now condemned and belittle in the eyes of America
and England. The ship which was carrying Congolese, it captain was asked to return
with the ship back to Africa. With the Congo Basin far away, the ship captain dumped the
Liberia was founded in 1822 by free slaves
transported and sponsored by American
Colonization Society, a leading American
sponsored Colonization Organization of the
18th Century. When they arrived, they met no
tribal and kingdom resistance, rather a
struggle for land which was inherited as
family custodian, with no ownership to
individual. They fought two battles, and
finally gained independence in 1847. Early
before the coming into being of the new
‘Republic” political ideologies were not built
on a true national idea, but built on a divisive
policy that will affect every reform policies
of the nation years later.
JJ Robert: First President of Liberia, political leader of the True Liberian Party
4
slaves on the Coast of Liberia since it was a black colony established by free slaves from
America. The mulattoes, and also the dark-skinned suppressed by the mulattoes; both
from America, rejected the Congolese. They did not give them warm welcome. The
Congolese retreated to what is now called Congo Town because of their settlement there,
but them high forest at the time. From the high forest, they produced cash crops like
pineapple, banana, plantain, palm oil, okra, vegetables and pepper and sold them to the
Americo-Liberians; this comprises of both the mulattoes and the dark-skinned. By the
1860s, after nearly 25 years of labors, the Congolese were strong economically. They
started serving as middlemen between the indigenous Liberian and the Americo-
Liberians. When the mulattoes kept their political suppression strong toward their dark-
skinned counterparts, Edward James Roye convened a meeting on Clay Island in 1868,
called the Congolese in his party and contested the 1869 elections and truly won the True
Liberian party. His loan programs orchestrated him from power in 1871 by the
mulattoes, but the significant lesson taught in the course of his dethronement is that few
Liberians had placed their self-image above the common good of the people, that they are
the best educated that reforms should ordinated from to better nation, once emulating
from another source, it means nothing. So it was the case of the mulattoes against the
Roye’s loan policy which make him unpopular with the People. This embalm in our early
loan history would serve as a warming to Weah whom ‘Pro-poor Agenda’ heavily
depends on loan for road construction, so it was with Roye, not anything else, but road
construction.
In 1877, the Unification from Clay Island was really a formidable force, it continued until
they finally got power from the Mulattoes and held it till 1980 when Master Sergeant
Samuel Kanyon Doe took the blame of a CIA’s coordinated coup for which he followed
it to the letter by executing the 13 ministers of Tolbert.
5
Roye’s Economic Recovery Policy and failures
When he took office, the country was in economic crisis. In 1871, accordingly, ‘he
directed the Speaker of the House of Representatives, William Spencer Anderson, with
negotiating a new loan from British financiers. Anderson secured $500,000 under strict
terms from the British consul-general, David Chinery. Chinery was heavily criticized and
eventually arrested as a single individual indebting an independent state. William S.
Anderson was tried the following year by the British authority for his part in securing the
loan. He was found not guilty, but was shot to death while leaving the courthouse.’
Roye has a very good economic recovery policy for Liberia at the time; it was about
carrying road to the ‘poor Liberians.’ No economic recovery policy has ever being a
major problem in Liberia more than the policy that directly impacts the poor people. For
time in memorial since 1847 this policy met resistance because it was directed toward the
poor. Few Liberians have always wish to survive as the sacrifices of the masses, not one
day willing to make sacrifices to connect the gap between the rich and the poor. There are
few factors responsible for the failure of the Roye’s Economic Recovery policy:
Edwin James Roye: Liberia’s First Dark president of the Opposition
True Whig Party (1870-1871)
Roye has an ambiguous economic recovery plan.
He is the first reputable individual who
understood that Monrovia is not Liberia. He
wanted to connect the hinterland to Monrovia
and introduce economic exchange programs
between rural Liberians and Americo-Liberians
for economic gains. It is interesting to know that
Roye started life as a barber and he built the
community’s largest barber shop in Terre Haute,
which also had the tallest barber pole in western
Indiana. He trusted the abilities of the locals. He
however, inherited a brooked economic in 1870.
6
1. He was to serve as chief negotiator of the loan and set a committee comprises of
British and Liberian citizens to investigate the risk of getting the loan and during
this process if there were backfire the committee could have resolved it and show
the way forward, instead he risked the speaker life with little, or no backing from
the Liberian community and the British Community,
2. He was quick to introduce constitutional reform policy in his economic reform
policy. He intends to amend the constitution to extend the tenure of the presidency
from two years to four years. The opposition mulattoes transferred this aggression
to his loan program, criticizing all good elements of the loan program,
3. The mulattoes who have stay in power with no such innovation fears the progress
of this loan programs that he would integrated the people of the hinterland and
increase his political will and power and stay in power for life, and;
4. He was to reverse the militia and increase the Congo-descendants from Congo
Town in the Militia and equip them with fair benefit, then the mulattoes could
have met resistance to overthrow his government.
Even though this economic reform policy by Roye directed toward the poor failed, but it
was indented to build a nation which we could have been proud of today. As earlier as
that era, he was thinking about connecting our nation, to create an economic platform for
the poor through road network, but he met a resistance, which he died in the process, yet
people strived to ignore the cardinal reform policy he died for – to carry road to the poor.
From the Roye’s episode, when you talk about ‘Pro-poor Agenda’ you should be strong
in your action and review your loan agreement well to carry road to the ‘poor people’
who Roye tried connecting in 1871, but failed. Another greater economic reform policy
to examine is “Operation Production.”
7
“Operation Production” Tubman’s Economic Reform Policy and Failures
Unfortunately, the fears of the mulattoes that Roye would use the progress of his loan
program to integrate the people of the hinterland and increase his political will and power
and stay in power for life was what began applicable and visible in the Tubman’s Era. As
now integrated policy, if the mulattoes have introduced it as a fair democratic premise, it
could not have been used as an economic policy, but was since absence in the
fundamental basic of our political ideology of the founding fathers of the nation.
Accordingly, ‘during activities marking the fourth National Unification Program held at
the newly constructed Fairground Hall in the City of Buchanan in 1966, Lofa County
won a prize of ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) for being the county of highest
agricultural production that year. This system of awarding sub-national units for
performing with excellence in national service was a key approach aimed at motivating
the citizenry to self-proficiency in agriculture, particular food production. The former
President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf and the current Liberian President George Manneh Weah
had created economic crime by abandoning such reform program and wasting money on
ministerial leagues among remunerative personnel of various ministries of government
who are well paid from government covers, and worsen with the Weah led administration
celebrating pro-poor day while the agricultural sectors lie discarded.
William V. S. Tubman: Liberia’s longest serving President (1944 – 1971)
When we think of Tubman in Liberian
history, we think of the open-door policy,
integration and Liberia longest serving
head of state. But there is a little known,
but significant policy that he introduced
knows as ‘Operation Production,’ also
‘there was a desire to increase rural
participation, not only in terms of political
participation, but also in the economic
mainstream of the country by announcing
what was known as’ “Operation
Production.”
8
In 1945 President Tubman held Executive Councils in Zwedru from April 3rd to 22nd and
in Webbo, from April 29 to May 5. He perfectly understood the demand to put food on
the table for every Liberian within 24 hours. Here was a dictator who perfectly
understood the power of the poor Liberian people feeding themselves through his
motivational economic reform policy.
However, ‘operation production’ did not restitute poverty, Liberians were among the
world poorest people, and people live in destitute homes. Climbing the ladder of the
1960s, Tubman was now a relevant politician, he abandoned ‘operation production’, and
the opened door policy was now importing tons of rice in the Liberian market and the
Liberia’s agriculture sectors went cold in the production of rice, and as the result Liberia
was face with the challenge to feed herself when Tubman died in 1971. Few factors are
responsible for the failure of the Tubman’s ‘operation production’:
1. Operation production was political, rather then been used as a tool to eliminated
poverty, it major aim was unification and also intended to make Tubman stay in
power for life,
2. ‘Operation Production’ was a crowd drilling policy, motivating farmers to feed
themselves, but not empowering individual farmers to feed the nation,
3. Tubman felt weak about ‘Operation Production’ after integrating his political will
in the hinterland, and;
4. Tubman’s opened door policy did not limit the importation of oversea rice in other
to prioritize the country rice produced by local Liberian farmers.
‘Operation Production’ was a good economic reform policy, but failed to restitute
poverty with prosperity for our people. However, this policy failed economically, but
integrated and unified our people who even became comfortable in poverty. Today we
think that the only tool of unification is through soccer. We should take a look at
‘Operation Production’ and unify our people through agricultural production again.
9
We should even go deeper if we are serious with the Pro-poor Agenda, and modify
‘Operation Production’ by adding the following pedigrees:
1. Award individuals of higher production in the agricultural sectors base on the
needs of what’s lacking such as mobility, seedling and tool,
2. Loan farmers with decent living bills by building farm’s house to avoid the
farmer(s) always rushing to the main town for rest,
3. Connect farms to market roads and create a market,
4. Hire a Team of Research Liberian Expects to educate Liberians about the nutrients
the country rice have and its benefits, and;
5. Hire a Team of Liberians Agriculture Chemists and Expects to think about
reserving raw and pound cassava leaves in a plastic for 90 days or above to be
exported and use for national consumptions instead always pounding and eating at
once.
‘Operation Production’ was once the significant policies of Tubman, even though it was
political, but unites Liberians and makes Tubman relevant among his people. If the Pro-
poor Agenda is intended to help the poor Liberian as it claimed, it need to expel its Pro-
poor celebration and reverse ‘Operation Production’ and direct its funding to strengthen
and integrated it Pro-poor agenda among the farmers through agricultural programs. If
Tubman have guided his ‘Operation Production’ in his open-door policy and took his
political motive from the policy and simple implement it to benefit the poor Liberians he
could have done better to transform the lives of the poor people in the first republic.
Notwithstanding, even though this policy failed economically, but the lesson we can learn
from there is to divert our funds for informer celebration into meaningful agricultural
programs. As Tubman failed to economically liberate the poor people, Tolbert introduced
another ambiguous policy intended to help the poor Liberian people, called “Operation
Higher Height, from mat to mattress.”
10
“Mat-to-Mattress Policy”: Tolbert’s Economic Reform Policy and Failures
Immediately after assuming the Presidency, Tolbert urged the residents of scattered
hamlets and villages within proximity to merge into towns in other to easier serve them
with roads, schools, health facilities and markets. Tolbert intends to build a nation based
on:
❖ Service
❖ Work
❖ Education, and
❖ Capital investment
He improved education and housing facilities, and also introduced a pension scheme
which replaced the lay-back, lackadaisical, fiscally-liberal P.R.O. scheme of Tubman. In
the area of agriculture, he set an example by being a major rice producer. He also set a
scheme allowing Liberians to borrow at least $50 interest free, payable in 7 years if only
the Liberian would use the loan towards farmland purchase.
William Richard Tolbert Jr.: Liberia’s 19th President 1971 - 1980
‘William R. Tolbert Jr. was a man of
tremendous energy and efficiency.’ He
too has a deed sense of the destitute living
condition of the ordinary Liberians. He
therefore introduced an ambiguous
economic reform policy known as “Mat-
to-Mattress Policy.” In Tolbert’s
administration, domestic policies focused
on the empowerment of the citizens of
Liberia as farmers, laborers and business
owners. The policies carried the hope that
the economy of Liberia would improve.
11
He finally embarked on plans to cease rice importation as a cost -saving measure, and this
policy met resistance, resulting to the rice riot of 1979. PAL and MOJA navigated their
political ideology, diffused the reform and made Tolbert unpopular, and finally died in a
coup in 1980.
When counting the gross placates of people rights for 133 years from 1847-1980 by
Americo-Liberians which Tolbert found his identity with, one tends to justify the
necessity of Tolbert’s death through frustration, but this does not in any way serve as
justifiable applicable reason for Tolbert’s death, for he too has a very economic reform
policy known as the “Mat-to-Mattress policy” intended to transform the lives of the poor
Liberian people which rest in the very code of the Green Revolution and the Pro-poor
Agenda. He made significant marks within 9 years, but yet failed to transform the lives of
the poor people. when you say Pro-poor Agenda, be the reason of your call to service by
the poor Liberian people to count your accomplishments tomorrow, for we await to pen
your successes and failures tomorrow, and let us be cognizant that a man once stood tall,
very passionate to transform the lives of the poor Liberian people, yet misunderstood by
the same poor people he wished to have liberated from poverty, and died in a coup. It is
quit necessary to examine some factors responsible for the failures of Tolbert’s
ambiguous “Mat-to-Mattress Policy”:
1. The indigenous Liberians were tire and weary of Americo-Liberian rule. They
wanted change, whether good or bad, it was not their concern.
2. 85% of the Liberian population were illiterate looking for indigenous liberator;
they categorically put all Americo-Liberians as bad, the same old people
3. Tolbert’s reform policy toward the poor to totally integrate them in government
make his Americo-Liberian counter-parts angry, and the poor people he was
advocating for did not love him, so he was cut on a lonely field making him
visible to the coup of 1980.
12
4. He apparently reduced spending on the Armed Forces while increased spending on
the Police Force.
5. In the area of foreign policy, he erred with the breaking of diplomatic relations
with Israel, and
6. He introduced a foreign policy that seriously considered dealing with the East and
the West, on the other hand, established links with Communist China, U.S.S.R.
and Romania. Some political pundits believe this policy led to West (notably
America) to plot his overthrow since the cold war was still active and Liberia was
strategically important to the U.S.
Even though the “Mat-to-Mattress Policy” failed, but it driver (William R. Tolbert Jr.)
was a passionate and optimistic Liberian. He believed in every Liberian potential to
contribute to the Liberian economy through work, service, education and capital
investment. These four pillars are the cornerstones of any developing nation no matter
which policy it pursues. Tolbert understood this very well. When you say Pro-poor
Agenda, do you perfectly understand the individual ability to awaken his potential to
serve in your Pro-poor Agenda? When you say Pro-poor agenda, remember that you are
not the only one who has seen the need to liberate the suffering destitute Liberian people,
people has seeing the demanding needs, but the kind of foreign policy they pursue and
the political environment they operated in, covert with the geo-politics of the era cause
them to die in the process, like in the case of Tolbert.
In the cause the people, a young military leader arriving the Liberian political arena said
the struggle should continue, a policy claiming to liberate the poor was introduced, called
“the Green Revolution.” I intend to make these policies visible in this article to remind
the current policy implementers of the Pro-poor Agenda and students of government that
they are not the only people in the struggles to liberate the poor, rather this is an old idled
idea that had meet resistance, with little or no implementation.
13
“The Green Revolution” Doe’s Economic Reform Policy and Failures
Accordingly, the “Green Revolution” was the notable increase in cereal-grains
production in Mexico, India, Pakistan, the Philippines, and other developing countries in
the 1960s and 1970s. This trend resulted from the introduction of hybrid strains of wheat,
rice, and corn (maize) and the adoption of modern agricultural technologies, including
irrigation and heavy doses of chemical fertilizer. The “Green Revolution” was launched
by research establishments in Mexico and the Philippines that were funded by the
governments of those nations, international donor organizations, and the U.S.
government.
The leader of a Mexican research term, U.S. agronomist Norman Borlaug, was
instrumental in introducing the new wheat to India and Pakistan and was awarded the
Nobel Peace Prize in 1970.
So the “Green Revolution” was a borrowed idea that Doe intends to use to build his
political legacy and feed his people and makes Liberia a self-sufficiency nation. People in
Master Sergeant Samuel Kayon Doe: PRC Chair Liberia’s 20th President 1980 - 1990
“And so, on assuming the Presidency
following the death of Tolbert,
President Samuel K. Doe took a policy
direction that was much the same as
leaders before him (Tolbert), but
launched it in the name “Green
Revolution Policy” that had a focus on
local participation in the running of the
country.” Was the “Green Revolution”
a perfect Doe’s revolutionary idea? I
term to examine the path of the “Green
Revolution” and it revitalization as a
policy to redeem the poor Liberian
people.
14
rural communities were being encouraged, as also were urban dwellers, to produce more
food to build a strong pillar for sustained national growth across the nation. The “Green
Revolution,” in the view of President Doe and his adherents, was intended for maximum
food security, with local farm-to-market roads, and highways linking all county capitals
to each other and to the nation’s capital, Monrovia. He nearly succeeded to feed the
nation under his “Green Revolution Policy,” but instead, he turned to building a strong
military state for his own security without investing in equipment and technical research
to maintain and sustain the “Green Revolution”, and also failed to expand it from a
Liberian scenario since it was a borrowed policy. The Green Revolution relatively help
feed Liberians and made the nation stable in food security for a while, but gradually
collapsed and failed to exist and left the ordinary Liberians into poverty when Doe met
his deadlock in 1990 marking the fulsome of the Liberian civil war in 1989.
Some key factors are responsible for the failures of the Green Revolution Policy:
1. The Green Revolution was a borrowed idea from Mexico, India, Pakistan, the
Philippines, and as such it modern agricultural technologies, and idea were also to
be borrowed, investigated and applied, but instead, it only took the name and
ignored the application. The local Liberians were heavily involved with the
method of subsistence’s farming during the Green Revolution.
2. Doe, the driver of the Green Revolution did not invest in technical agricultural
research, but instead, he was concerned with the art of production in the Green
Revolution.
3. The Green Revolution did not invest in young scholars in pursuance of Degree in
agriculture to foster their study in Mexico, India, Pakistan, the Philippines since
these places were the origin of the Green Revolution; educational sectors of these
counties could have helped better educate Liberians about the Green revolution.
4. In his quest to build a strong military, he did not build an agriculture battalion in
the army.
15
5. The Green Revolution was partial, it was not integrating and unifying the Liberian
people like ‘Operation Production,’ it abandoned Doe’s oppositional County,
Nimba County.
6. Continual and annual celebration of REDEMPTION DAY reminded Americo-
Liberians about the death of Tolbert and made them avenge not to participate in
the green Revolution.
7. Like ‘Operation Production,’ the “Green Revolution” was crowd drilling; it did
not invest and empower individual agricultural cooperation to feed the nation.
8. The Green Revolution failed to look at it model ‘Operation Production” to ratify it
in the Green Revolution to integrate the Liberian people, instead the Driver (Doe)
of the Green Revolution think it was an messianic idea that have arrive to redeem
the poverty stricken Liberian people, he was not cognizance to the mental of
‘Operation Production’ to keep rewarding farmers of higher production, but
crowded all productions on government operation.
In it nutshell, the Green Revolution failed to transform the lives of the poor Liberian
people, in fact poverty retook it course in the Liberian society, erupted by civil war which
worsen the situation when all other functioning infrastructural and agricultural activities
collapsed commiserating with the death of Samuel K. Doe in 1990. The Green
Revolution did not change the lives of the Liberian people. But it was a good ambiguous
policy intended to change Liberia and build a noble state in the 2nd republic. It driver
(Doe) was a poor military man merit by military rank upon the coup to take the lead to
direct the path of our nation. He came blind, with no platform, yet with a plan to build a
noble nation. Depressed to protect his power, he became ataman, radical and aggressive
and created the best unworthy hideous crime against the Liberian state and its citizenry,
but at the heart of this lackadaisical soldier was a plan for the poor Liberians too, to
transform them for better, restitute their stricken poverty with prosperity and build a
nation that his origin and indigenous Liberians could be proud of, and give them
16
sufficient reasons to condemn Americo-Liberian rule for 133 years, but failed to
transform the lives of the poor Liberian people.
When you say ‘Pro-poor,’ reflect in the corridor of our history, a lackadaisical soldier
name Doe, he too has and indigenous ambiguous policy like you with a noble mind to
build a proud nation to prove the political elites of the time wrong. So is the case and
challenge of this ‘Pro-poor era.’ The Green Revolution ended with a desperate era, and
the rest of the story was 7 years civil war which ended in a democratic election, bringing
48 year old revolutionary leader Charles G. Taylor to the presidency, urging us into
another ambiguous policy, “vision 2024.”
17
“Vision 2024” Taylor’s Ambiguous Economic Reform Policy and Failures
These synopses of accounts reflecting the mindset of our national leaders to bring about
participatory governance and economic opportunities for all, were good efforts that if
methodologically implemented, would have lifted our country to a higher realm of
development and thereby serve as a platform for peaceful co-existence according to Ellen
Johnson Sirleaf.
From the ashes of our years of civil strife, it seems Charles Taylor “Vision 2024” was the
source of hope for new Liberia of the 21st Century. In his Presidential Press Paper, Taylor
outlines his Vision 2024, and the “made in Liberia” ideology was economic reform
champion for self-sustainability and reliance, and ending a global threat on food security
in Liberia. His ambiguous policy nearly agriculture oriented anticipated to:
❖ Make flower(Powder) in Liberia through Cassava
❖ Build manufacturing factory and make tea, margarine, peanut butter, coffee and
sugar in Liberia
❖ Make rubber dishes and car tiers in Liberia, and later build car
Charles G. Taylor: Liberia’s 21st President 1997 – August 11, 2003
President Charles Taylor’s “Vision 2024”
also combined much of the elements of
operation higher height, “Mat-to-Mattress
Policy” and the “Green Revolution”
indented to deliver the economic good of
the suffering Liberian citizenry
irrespective of where they resided. His
“Vision 2024” Conference sought to
ensure national reconciliation and healing
amongst the people. Then, the way would
be paved for a progressive national
development effort.
18
❖ Make juices in Liberia through banana and oranges
❖ Build farm to road market, and
❖ Demands all government officials to make farm
In the heart of the dictator, Charles Taylor; were these visions to transform Liberia, and
build a nation we could be proud of, in order to give sufficient reasons for his revolution,
for disheveling the Doe’s regime. I intend to acquaint you with these polices that in the
very code and dominance of civilian, visionary, soldier, rebel and dictator, emanated
good policy, and even better policy have originated from their expenses that would
transform this nation to the very peak of prosperity where poverty could not have been
our worry. But these policies met resistance and failed as the result of lack of
implementations, and dishonesty. “Vision 24” possesses the ability to transform our
nation and build a nation we desire, for the vision was totally Liberian center, and
indented to give the nation total independence since 1847, but failed. Its’ vision bearer
was exiled by aggrieved rebel groups and later excavated to the Hargue for crimes against
humanity. When you say ‘Pro-poor,’ in my wisdoms, it does not means you have come
with a messianic agenda, it also means examining our path and past of economic
recovery and outlines our failures and successes as nation and people and draw a final
conclusion from our past to transform the lives of the suffering and poverty stricken
Liberians who wait in hope for economic emancipation. Taylor too has a better agenda
for the poor people of Liberia. You now tell if you have the best, and if you claimed to
have the best, then best without implementation is nothing.
As “vision 2024” finally failed in the summer of August 11, 2003, when Taylor left with
tears urging that ‘he will be back one day, God willing,’ in his political and economic
symposium, if his tears represented excavation from Liberia, it was not enough, but that
his “Vision 2024” came to an end, and left the county in ashes of poverty, with no pave
roads and infrastructures.
19
But he was an embalm of his vision by making farm and bringing his rice on the market.
For that, we remember his passion to transform Liberia. Several factors are responsible
for the failure of “Vision 2024” and Taylor excavation from his motherland to exile:
1. He created more enemies for himself when he was at the front of the revolution. If
he have sat back and support the revolution like the then Former President Ellen
Johnson, more Liberian could not have problem with him, his loyalists could have
defend his innocent like in the case of Ellen Johnson Sirleaf.
2. He has problem with Liberia’s tradition allay and highest donor, America.
America was not certain of supporting a revolutionary leader since their first
experience with Samuel K. Doe did not materialize.
3. The sub-region fears his ambiguous vision and sees him as agent of Mohammed
Kadafi to promote United States of Africa through revolution.
4. After the National Reconciliation Conference introducing his “Vision 2024,” he
was not to sit, instead; he was to set up Aggrieved Committee to hold a
consultative meetings with aggrieved refugees of the neighboring counties in
Guinea, Ivory Coast, and Sierra and to reconcile his regime with these people and
slow the path of aggrieved members of the warring factions not to easily use them
as rebels. But instead he abandoned them; they were not even represented during
the National Reconciliation Conference based on my research.
5. Firestone as the major rubber producing Company fears his “Vision 2024” and
therefore undermined it since it mentioned about producing cars’ tiers in Liberia.
6. Early civil war strikes him in 1999 marking the beginning of the second Liberian
civil war.
7. His vision was more paper center and ambiguous, ignoring a small start with
individual farmers to help him feed the nation, but solemnly took it as government
responsible, ignoring relation with main land china and making Taiwan his allay
which was not china allay. Since he missed the American relationship, he was not
20
to afford missing the china relationship which was exercising it potential growing
technology and investment in Africa at the time.
8. Most Liberian political elites did not view “Vision 2024” as a national vision, but
a vision to perpetuate Taylor in power for life.
Upon the failure of “Vision 2024,” it was in 2005 when Liberians engulfed a new hope in
a nation emerging with Madam Sirleaf as head state, and inaugurated in January 16, 2006
as Africa first democratic female elected president. Madam Sirleaf promised to restore
the hope of the suffering Liberians, adding that “papa will truly come home.” Vigorously
awaiting to ‘see papa come home’ in the mist of criticism, she introduced the Poverty
Reduction Strategy, another economic reform policy gearing toward touching the lives of
the poor Liberian People.
21
”Poverty Reduction Strategy” Ellen Economic Reform Policy and failures
Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSP) are prepared by the member countries through
a participatory process involving domestic stakeholders as well as development partners,
including the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. Updated every three years
with annual progress reports, PRSPs describe the country's macroeconomic, structural
and social policies and programs over a three year or longer horizon to promote broad-
based growth and reduce poverty, as well as associated financing needs and major
sources of financing.
Richard V. Reeves; Wednesday, September 2, 2015 in his anti-poverty strategies post
said there are two strategic approaches to tackling poverty.
Strategy 1: raise the incomes of those with low incomes.
Strategy 2: reduce the knock-on effects of having a low income on housing, schooling,
safety, health or health care.
Ellen Johnson Sirleaf: Liberia’s first Democratic Elected Female President 2006 - 2017
Where does the Poverty Reduction
Strategy come from? When Ellen
Johnson Sirleaf’s Economic policy was
failing, she enacted the ‘Poverty
Reduction Strategy’ in Liberia and
borrowed lots of million dollars in the
name of the policy. Let us examine the
path of the ‘Poverty Reduction
Strategy.’ Poverty Reduction Strategy is
a global transformative policy that
member counties can subscribe by, so it
was in the case of Liberia.
22
Why then the Liberian Poverty Reduction Strategy was implemented with highest salary
in government and people live in ashes’ poverty after years? To answer this question, I
intend to analyze Liberia vision on the ‘Poverty Reduction Strategy.’
Here is a press release posted on the website of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 2008
with The Foreign Minister of Liberia announcing Liberia vision of the ‘Poverty
Reduction Strategy:
Liberia’s PRS articulates the government’s overall vision and development
strategies. Successfully implementing the PRS will further Government’s central
objectives: firmly establish a stable and secure environment across Liberia, to be
on an irreversible path towards sustainable, equitable, and inclusive growth and
development, to rebuild the capabilities of and provide new opportunities for
Liberia’s greatest asset-its people and to have established responsible institutions
of justice, human rights, and governance.
The PRS will be implemented between April 1, 2008 and June 30, 2011, a period
of critical importance as Liberia shifts from post-conflict stabilization to laying
the foundation for sustained and shared growth, poverty reduction, and
progressing towards achieving the Millennium Development Goals.
The PRS is anchored on four pillars:
❖ Consolidating peace and security
❖ Revitalizing the economy
❖ Strengthening governance and the rule of law, and;
❖ Rebuilding infrastructure and delivering basic services.
This is the whole of the PRS which the Harvard Trained Economist (Ellen Johnson
Sirleaf) capitalized on to bring some set of transformation to her people. She revamped
the educational sector, for nearly 18 years, she again the first time established a pension
and payroll system. She increases women participation both in government and the
23
private sectors and for the first time women defined their role and necessity of
participating in the economy.
She left a relative well defined mark on the Liberian economy and its people, but failed to
transform the lives of the poor people. The Liberian Poverty Reduction Strategy went to
bed with poverty re-taken it new course against the very people who was at the pinnacle
of the policy. At the latter part of her era, they were finally depressed, not willing to
adhere to her if even she had intended recommending her replacement. Economic
hardship increased, and the legislature was milky, and was not match to her hard code
profile politics. She divided them and made the legislature changed speaker twice and
made her friendly bloc of the legislature rich, but suppressed and snagged nationalists and
floor fighters in the Legislature. Donors and PRS’ funds were unscrupulously used to
consolidate her power in the legislature. She built a solid and strong foreign policy, and
she became relevant and love by foreign people more than her own peasant Liberians. As
the result the people live in ashes’ poverty; she fueled the International Community and
donors with images of mini projects that everything was well, while the people live in
poverty in the hinterland, particularly those of the sub-eastern part of the county. At the
end results, few infrastructures stand in the nation as evidence of the PRS, but with no
trigger effects on the lives of the ordinary people.
Despite of these failures and the failure of PRS to economically emancipate the Liberian
people from poverty, she stood as the embalm of political tolerance, and role model for
women. She has the best idea where to start solving the problem of a nation broken down
for nearly 30 years. She knew it was a long process; but it could not happen overnight.
She knew that we have arrived from a turbulent history, and some people wanted quick
fit, and in the process of slow economic reform enhancement, frustration could occurred,
and some could expressed their anger by insulting in the name of subscribing to
democracy. In this light, she was quiet like old dump-grandmother and refused to
reciprocate many confrontational activists and campaigners who wanted reciprocal action
at the detriment of our democracy. She is the conservative perseverance of our
24
democracy in the 1st Liberian Republic and the civilian custodian of our democracy in the
2nd Liberian Republic. She understood that we Liberians were barricaded from expression
of our freedom of speech, so we went to civil war. The much hidden idea to transform
this nation was in the corridor of Madam Sirleaf, but she knew it from a difficult
perspective. When you say “pro-poor, please note that the very people you want to
liberate, you are not the first to anticipate in that endeavor, Madam Sirleaf too understand
that language very well, but she knew it could be a long path. She was not ambiguous in
her economic reform policy; she was moderate, for this she failed to fight corruption. In
her last day of the presidency, she saw the hungry poverty stricken crowds anticipating
for new sense of hope and direction, for this she remain astute, and decided to play a
neutral role in the October 2017 general elections to watch the masses go any direction
they wish, figurative saying “it is not my demn business.” There are however, some
factors responsible for the failures of the PRS in Liberia:
1. Ellen is a long international veteran who stays long in the field of opposition
wanting the presidency. Her quest has long been supported by many dormant
Liberians who were not really care for Liberia. She imported them as ministers
who were pay in the range of 15,000 – 30,000 US$. They imported the PRS and
donor money back to America and with no form of infrastructural developments
here to benefit the poor.
2. Most of the positions in her first term was likely a token for those that stood for
her when she was in opposition, than an actual job to serve the state
3. Ellen failed to revise and modify ‘Operation Production’ which could have helped
her integrate and unify the poor famers through Agriculture.
4. Liberia’s Poverty Reduction Strategy was cash based, not agriculture based
5. The poverty Reduction Strategy didn’t follow good path to educate the banking
system to easily deliver loan to marketers. Bankers created a hash monotonous
system and cut actual money from borrowers apart from interest rate. The PRS did
not employ financial counselors.
25
6. Ellen’s son Robert Sirleaf weakens her corruption gasp in her government by not
championing transparency at NOCAL. She lack moral pedigree to trial others for
corruption.
7. She concentrated on consolidating her power in an opposition legislature; thereby
spending lots of million dollars undercover to buy opposition lawmakers and
abandoned the poor Liberian people.
8. She developed lots of sitting and investigating committees comprises of her
comrades and political allies and give them lot of million dollars annually.
9. Her budget was legislature and executive cooperation and coordinating budget,
not reflecting perfect balance in geographical development.
10. She spent more money and energy making polices than implementations.
Today poverty has manure itself as a component in Liberia. Madam Sirleaf left a
struggling nation with a task to redefine its agenda to tickle the issue of poverty. Instead
of worrying about technology, anticipating for innovation for young people to take grasp
of digital technology, our thinking and innovation is shark with poverty and inequality in
infrastructural dividend. Post Ellen Liberia is a difficult path, seeking a new sense of
economic emancipation in a pro-poor Agenda led by former soccer legend George
Manneh Weah which I intend to analyze if it will surely emancipate Liberia and give the
suffering Liberian People hope after post Weah Liberia.
26
“Pro-poor Agenda” Weah’s Economic Reform Policy, and why it will Fail if Lacked
Future Perspective
Accordingly, ‘when development studies were born, after decolonization in the middle of
the twentieth century, poverty was not an important concern of policy-makers.’ The
situation changed in the early 1970s, a question of how the interests of the poor could be
incorporated in policy-making arrived. ‘New data became available, showing that famine
was still occurring and that a third of the poor were not gaining from growth; inclusive
policies were presented as a means of allaying threats to state security within a cold war
environment, especially in Asian developing countries; and a big boost was given to these
policies by the commitment of donors – especially Robert MacNamara; World Bank
president – to reorientate lending policies towards urban poverty and rural development.
Under the stress of global crisis, poverty focus among aid donors decayed in the 1980s,
but it continued among many recipients, especially in South and South-East Asia. In the
1990s, it was relaunched, first tentatively, as a means of protecting the losers from global
adjustment (a process which, with the end of the cold war, now embraced Russia and the
When you say ‘Pro-poor’, people likely to
believe that a government has come straightly
for the suffering Liberian people, and it
appears like for the first time, no economic
platform has ever surface in the history of
Liberia to emancipate the people from poverty.
But before driving you to the ‘pro-poor’
agenda I sincerely enlightened you on reforms
in the corridor of our history by past leaders
that strive to eliminate poverty, but failed. And
here we now stand with a ‘Pro-poor agenda.’
Where does the ‘Pro-poor agenda’ come from?
It is a George weah led innovation?
George Manneh Weah: Liberia most moderate Opposition Leader in the 2nd Republic and Liberia’s current President
27
former Soviet Union) and then more decisively, a process which culminated in the
Millennium Development Goals. In the 2000s, with the decay of the Washington
consensus, the idea of pro-poor orientation becomes incorporated into a more state-
dominated politics in a number of middle-income, especially Latin American, countries.’
‘Pro-poor’ is not a Liberian idea. The general understandings that can be drawn from
“pro-poor policies” are those that directly target poor people, or that are more generally
aimed at reducing poverty. There is also a general consensus that pro-poor policy
processes are those that allow poor people to be directly involved in the policy process, or
that by their nature and structure lead to pro-poor outcomes. The current definition used
by the Civil Society Partnership Program is that 'the aim of pro-poor policies is to
improve the assets and capabilities of the poor'.
Pro-poor agenda is just another borrowed policy like the Green Revolution and the
Poverty Reduction Strategy. ‘A pro-poor government is largely understood as a
government driven by the primary objective of reducing poverty. A pro-poor government
thus takes direct actions that alleviate the sufferings and reduce the number of its citizens
living in poverty through sustainable and long-term interventions managed by both the
state and the private sector,’ Liberian scholar Ibrahim Al-Bakri Nyei wrote.
‘Pro-poor, according to a working paper by International Poverty Centre (IPC) and the
United Nations Development Program (UNDP), “Pro-poor growth may be referred as
growth that benefits the poor and provides them with opportunities to improve their
economic situation, as often cited by international agencies (UN 2000, OECD 2001).”
Therefore Pro-poor Agenda should donate its agenda to Pro-poor Growth. Pro-poor
Growth is dubbed in two measures: relative pro-poor growth and absolute pro-poor
growth. Without these examinations pro-poor is meaningless.
Relative Pro-poor Growth: economic growth should benefit the poor proportional more
than the non-poor. This growth reduces poverty faster and incites inequality.
28
Absolute relative Pro-poor Growth: the poor receive the absolute benefits of growth equal
to the absolute benefits received by the non-poor. This pro-poor stimulates equality, but
slow in growth.
We stand yet to know which pro-poor growth we are subscribing to. Maybe we are
subscribing with the two growths.
Liberians are actually poor people. Poverty is destroying the foundation of the nation.
Private schools continue increasing school fees, and the Liberian dollars is depreciating
daily. LD$ 600 should be the relative amount to give a nuclear family a daily appreciative
meal, not to mention an extended family. In all my research tours in major market places
in Liberia, in schools, university campuses, in meetings and public places I have sensed
that public trust is wading away and the respect for character is growing cold, and people
are getting legally inclined on their right, but morally lack passion for humanity and
people are taken character assassination and personal attack as democracy. We live in
total confusion and we are becoming selfish with no economic prosperity. Poverty has
retaken it course in the Liberian society and people are looking for a new sense of
economic emancipation every day. So ‘when President George Weah announced his pro-
poor agenda two days after winning the 2017 election, optimism swelled about a well-
defined set of policies to address the plight of the intrinsically poor population (Lennart
Dodoo, [email protected]).
Weah’s Pro-Poor Projects earmarked with resources allocated under the pro-poor policy
include:
• Pay Junior and Senior High School Examination Fees for public and private
schools;
• Provision of digital registration system for the University of Liberia and free Wi-
Fi internet for students at the main campus;
29
• Fulfill government obligation by paying the salaries of 400 new teachers and
correcting the salaries of 180 underpaid personnel;
• Increase the number of local Liberian experts through professional skills
development for key technical positions in government;
• Provide beds, tools, and other medical equipment and facilities upgrades for John
F. Kennedy Medical Center;
• Support on-going humanitarian outreach programs by the First Lady;
• Repair and maintain traffic lights in Monrovia and construct 400 new street lights
along the Roberts Field Highway;
• Conduct feasibility study for new Military Hospital;
• Finance efforts to issue biometric identification to government employees and
rationalize the wage bill through payroll verification;
• Repair and maintain damaged NTA buses;
• Introduce non-discriminatory loan and grant facilities will provide empowerment
and support for Liberian-owned businesses.
Two months after launching the ‘Pro-poor Agenda,’ the President Weah, his First Lady,
Mrs. Clar Weah, and some members of his Cabinet have lunch in a local ‘low-level’
restaurant, eating with his bare fingers. Few minutes later, photos of the President eating
at the local restaurant went viral on social media in an attempt to depict the pro-poor
agenda. These photos, most Liberians understood as the beginning of emplacing
government of the poor, denigrating the pro-poor agenda. These humanist photos with the
President eating with the poor in local cook shop, but with no plan to transform their lives
were the early beginning of the failures of the Pro-poor agenda. Pro-poor Agenda is not
about identity, is about transformation. Now, here a recommendation to improve the
president pro-poor agenda with local cook shops or restaurants in which he strive to
identify with, with no transformation:
30
Introduce a program that empower and make rural women effective of producing
and milling country rice and make the urban cook shops’ women to buy the
country rice from the rural women for a minimum cost and then sell the food to the
ordinary Liberian people in the various cook shops. With such program; you are
helping to promote the country rice in Liberia as compare to imported rice. When
you say pro-poor, be cognizant that it is a board idea that needs innovation to
transform your people.
Before I address the prospects of the Pro-poor agenda, let me corroborate, not legally, but
in my conscious mind inject what are NEWS and what are OLDS in the pro-poor projects
weah embarking. However, all the pro-poor projects are crucial and significance for the
survival of our nation.
What are old in the pro-poor project?
o Pay Junior and Senior High School Examination Fees for public and private
schools:
Taylor did this without platform, but when this happens continually, then, it is a
new project.
o Fulfill government obligation by paying the salaries of 400 new teachers and
correcting the salaries of 180 underpaid personnel;
President Sirleaf fulfill government obligation, pay salaries and give retire benefit
and pension bill. Continual implementations of these projects are the problem Mr.
President.
o Increase the number of local Liberian experts through professional skills
development for key technical positions in government;
31
President Sirleaf did this by sending young people aboard for study and mentoring
young people and later entrusted them with ministry. An example was Augustine
Ngufua who Ellen assigned as deputy to Anthontee saydee and later become
Liberia’s youngest Finance Minister.
o Provide beds, tools, and other medical equipment and facilities upgrades for
John F. Kennedy Medical Center;
Not new, when Ellen took over in 2003, JFK was practical empty with equipment,
bed and human resource capacity. It was Ellen who revamped JFK since 15 years.
o Support on-going humanitarian outreach programs by the First Lady;
Not new, President Doe support lots of humanitarian works of his wife and then
Charles Taylor, who support lots of local project in His wife Jowel name, thus,
gave her some political preference in Liberia.
o Repair and maintain traffic lights in Monrovia and construct 400 new street
lights along the Roberts Field Highway;
Not new, Ellen was always maintaining road and repairing traffic and street light
and she had plan to extend street lights to kakata and Robert Field highway.
o Repair and maintain damaged NTA buses;
Not new, Madam Sirleaf introduced a system reserving fund for maintenance and
repairing of NTA buses, but the system collapsed in early 2016, two years after the
Ebola crisis hit the nation.
o Introduce non-discriminatory loan and grant facilities will provide
empowerment and support for Liberian-owned businesses.
32
Not new, Madam Sirleaf did this through the 4th pillar of the TRC
recommendation. Community dialogue and empowerment through Macro loan
through the Central Bank of Liberia, a program which Dr. Mills Jones intended
using for his own political relevance to integrate his political will among the rural
and urban Liberians.
What are New in the pro-poor project?
o Conduct feasibility study for new Military Hospital;
New indeed. This will add value to the military, and transform them from a
warlike human figure to humanitarian.
o Finance efforts to issue biometric identification to government employees and
rationalize the wage bill through payroll verification;
New in height of technological but old as just database. This is the beginning of
improving security and transparency in government
• Provision of digital registration system for the University of Liberia and free
Wi-Fi internet for students at the main campus;
New, and a very proud project. Not that it touches students, but that it is an
incentive of modern technology that should have been introduced 10 years back,
but failed to deliver.
All the pro-poor projects the President intends to embark on are genuine and crucial for
the survival of the nation.
You are likely to wonder why I analyzed some projects as NEW and some as OLD. I
antedate to tell you that some of these projects have existed in the course of our reform
process, but failed to materialize due to the lack of implementation. These projects are
33
done once and for all, but they are project to be carefully monitored and maintained, with
no future prospect to maintain the life cycle of these projects to foster national growth
and development, the pro-poor agenda will fail if lacked future perspectives.
The building of new Military Hospital, issuing biometric identification to government
employees and rationalize the wage bill through payroll verification and providing digital
registration system for the University of Liberia and free Wi-Fi internet for students at the
main campus are new projects under the pro-poor agenda. But former President of the
University of Liberia; Dr. Emmitt Dennis was always annoyed when you referred to
Capitol Hill campus as main Campus of the University of Liberia. He preferred directing
the University of Liberia activities on Fendell campus, for he indents to shape the student
population to Fendell. This is exactly what President Tolbert intends to do. A pro-poor
project to provide free Wi-fi internet for students at the main campus without mentioning
Fendell Campus which now carries the highest density of the students’ population tends
to contradict a pro-poor agenda project. Maybe, not to jump the gum, it’s Fendell
Campus that the President is referring to as Main Campus; not Capitol Hill Campus.
All the pro-poor projects are welcoming, demanding and appealing as threat against
poverty, but do not in any way adequately stand to fight poverty and reduce it to the
lowest to match the courage of the suffering Liberian people. But they are good start for a
political soccer patriot who believes that he can transform the lives of the suffering
Liberian people, make them proud as the best carrier of the Lone Star of Liberia, and
bring hope and relief to his people through a borrowed pro-poor agenda that I believe if
not properly Liberalized, will fail. No one should be convinced by politicians and critics
that he does not have plan for Liberia. Yes he has, but he is faced with dilemma to narrow
the gap between the rich and the poor and also remain a strong friend and confidante of
the rich whom his pro-poor agenda intend to narrow some of their benefits and give them
to the poor. The process is ongoing now! The cutting of some luxuries, benefits and
34
salaries of some cabinets and members of the executive branch was, however the
beginning of implementing a pro-poor agenda.
On the other hand, pro-poor agenda also narrow-net and reduce government spending on
high cost vehicles and introduces strong and affordable vehicles and motor bikes to
government agencies with the basic concern to carry them to jobs to carry-on
governmental functions with the focus to narrow the gap between the rich and poor. Your
government officials are riding the best of vehicles which is also a contradiction to a pro-
poor agenda. This element of the pro-poor will not take its course in Liberia?
Another element of pro-poor should be continuant of, is the aspects that improve the
living condition of the people through government credit loan programs. In this element
of pro-poor policy, Government provides portable homes for poor people living in slum
communities, but not really free houses, rather maybe, tells each head of a poor family
residing in the house to pay a house tax of $200 LD per month. Base on the quality of the
house, some generation pay for five decades, through cash, works and services. When
you say Pro-poor policy, please look its elements; and imply them in your certain with
innovation. This is why the Green revolution failed. This is why the Poverty reduction
Strategy failed. When you say pro-poor, it is not all about including poor people in your
government, its main concern is about innovation and program to transform their lives
and release them from poverty since you will never be able to employ all. I am not only
talking about the condition of all poor men and poor women in Liberia. When they say
poverty, sometimes the person does not even understand that he or she has anything to
offer to desire his or her lives a better life. When you say pro-poor is likely that you are
playing fool out poor people if you do not look beyond the ladder behind the poor people
I am addressing their plat to your pro-poor agenda. If your pro-poor agenda does not
understand the underlining factors beyond the poor, it will fail, and it will be a mare
policy which will leave, with this country stay subscribing to poverty after post pro-poor
era. When you say pro-poor, you better understand the elements of pro-poor. It is a policy
35
that you have borrowed with an intend to transform your counties, and you must
observed the elements that made it succeed for other counties and then apply it from a
Liberian perspective to deliver our poor people, but without these future prospects, the
pro-poor agenda will fail.
When you say pro-poor, do not think you have come with a highest realm of
government’s policy to liberate the poor people and ignore the private sectors. You
should develop programs to empower the private sectors. All policies before the Pro-poor
too, were appealing, all claimed to have the greatest economic platform to deliver Liberia
from the sin of poverty, but none was able. All met resistance, and moreover, faced the
problems of lack implementation and dishonesty. When you say pro-poor, be honest to
yourself, and make all progressive efforts to implement whatsoever plans you have to
make the Pro-poor plans materialize. You will fail not because of the lack of plans, rather
because of the lack of implementation and dishonesty. Few factors could be responsible
for the failure of the pro-poor agenda if lacked future perspectives to underline and right
the frauds and errs which are responsible for the failures of past economic reform
policies, and what might hinder the pro-poor policy in Liberia:
❖ Lack of implementation
❖ Dishonesty
❖ Lack of monitory system
❖ Using millions of dollar undercover to buy opposition law-makers
❖ Suppressing nationalists and truth floor fighters in the legislature
❖ Celebrating pro-poor day or pro-poor government
❖ Hosting ministerial leagues
❖ Indecisive of pro-poor growth between the rich and poor, who to befriend while
implementing a Pro-poor Policy? The poor are the ones you wish to transform,
while the rich are the political elites and warlord?
36
❖ Managing conflicts of interests with law-makers; they hope to increase their salary
and get benefits from every national barrowed loans under a pro-poor government
❖ Loyalists: they defend the pro-poor policy more than listening to their mistakes,
not adhering to suggestions that may yield to transformation
❖ Loyalists: another tendency of loyalist is the hit back tendency on social medias to
tease oppositions and aggrieved Liberians
❖ Lack of plan to measure the pro-poor in education, agriculture and technology in a
new dimension. But its dimension on road is clear.
❖ Lack of pro-poor policy advisors to narrow Pro-poor vision to befit an individual
Liberian road in a nation building process; as the result, individual squarely see
pro-poor agenda as government business
Pro-poor agenda is a good policy with the ability to transform this nation better for the
common good of every Liberians. It driver (George Manneh weah) is a nationalist who
refused to donate his pride as a French citizen when he was emerging as a super star in
soccer. With this, there are some sorts of truth values and loves of this nation relatively
defined in him more than some thousands that look for opportunity with no regard for
origin. He too, can transform this nation, but also with no warranty to failure if he does
not revise his pro-poor plans and look at it future perspectives and challenges as
discussed above. Here come the pro-poor; it is a long road that requires a new definition
for better success! It is an old policy, but new in Liberia.
37
Conclusion
Whatsoever policy it might be to help the suffering Liberian people, after analyzing
policies of past Liberian leaders; from Edwin J. Roye to George Weah, I have come to
the final conclusion: that the resurrection of this nation from poverty lies in education,
road and agriculture. All the patriots, revolutionaries, dictators and visionaries of the past
realized this, and tried doing something to help rescue this nation from the sin of poverty,
but failed. Some were truly heroes, and my last female, madam Ellen Johnson Sirleaf is
just a heroine and a radical who I sometime hate and love.
There are lots of evidences that people tried transforming this nation, with better mind of
economic reforms more than pro-poor policy. But today we are with pro-poor, which for
it very cause, I analyzed the Roye’s Road policy and Failures, Tubman’s Operation
Production policy and Failures, Tolbert Operation higher Height, Mat-to-mattress Policy
and Failures, Doe’s Green Revolution Policy and Failures, Taylor’s Vision 2024 and
Ellen’s Poverty Reduction Strategies and Failures to compare their weaknesses and
strengths with the Pro-poor policy in order to make a comparative dynamic analysis for
the Pro-poor Policy to take its rational and transformative course to truly affect the poor
people if the policy adhere to the commendations I have made in this article, which I
think is one of my least, but greatest contribution to the Pro-poor agenda. In my final last
word, the best way forward to economic emancipation and self-sustainability is through
education, road and agriculture. Let the sound of their words go down deed in your heart:
for Roye said ‘Road’, Tubman and Ellen said ‘Education’, and Doe, Tolbert and Taylor
said ‘Agriculture.’
38
Reference
Jones, Jae, June 8, 2017 - BLACK MEN, BLACK POLITICS, Edward James Roye: The
Fifth President of Liberia
Mosley, Paul, A short history of ‘pro-poor policy’ 1970–2010
Dodoo, Lennart, April 5, 2018, Frorntpage Africa Liberia: Weah’s Government
Misconstruing ‘Pro-Poor’ Agenda; Policies Shy of Lasting Solutions
Quarbo, Octavius, MA: (Article) Published on March 16, 2018: What should Pro-poor
Governance mean for Liberia?
Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSP) Wednesday, December 28, 2016,
Unknown Post
Reeves, Richard V., Anti-poverty strategies: (Post) Wednesday, September 2, 2015
The Foreign Minister of Liberia, IT/Public Affairs Bureau- MFA: Liberia Vision of
Poverty Reduction Strategies
Wilson, Richard: (Article) William Tolbert Jr.’s Triple Legacy to Liberia: Sub-Title:
May 13, 2014, would have been the 101st birthday of William Richard Tolbert Jr.
Walsh, Renford E. A., (Article) Brief Analysis of Tolbert’s Administration 1971 – 1980
Oxford University Press, A short history of ‘pro-poor policy’ 1970–2010
Agriculture and Rural Development Research II Public Policy II: International
Monetary Fund: Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSP). Last updated: Wednesday,
December 28, 2016
Ellen Johnson Recovery Policy: Decentralization in Liberia: A giant leap into the
future: Posted by admin on Saturday, February 21, 2015
Robbert Quiminee is a Liberian writer and activist. This article is his insight on Liberia’s struggle toward Economic Recovery.
Live in Monrovia, Liberia
Email: [email protected]/ [email protected]
Top Related