[allAfrica.com]  [celtel.com]


Liberia: Matters Arising

The Analyst (Monrovia)
ANALYSIS
August 6, 2004
Posted to the web August 6, 2004

By H. Boima Fahnbulleh, Jr.

The near total destruction of the country and the absence of meaningful
employment opportunities for the majority of the people have made politics the
instrument of survival and recognition. From the seizing of a seat in the
National Assembly which allows for free travels, per diem, an expensive jeep
and a modicum of recognition in a country where the masses of the people live
in displaced centers and scavenge for food in the streets to the pretentious
ranting one reads on the various websites where people without any nobility of
character expiate absurdities with smugness under various pseudonyms, to the
fierce struggle over various ministries that has nothing to do with public
spiritedness, one gets the feeling that the destruction in Liberia has more to
do with the mind than with infrastructure and the family.
Politics has become an obsession because in the absence of other avenues for
advancement, people gravitate towards that which is considered an oasis of
survival and enrichment. This is given much emphasis by the experience of the
last two decades. From the emergence of Samuel Doe to Charles Taylor, the
people witnessed the transformation of impoverished individuals into corpulent
millionaires within a few years. This trend took on frightening dynamics not
only because Charles Taylor waded through blood and total destruction to
achieve his personal ambition but because the rules were established whereby
the ascendancy into politics and subsequently the corrupt enrichment of
individuals could be achieved through brutality, death and destruction as can
be seen from the people who emerged from the last mass killing and their agenda
for profiteering.
Politics in Liberia has ceased being about the public interest and the noble
inclination of public spiritedness. With the trauma of the mass killing over
the last fourteen years and the rewarding of offices to the perpetrators of
murder, rape and pillage, it has become established in the warped minds of
brigands that crime does pay and that ruthlessness is an asset in a society
where failures, cheats and lazybones only have to demonstrate their craving for
blood and murder to be accorded the status of leaders. This mindset is re-
enforced by the willingness of the people to accept the perversion that
politics is about the stomach and no matter how offensive the path taken to the
satisfaction of the craving of the stomach, so long as one eats today, tomorrow
doesn't matter. This is the context in which principles are sacrificed,
abandoned and negated and the future of the children are mortgaged on the altar
of greed, dishonesty and callous indifference. It is this atmosphere of immoral
trading for influence and prestige, of the sale of human dignity and the cheap
acquisition of status in a moribund society that has led to the upsurge of
wanton greed, dishonesty, pretences and that arrogance of the small minded that
emanates from being placed in a position of authority without the nobleness of
character.
With fifteen months to go before elections, everybody seems to be preoccupied
with who gets to the Executive Mansion. This has become an employment
opportunity for the many hangers-on, the rascals, the swindlers and the
lazybones. One would have thought that in a society emerging from a destructive
civil conflict, people who have a sense of public spiritedness and want to rule
a nation would submerge their ambition for now and get on with the task of
dealing with the urgent situation facing the refugees, the internally
displaced, the traumatized victims of rape, brutality, torture and abuse. One
would have expected everybody to become involved in various committees and
commissions to help with resettlement, identification of the dead and missing,
establishment of centers for orphans and urchins, the renovation of homes for
the elderly and the immersion in the distribution of food and clothes provided
by international relief agencies.
This would have started the process of humanizing the people after nearly
fourteen years of dehumanization.
Kindness to the downtrodden, the brutalized and the hapless is a demonstration
of the humane quality needed to build a society of human beings and not the
creation of a zoo of rapacious beings.
One is forced to ask: what kind of politics can any decent individual engage in
when the people are in rags, hungry, destitute and forlorn? Is it not obvious
that they will sell themselves to the highest bidder?
What kind of electioneering is this taking place in the midst of the continuous
intimidation and plundering in the countryside? What kind of politicians are
these who are so desperate to get into the Executive Mansion that they will
dance in the ashes of our national destruction when the blood on the ground is
still fresh from the victims who now hover in displaced centers mourning for
their loved ones whose bones are exposed to the beasts of the fields and the
vultures in the air? How can we take politicians seriously who begin a journey
of a thousand miles with the sprint of a one hundred yard dash when we know
that this journey will be long, arduous and difficult? The matter is simple:
either these politicians have not learned anything from their recent national
history or they are so dismissive of the people who they see as being only
interested in the politics of the stomach and not the destiny of their country.
It is often said that a people deserve the leaders they get!
The Election Commission has a responsibility to put an end to the present
charade. It has to be firm with its injunction. There is no place in the world
where people begin campaigning two years before an election.
The Commission has a timetable and can impose sanctions with drastic
consequences for any abridgement. Regardless of how members of this Commission
were selected-and there are individuals with questionable reputation as
members-the Commission must demonstrate understanding for the reservation of
citizens who have raised questions about the loyalty of certain individuals. An
individual who as recently as a year ago in Accra was heard over the BBC
vouching for a candidate and who campaigned relentlessly for that candidate in
the elections of 1997 cannot be considered impartial simply because he says he
is.
Partiality is a sentiment and does not evaporate simply because one says he
does not have any more loyalty. It is obvious that being a Commissioner is more
attractive than being a supporter of a candidate who is not certain of victory!
Human nature being what it is, human beings gravitate toward certainty and
realistic rewards rather than uncertainty and chance, especially when the
Election Commission has asked for millions of dollars to conduct an election
for less than a million voters! Thus, in the context of our electoral history,
it is necessary that certain individuals exclude themselves from the Commission
if they have any integrity. This will go a long way in reassuring certain
citizens that the process will be a bit fair and impartial. The failure to take
this route could plunge the nation into chaos after the elections with
accusations of rigging, ballot stuffing and electoral manipulation.
The Chairman and the deputy chairman of the interim administration ought to be
forceful in managing the affairs of the country. It is possible that they could
be in office for more than two years considering the general level of
paralysis, the tardiness of the process of disarmament, resettlement, resource
allocation from the international community and the inadequacy of funds to
conduct an election. The last time we prepared for an election, it took from
1993 to 1997! This was not due to the unwillingness of the various interim
administrations to hold elections but to the state of general instability and
the lack of financial resources. There could be a repetition with or without
the contrivance of those in power. Against this background, there is a
necessity for serious accounting of the meagre resources of the nation in order
to help with the process of resettlement, reconstruction and future elections
without waiting passively for the international community.
The cynical corruption and total disregard for accountability at the moment
demonstrate not only a high level of insensitivity but the entrenchment of the
mindset that one can engage in brigandage and barbarity in order to plunder the
state coffers without fear of punishment or sanctions. Recently, three assets
of the people of Liberia were sold in England and Nigeria. The reasons given
for the sale of these assets are so threadbare and simplistic that only fools
cannot see the mercenary intent of these transactions. In the case of England,
a house was sold for nearly four hundred thousand pounds, which is the
equivalent of $700,000.00 (Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars). The argument used
to justify the sale was that the building was crumbling and useless. Anyone who
lives in England knows that it is the land that is valuable in most cases. For
the sake of argument, even if the building was crumbling, the government could
get a loan from any bank in England for repairs since the property was valuable
as it was situated in an upmarket area. No sooner had this property been sold,
than the Chancery at Pembridge Road was sold. This is one of the most lucrative
housing areas in London.
Anyone who lives in London knows that the Borough of Kensington and Chelsea-
where the Chancery is located-is one of the most fashionable areas of London
where a property like the Chancery goes for anything between four and six
million pounds (between seven and ten million dollars).
We are told by those who are so ignorant of housing transactions in England
that they would shamelessly put out fairy tales to conceal their theft of the
people's resources that the Chancery was "in a dilapidated condition in
violation of the city ordinance." This is sheer nonsense. The property was not
in breech of any city ordinance in London. It was a high valued property in a
very expensive area. The spokesman said further that the Chancery was sold for
two million, one hundred thousand pounds which is the equivalent of three
million eight hundred thousand dollars. This is a barefaced lie! About five
years ago, the identical property was assessed for sale by the Taylor regime.
At that time, the property was evaluated at two million, five hundred thousand
dollars which is the equivalent of four million, five hundred thousand dollars.
Since then, the price of property in London has been rising by 20% a year. From
all indications, the Chancery could not have been sold for anything less than
four million pounds, which is the equivalent of seven million dollars. The
argument that a "five storey building" was purchased for one million, eight
hundred thousand pounds (three million, two hundred and fifty thousand dollars)
in the heart of London is comical. In London, it is not the size of the
building that is important but where it is located. A twenty-floor building
could be in a slum area or near a red-light district and it would not cost
much. In the same vein, a two-floor building could be in an upmarket area and
it would be very expensive. The spurious argument that it is near the Embassy
of Mozambique makes mockery of the longevity of our country's relationship with
the United Kingdom.
Mozambique purchased her embassy after relations were established with the UK
in the 70s and Maputo was determined to demonstrate her revolutionary socialist
credentials at the time by housing her embassy in a run down area of London.
What the spokesman for the Liberian government failed to tell the people is
that the embassies of Nigeria, Zimbabwe, Uganda, South Africa and a few others
are located in The Strand, a stone throw away from Whitehall, the center of
foreign policy making in the British Capital. These are all embassies
representing countries, which gained their independence in the latter part of
this century whilst a Liberian embassy has existed in the British Capital for
over a century.
A nation's pride depends on its projection abroad. It does not matter how poor
or underdeveloped a country is, in the context of diplomacy, respect is
bestowed depending on the calibre of men who represent the country, the
seriousness with which those who rule regard their mission and the projection
of the spirit of nationalism and dignity by those who speak in its name. For a
nation's flag to fly in a run down area near bargained shops and stores is an
insult to the honour and dignity of patriots living and dead.
Liberia, being the oldest Black Republic in Africa, asserted her status and
dignity in the British Capital for a long time by having her embassy in the
posh area of Knightsbridge at Prince's Gate. This embassy saw patriots like
C.L. Simpson, Sr., D. Lawrence, G.Brewer, F. Dennis and H. Moniba working
within its walls with their nationalistic presence. This was the embassy where
many African freedom fighters visited to seek help from the Liberian government
during the struggle for independence. It was at this very embassy that the
preparatory meetings for the first All-African Conference that took place in
Accra, Ghana in 1958 were held. It was an embassy with historical significance.
Then the small minded men around Samuel Doe who thought only of money and not
national dignity sold it for pittance at the time against the protest of Harry
Moniba. It was then that they bought the property at Pembridge Road, which has
now been sold by another bunch of small-minded men who think more of money than
the honour of the country.
In the United Kingdom, all transactions involving the sale of property and land
are in the public domain.
The Chairman and deputy chairman of the interim administration ought to set up
a committee composed of veteran diplomats of Liberia, members of the
International Contact Group and representatives of Transparency International
to investigate the sale of the house and the Chancery with the objective of
establishing accountability. Those found guilty of swindling the people should
be arrested and turned over to the Courts for prosecution. In a period when the
people are starving in refugee camps, the internally displaced cannot find
medicine, the schools are crumbling and the hospitals are chambers of diseases
and plague, it is criminal for any group of men to rob the country with
cynicism and put out lies as justification! An investigation must be done now
to set an example of those who believe in accumulating wealth at the expense of
the people's blood and agony!
As regards the embassy in Lagos, Nigeria, it is either that the spokesman for
the government is not smart or he has utter contempt for the people of Liberia.
There is no piece of land on Victoria Island around Adeola Adekun like the one
where the Liberian Embassy is situated that sells for less than five million
dollars. Anyone who has lived in Lagos and knows anything about the property
market will realise that the spokesman is playing games with the people's
property. How can one dispose of valuable property like the embassy in Lagos by
giving it to a company without any bid? What is done usually with the sale of
choice property like the one in Lagos is that the property is advertised in
newspapers by reputable Real Estate Agencies and the price stated. The giving
away of the people's property to a company with the argument that it would have
cost two million, four hundred thousand dollars if sold is to engage in crafty
speculation. One can reasonably assume that the entire process has been based
on a speculative venture. What is done here is that the property would be given
to a company for pittance. The company will give an undertaking to duplicate
the property in Abuja for the paltry sum agreed. In reality, the original
property is held for a few weeks or months and then sold for its rightful
value. In the case of the people's property in Lagos, this could go for as much
as eight million dollars.
Recently, a diplomat of a sister African country indulged in the same scam with
some Nigerians. The embassy was situated not far from the Liberian embassy but
in a less attractive area. The compound was taken for two million, five hundred
thousand dollars. Four months later, the compound was sold for five million
dollars. The diplomat who did the transaction resigned immediately from the
country's foreign service and set up business in Northern Nigeria. Suffice it
to say that in the case of the Liberian embassy compound, the same company that
has now been given the property made a proposal to Charles Taylor. At the time,
Taylor demanded four million dollars upfront. The deal fell through because the
company could not come up with the money. Today, we are told that this same
company will construct a compound in Abuja for two million, four hundred
thousand dollars. Can the people of Liberia be shown evidence that the compound
was assessed for this amount by Real Estate evaluators in Nigeria? Who has
given anyone the authority to dispose of the people's assets just after a year
in office? Why the urgency to sell these assets now when there are pressing
priorities on the home front if not for the sole intention of profiteering?
The interim government must set up the recommended committee to probe into the
sale of government assets abroad. This attitude has to stop whereby greedy
individuals without any sense of national honour dispose of valuable overseas
assets and pocket over sixty percent of the proceeds. This started with Samuel
Doe and his cronies. They sold the embassies in London and Nairobi. During the
interim government of Amos Sawyer, the embassies in Belgium and France were
sold. With Charles Taylor, everything was for sale including the embassies. The
ambassador's residence in London was sold and a private house bought by Taylor
in South Africa was rented to the Liberian government.
Now we have an interim administration that within three months has sold
overseas assets with an estimated value of over fifteen million dollars without
any accountability except what a spokesman says as if running a government
depends on words and not documentation and records!
Liberia's political malady is partly the responsibility of the international
community. The appeasement of the warring factions with jobs in Accra in 2003
allowed for the kind of irresponsible behaviour we are now witnessing. These
men without any constituencies or records of public service were forced on a
people who had experienced terrible brutality at their hands. This kind of
appeasement or abdication was tried in Sierra Leone with serious consequences
for its people. When the rebel group was asked to seek the people's mandate in
an election, it could not garner even five percent of the popular votes. This
lesson should have been instructive for Liberia. Instead of giving out jobs and
sinecures which have now led to the wholesale plundering of the nation's
resources and the prolongation of the agony of the people, the Liberian rebels
should have been given funds to organise their political parties, instructed to
disarm by the international community with dire consequences for the leaders in
the case of failure and be confronted with the possibility of trial by a war
crimes tribunal in case of the death of any UN soldier by their fighters. What
kind of justice can there be when the leader of a group that is responsible for
some of the worst murders and mayhem is given the ministry of justice? What
semblance of accountability can there be when those who plundered the resources
of the country during the years of fighting are given the key financial
institutions? How does one heal the wound of a traumatised people when those
accused of murder and rape exercise power with arrogance and indifference?
The international community has the power to change the situation in Liberia.
With over fifteen thousand troops, there has to be a consideration of peace
enforcement. It is an illusion to believe that disarmament is going smoothly.
It is sheer fantasy to believe that there were fifty thousand fighters in
Liberia. The culture does not have that kind of discipline to tolerate that
many men and women in arms without uncontrollable genocide. LURD and its
Southeastern wing called MODEL could not have had more than five thousand
fighters in all during the final phase of the offensive. The Taylor forces
could not have been more than ten thousand. There is a game of numbers being
played in Liberia, which could hamper all serious attempts to control the
situation effectively in the rural areas. The exaggerated figures create the
false impression of many trained idle hands and could lead to the recruitment
of innocent young people by those who still have designs on neighbouring
countries in the sub-region. By coming up with a realistic number, the process
of disarmament could be hastened and adequate programmes devised to assist the
young combatants with the limited resources at hand.
In concluding these matters, one has to give the Chairman a piece of advice. In
diplomacy, the leader of a country does not go to visit an ambassador as was
done recently with the Libyan ambassador. A leader is the embodiment of the
sovereign will of the people and stands above the petty formalities of
diplomatic interactions. It is degrading to bring oneself down to the level of
a protocol officer by visiting a foreign embassy. Experienced officials of the
foreign ministry could have alerted the Chairman that even the foreign minister
visits an embassy rarely and on those occasions when it is absolutely necessary
to do so.
The ambassador accredited to the country is the one who visits the foreign
minister. Liberia has a history of astute diplomatic interactions garnered over
a century of international diplomacy. The nation has bled sufficiently but its
vision must remain sharp in order to survive in a world of contending forces!
And what if the possibility of elections recedes as we move into 2005? Here the
Chairman has to begin to think constructively. To raise millions of dollars for
elections from any source at a time when the people do not have clean drinking
water, sufficient food, decent schools and hospitals, and the modicum of
civilized living with regular electricity is a tall order.
Maybe, it is necessary to begin to think of alternatives as we move into the
New Year. What about the possibility of a sovereign national conference next
year to discuss the issue of governance for another twelve months after October
2005? This will allow for the retrenchment of all unqualified rebel appointees
from the government and their replacement by competent Liberians, the
dissolution of the Legislative Assembly which is now dominated by men who
represent only themselves and others who represent warring factions and its
replacement by a council of twenty-five elders, the resettlement of our people
from refugee camps and those who are internally displaced, the conduct of a
national census, the conclusion of the reports of the committee charged with
investigating the sale of the people's assets and the prosecution and
punishment of those found culpable of theft, and the drawing up of a timetable
for elections in 2006. The present situation where rebel representatives will
go into an election exploiting the factor of incumbency in 2005 is dangerous.
Also, the conduct of elections without adequate preparations will not help in
establishing lasting peace.
One can heed these concerns of an ordinary citizen or one can reject them with
derision. Silence is not acceptable in the midst of our national calamity. Over
the past thirty-three years, the people have paid a terrible price for the
fecklessness of their national leaders. It is hoped that with our international
partners and with the vigilance of those who are our true friends, a difference
can be made in order to provide the children of tomorrow with the right
framework for reconstruction, reconciliation, stability and progress

   

  =============================================================================
  Copyright © 2004 The Analyst. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica
                         Global Media (allAfrica.com).
  =============================================================================