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, ldodoo@frontpageafricaonline.com).

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: mbf_friendship@yahoo.com/ robertquiminee@gmail.com