
On July 26, 2024, Liberia celebrated its 177 years of independence. Dr. Robtel Neajai Pailey, a young Liberian lady, gave the oration, entitled: A Radical Agenda for Re-Imagining Liberia. Liberians expressed a mixed view of the speech. While the address talked about many issues, the opinions on the oration focused on what she said regarding the US. Most criticized the oration, saying Pailey disrespected America; condemned US relations with Liberia; and spoke without facts.
This paper briefly discusses the central points of the speech. Pailey urged that ‘dignity should define Liberians’. She spoke of Liberia’s historical role as a resilient nation against Western colonialism and racial prejudices. She called for the need to review the Liberian national motto; “The Love of Liberty Brought Us Here”, which is divisive and should be changed to “The Love of Liberty United Us Here”. In essence, the change would be inclusive, involving not only the settlers but also the native majority. It would enhance national unity.
Pailey criticized the Boakai administration, stating that he had made some wrongful judgments, including the appointments of people of questionable characters in key positions of trust; that he disregarded the rule of laws, disregarded tenure positions, and demonstrated the appearance of corruption, what she called the “Yellow Machines Gate”. She classified the Liberian lawmakers as lawbreakers. She called on President Boakai to withdraw the appointment of the head of the Office for the Establishment of the War and Economic Crimes Court. She viewed the appointment to represent a conflict of interest because the selected individual had served as a legal advisor to some of the individuals accused of war and economic crimes.
But she also gave recommendations to the president: While observing that President Boakai has a laundry list of desired deliverables, she advised him to choose a few that must be accomplished in six years. She said the president should “assemble a diverse and nationally representative team of competent and committed Liberians with integrity to devise mutually agreeable [and] time-bound deliverables”; and that the president should hold the team accountable. She suggested that “all appointees roll up their sleeves and get to work or move out of the way of progress.” “I propose using the phrase ‘dignity must define us’ as the unifying anchor for [the] administration’s national development plan. The process of managing change and delivering public goods must be Liberian-led, Liberian-financed, and Liberian-managed. I urge you to run the executive branch like the well-oiled machine it should be”, she advised, adding that President Boakai should have quarterly presidential town hall discussions on the state so that citizens can converse with [him] in real-time. “Mandate your ministers and heads of state-owned enterprises to do the same. The Liberian people elected an executive they presumed would be accessible and accountable.”
At the end of the address, Pailey advised Liberia to review its relationship with America; that the US has benefitted more from the relationship than what Liberia has received, that America was one of the last nations to recognize Liberia’s independence; and that the US seeks its best interest in a relationship. Hearing the orator’s view on America, Ms. Rodrigue, the American Charge’ d’affaires, walked out from the gathering.
Critics of the orator included Rev. Luther Tarpeh, chairman of the ruling Unity Party, Economist Sam Jackson, the former ruling party Congress for Democratic Change, CDC, and some media outlets. The US Embassy in Monrovia issued a statement after the speech pointing out that the US spends $163 million annually on Liberia.
However, some Liberians backed the orator. For instance, Mr. Reeves, a Liberian in the US, supported the address, saying that she spoke the truth. Dr. Herbert Brewer commented that the speech is a sprinkling of brilliance. The Liberian government, through its spokesman, expressed that Dr. Pailey gave a personal opinion and the administration would consider some of her suggestions.
Did the orator speak the truths about Liberia-US relations? Let us look at the relations and the facts. Liberia, as a nation-state, came into existence from the US. Former enslaved Black settlers from America landed in Liberia in 1822. After wars and agreements with natives of the land, the settlers established Liberia, which gained independence in 1847 from the American Colonization Society (ACS). The organization transported and settled the emigrants. The US government supported ACS and Liberia. However, America did not recognize Liberia’s independence until 1862 during US President Abraham Lincoln's administration. The relationship and the support made Liberia an America’s stepchild, as the late Hon. Didwho Welleh Twe also observed.
Besides America helping the Liberian commonwealth, before independence, the US protected Liberia against slave traders and colonial aggression. Also, America assisted in the formation of the Liberian government. Indeed, a US Harvard professor helped write the Liberian constitution. The document was patterned after the American Constitution. America trained the Liberian Frontier Force. Also, America defended the Liberian government by sending a gunship, which bombed Sasstown villages in the Sasstown War of 1930-1936.
While the US gave financial support to Liberia since 1862, it did not offer Liberia the financial assistance, which Liberia urgently needed in the 1910s. For example, faced with financial difficulties during Daniel Howard’s presidency, Liberia asked the US government for a $5 million loan. America refused. Consequently, Harvey Firestone, an American capitalist, agreed to loan the money at 7% interest under the condition that Liberia would give “one million acres of land for 99 years at 6 cents per acre”. Firestone started the Firestone Rubber plantation in Liberia in 1928. However, the US broke diplomatic ties with Liberia when Liberia failed to make timely payments on the loan.
Moreover, Americans took control of the Liberian revenue until Liberia made the payment. Though Firestone’s operation helped employment in Liberia and made Liberian officials rich by becoming absentee rubber farmers, the company made millions of dollars, improving the US financial market, as rubbers became a demand commodity, particularly during WW II. During the war, Liberia allowed the landing of American military aircrafts at the Roberts International Airport. Further, by US influence and pressure, Liberia deported German citizens living in Liberia, broke diplomatic ties with Germany, and declared war on Germany. The action caused Liberia financial loss because Germany was its major trading partner. Also, Liberians who were children of German citizens became fatherless, creating economic hardship for the children's mothers. During the Cold War, “Liberia served to protect important U.S. facilities and investments and to prevent the spread of so-called Soviet influences.”
Firestone's plantation in Liberia gave America a financial edge over Great Britain, which during World I dominated the world rubber market. The monetary reward from Liberian rubbers to the US was far greater than what Liberia got from America. The US auto industry improved significantly since America did not depend on Britain for rubber supplies, i.e. tires.
According to the US Embassy, America spends $163 million yearly on Liberia. However, the US gives more to other countries, particularly Israel, though Liberia and America have a longer relationship than Israel. Both countries consider America their traditional friend. Liberia gave more to America than what Israel gave. However, Israel has clout in America. A US presidential candidate needs Jewish votes and support in an election. Liberia adopted American symbols as national identities, such as the Liberian flag. The flag is almost identical to that of the US. Liberia uses the American dollar as the national currency. Liberia named its capital city, Monrovia, after US President James Monroe. Liberia named many of its streets and towns after American states and individuals. Liberia supports US positions, including matters at the UN. Though these symbols, namesakes, and behaviors are nonmonetary, they are elements of association, influence, and control.
As indicated earlier, the independence address covered other important elements; unfortunately, the orator’s opinion on America dominated the reaction to the speech, making other major parts irrelevant. In addition to the recommendations above, she said that Liberians see corruption only in the government but “[fail] to realize that corruption begins in homes and communities, that corruption is a function of poverty and greed, and that a corrupt regime is a reflection of a corrupt society.”
She said, “While we modify our values from top to bottom, bottom to top, we must enforce already sound laws while building additional safeguards to curb corruption. We must strengthen judicial bodies and integrity institutions by populating them with impartial patriots, name and shame those found guilty of evading public trust, force them to restitute stolen funds/resources and then send them to jail! High-level corruption, in particular, is like mass murder and we must treat it like the egregious crime it is.”
She thinks that the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and their proxies in the UN “are not committed to the radical transformation required to re-imagine Liberia.” Therefore, Liberia should not allow them to “hijack our development process”. Also, she said that Liberia’s “socio-economic transformation must be internally driven and not be externally imposed!”
Normally, nations seek their national interest in their relationship with other nations. A diplomat can leave a gathering if the diplomat feels his/her country is mentioned negatively. Hence, contrary to others’ opinions, diplomat Rodrigues’ action should not be considered rude, disrespectful, or premature.
Further, Liberia is the oldest African republic. Yet the country is underdeveloped. Liberia financially depends on the Western powers, especially America. Liberian officials travel to other countries for healthcare. Liberia is among the poorest countries in the world. Published data indicate that the average Liberian lived on less than $1.25 daily. Yet some Liberian officials in the past earned over $25,000 monthly. Many parts of the country are inaccessible by roads, and over half of the nation has no electricity.
The orator did not say that the US fails to help Liberia or has not helped Liberia, but Liberia as a sovereign and independent nation should look inward, behave independently, and not see America as a stepfather. Liberia is not any country’s “stepchild”, as Dr. Pailey narrated. In other words, for Liberia’s age, it is not a “child”. It should be better off and not depend on America or any other nation.
However, America is not at fault for Liberia’s inability. The speech should blame Liberian past and present leaders for the cause of Liberia’s underdevelopment. Moreover, the orator appeared to hold the general opinion preached by others that all Liberians migrated to the land called Liberia and therefore, all Liberians were foreigners. This view does not consider the scholarly debate on African early migration. Some scholars argue that the Bantu people, early Africans, migrated from the West-Central to South-West Africa. Others hold the opposite. A source shows that “Homo sapiens may have lived in West Africa since at least between 780,000 BP and 126,000.” This information could suggest that “Liberia’s land was initially populated before the collapse of the African empires.” If the orator supports the South-West argument, then she contradicts her recommendation for changing the motto.
Considering America’s relation and assistance to Liberia as a commonwealth, why did not the US first recognize Liberia’s independence as a nation? US senators from the southern states did not support the independence. They saw Blacks as subhuman who should not head a nation. Remember that the southern states depended and promoted Black slavery in America. But also, the behaviors of the Liberian ruling elite may have added to the non-support: the government excluded the Liberian natives from citizenship of the new nation. Further, as Dr. Etrenda Dillon’s doctoral dissertation reveals, immediately upon independence, the ruling “Americo-Liberians passed a law prohibiting the education of any indigenous people. Failure to comply would lead to banishment from the country.” The elites feared that the education of the natives would dethrone the Americo-Liberians, who then constituted about 5% of the total population. The Americo-Liberians ruled and oppressed the natives. America condemned this constricted and suppressive behavior apparently causing the general withholding of the recognition. With the departure of the southern states from the US Congress during the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln, a president who championed the cause against Black slavery in America, saw the need during his administration to recognize the independence of a Black nation.
Independence Day celebration in Liberia is an important holiday, second to Christmas. The festival was well attended in Monrovia where the government held the occasion. Guests included members of the diplomatic corps, government officials, and representatives of civil groups. Interestingly, while the leading political parties condemned the oration, the government considered it an opinion worth considering, even though the speech criticized the administration.
I consider this year’s independence oration to be one of the best. Unlike some past orations that were politically glorifying, this address was clear, firing, fearless, and truthful.