A rational examination of the economic and social policies of the Johnson-Sirleaf administration

 Thursday, October 12, 2006   

             By Paul Jebbah Albert

This is a rejoinder to the article published on September 13, 2006 by the Perspective website titled, “In Defense of a thoughtful Social Policy.”  I will attempt to take a critical look at some premises which Dr. Emmanuel Dolo puts forth with regards to finding the solutions to the break down of the social structure in Liberia. 

Dr. Dolo begins his essay by demonstrating his understanding of the prevailing social conditions in Liberia, its genesis and the accompanying effects of rabid crimes throughout the country. To state some of his key points, “In every household, community, and the larger Liberian Society, the predominant reality is rage, grief, terror, emotional tensions, loss of inner strength, nervousness, self-loathing, chronic poverty and many other perilous conditions – linked for the most part to the heinous offenses that people witness and an/or directly suffered during 14 years of war.” 

He goes on to say,  “No matter how the war operates in each life, the government has the responsibility to create pathways and social conditions under which all Liberians can lead productive lives.” 

Also, he gives a roadmap as to what the Johnson-Sirleaf administration can do to restore individuals who have been marred by the scars of the tragedy back to normalcy.  As he puts it, “To fully restore Liberian society to place where the scars of the war are healed, interventions will have to occur at three levels, involving the public, private, and civic sectors individually or collaboratively.”  “Three forms of damage have been done to the Liberian psyche which must form the core of social policy.”  “Understanding the nature of and categorizing how people were affected by the war, and the barriers specific categories of citizens, face in accessing mainstream society is crucial to designing interventions to meet their needs:  formal, informal, or otherwise.” 

I agree with Dr. Dolo about the many prevailing social conditions in our country, and the need to urgently address these issues.  Notwithstanding, I do not agree with the causes to which he attributes the problems.  Moreover the methodologies that he is recommending to remedy the situation are obscured. 

“To begin with, Dr. Dolo discredits the Johnson-Sirleaf administration for prioritizing the economic policy over the social policy.” He begins by asking this question, “How do I know that lopsided investments are made in economic policy over social policy?” He responds to this question by saying that he draws his conclusion from three indicators. According to him, “The first clue is the fact that armed robbery is overtaking the nation and acting as a drag on national security and quality of life.”

To begin with, I do not believe that the Johnson-Sireleaf administration is lopsided on the social policy front.  The problem is an inadequate lack of funds and severe budgetary constraints!  I wonder where was Dr. Dolo a few months ago prior to President Johnson-Sirleaf’s recent visit when she unequivocally and explicitly admitted during a question and answer session, that the nation’s coffer (treasury) was completely bankrupt, looted, and/or depleted?

Even though economic policies and social policies are of equal importance, nevertheless no matter how an individual may view it, the preponderance of the argument is in favor of the economic rationality given the exigencies of the time, and the administration’s limited capacity to distribute goods and services among all the competing resources.  This does not go to say either that the administration should turn a deaf ear to the social policy needs of the country, when the availability of funds are optimum. But this is not the case.

On the issue of armed robbery:  In most industrial nations, there is a correlation between crimes and the economy.  When the economy is good the crime rate reduces.  But when it is bad the crime rate increases.  I buttress this fact with a case in point:  To an economist, “President Kennedy’s “rising tide lifts all boats” means an expanding economy translates into higher living standards, improvements in the distribution of income across classes, and lower poverty rates.”  “All of these factors contribute to the stylized fact that crime rates tend to fall when the economy is booming.”  “…However, it makes sense that for some segments of the population desperate economic conditions can lead to desperate acts.” (CASE & FAIR, pg. 557).  This latter explanation underscores my previous point that even though Dr. Dolo strongly supports giving equal attention to both social and economic programs, nevertheless there is a compelling argument for why the economic rationality is taking precedence over the social one.

The second indicator that Dr. Dolo attributes to the result of the government’s lopsided investment is, according to him, “…Government’s response urging citizens to engage in vigilante justice against the scourge of armed robbery.”  The answer is obvious.  As I indicated earlier, people resolve to desperate measures during bad economic conditions. W.W. Willoughby, a renowned sociologist, once said, “Where men are apt from necessities, they are likely to forget their moral obligations.” This is not a justification for people to commit crimes at the anomic (lawlessness) level that Dr. Dolo describes.

Unfortunately, it is a fact of life for modern societies. And for this reason, humanitarian organizations like the UN, Catholic relief groups, non-governmental officials deployed their personnel and services in Liberia after the civil war, because they saw the unimaginable consequences of the human carnage, and the government’s inability to deal with its social dimension, while at the same time undertaking the daunting (overwhelming) task of economic development. Among the many programs that they have initiated in Liberia have been disarming the warring factions, de-traumatizing the war victims, re-integrating some into the society, etc. Their presence in Liberia is not a futile (useless) exercise.

With regards to vigilante justice, I do not see what is so much alarming about it. Citizens have the right to form groups to protect themselves, their personal property and/or safeguard their personal interest.  Is this not so, even in the great United States of America?  As one travels the length and breadth of the United States, one would see community/citizen watch group signs posted throughout neighborhoods and communities. Should we conclude then that because of the visibility of these signs, it is an indicator that the Federal Government is being lopsided on how it allocates funds – giving greater attention to economic programs over social ones?

In explaining his third indicator, Dr. Dolo says, “The third indicator is the fact that in much of the government’s public relations campaign, it has made concerted efforts to announce its economic recovery initiatives:  the National Investment Commission (NIC) attracting new businesses or the Finance Ministry increasing revenue collection, but relatively limited attention, in my view, has focused on social policy milestones.”  There we go again.  I understand that the Johnson-Sirleaf administration is not placing equal importance on both social and economic programs as explained by Dr. Dolo, and that the economic ones tend to outweigh the social ones.  But considering all the prevailing factors, this can be rationally understood.  How can the administration pursue a vigorous social agenda, or undertake other major capital expenditures, when its revenue generating capacity is in disarray?  This is why the NIC is aggressively creating investment opportunities in order to attract businesses into the country, expand the economy and augment the national revenues.  Only then can the government be able to allocate needy funds towards Social Policies and other vital programs. 

It is irrefutable that the civil war has left Liberia in shambles and we are in a big mess! The questions that we as Liberians living in the Diaspora should be asking ourselves now are, what can we do to improve the lot of our brothers and sisters in Liberia, and not what only the Johnson-Sirleaf administration can do for them. More so, in what meaningful ways can we assist the government to empower the citizenry, and inspire them towards self-help initiatives? 

If I may make a case in point:  Israel has a booming agro-industrial complex today, which has become the pride and envy of friends and foes.  But this did not happen overnight. After the Arthur Balfour Declaration, proponent of a Jewish homeland, Israelis and Jews alike began immigrating to Palestine in droves.  The areas allocated for agricultural ventures were barren and infertile. Notwithstanding the government launched a vigorous reclamation program aimed at inundating the soil and reforesting the area.

And as patriotic as they can be, Jews and Israelis living in the Diaspora came to the clarion call of their government. And in no time, millions of cash remittances were sent to their homeland to undertake this all-important project.  The government was able to undertake and complete the gargantuan task.  And today, it is regarded by many as one of the most brilliant technological endeavors to be undertaken and brought to fruition by a group of resolved people.  This would not have happened was it not for the resilience and collective efforts of Jews and Israelis alike.

Back to my topic. I interjected the above scenario to make a point.  I do not know the accurate statistics of the number of Liberians living in the Diaspora most especially in the United States.  But say for example, if 100,000 Liberians were to tax themselves like $100.00 per capita, the gross total would be $10,000,000.00 if successfully collected. In reality, the total Liberian population in America far exceeds a hundred thousand. One cannot imagine the incalculable dividends that we would reap if close to a million of us were to tax ourselves $100.00 per capita and that amount was collected. Now government could then concentrate on the  implementation of a vibrant, social policy agenda as is adamantly defended by Dr. Dolo, while at the same time forge an aggressive economic platform, because economic stability begets political stability vice versa.    

Liberians in the Diaspora can conceptualize the Jewish paragon (model) of self-help through collective involvement within our own cultural setting, provided we have a quality leadership that can organize and mobilize us towards the achievement of a common goal. Let us face the facts.  We cannot rely on a moribund and emaciated economy to do the many things that we need to do in order to help our people.  But we can undertake self-help initiatives.  If we talk the talk, we got to sometimes walk the walk.

Let me make this suggestion. Dr. Dolo eloquently articulates a social policy agenda and for this reason, I make this pledge.  If he can marshal the efforts in setting up a national social policy trust fund and call on Liberians to contribute per se $100.00 per person, I will transmit mine as soon as possible.  My e-mail address is above.

Among the many social policy implications, which Dr. Dolo wrote about is the mention that over the last few years, there have been a profusion of scholarly writings, which has certainly enlarging people’s views of the causes of the war.  Nevertheless, the administration has done nothing to avail itself of the new knowledge.  According to him, “The seeming lopsided focus on economic development at the expense of psychosocial development, points to the fact that the government has yet to marshal the burgeoning new knowledge to support its policy making.”

Let me say this.  I do not read minds and furthermore, I am far removed from the true realities in Liberia.  But from what I observed in some of the “scholarly publications” to which Dr. Dolo alludes, the reasons why the administration is probably resigned to utilizing those resources are  because the publications are confined only to intellectual abstractions and incessant colloquies.  Moreover, they are terminologically and logically vague.  Perceptively, and for their own intended purposes, one could make the argument that they are brilliantly authored. Notwithstanding, their lack of statistical and empirical entities  render them impracticable to a certain degree.  The problems in Liberia do not lend themselves only to moral, theoretical and ethical objectives, but largely to material and practical factors.

Say for example, in Dr. Dolo’s essay under the subject heading, “Understanding the Nature of Damage Caused by the War,” he explains the nature and cause of the war and in turn makes some recommendations on how to mitigate “psychosocial problems” through interventions.  Nevertheless, he plainly states that his explanations are  “unscientific categories of the damage inflicted by the war on the Liberian people,” and that there is “absolutely no science behind his descriptions.” Now, this is precisely what I alluded to in the preceding paragraph.

With all due deference to Dr. Dolo, he wrote a very informative and argumentative essay. But all things considered, people are less likely to accept publications of an expert nature if empiricism (observable facts) are disregarded.  To make an analogy:  What bank will extend a loan to a potential entrepreneur, if his business plan does not exhibit crystal, clear figures, forecasts and analysis?  No doubt, it may not be in all circumstances, but the numbers do speak!

I would imagine that any expert who will attempt to scrutinize the social ails of our society as well as offer practical solutions to the government, will take into account the setting up of  strategic and operational plans to cover the 15 political subdivisions of the country.  The challenge would be to develop broad range objectives and design measurable, flexible, and achievable goals to meet those objectives.  Issues like budgetary expenditures, wages and training of personnel, cost of technology, must be given serious aforethought. In terms of the prevailing circumstances in Liberia, that individual must also be able to identify an alternative source of funding in that the government may not have the funds for the project. I do not imply that this approach is confined to the social policy agenda only, because it can be generically applicable to other vital programs.

Dr. Dolo mentioned about revisiting the prospects of placing the implementation of social policies under the purview of the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare.  But as he is already aware, social policies and the administration of a national health care delivery system in Liberia have long been under the umbrella of this ministry.  To strike a personal note:  I, the author of this paper, worked at that ministry as an administrative secretary before coming to the United States. It is still in existence and as I am told there are still a lot of qualified and trained health care personnel who work there.  The solutions to the paralysis at this ministry lend themselves to budgetary considerations. 

Last, Dr. Dolo concludes his essay by expressing some disappointment in the legislators of Liberia.  According to him, “The legislators who write and pass laws too, have not seen value in asserting much power behind the executive branch to change the dynamics either, which leaves me wondering if at all change is ever to come in the conditions prevailing in our country.”

Nevertheless, Dr. Dolo will be surprised to know, that legislators are not omniscient (having all knowledge) and therefore lack the ability to deal with the many aspects of today’s society.  And this is so, even in the great United States of America.  Legislators are “generalists”.  They know a little about a lot, but are rarely, if ever, experts in all areas under their power.  This is where government ministries like the one, which I just mentioned above and administrative agencies come in. They are setup to broaden the scope of statutory law.

The problems that beset Liberia are manifold, but the resources are meager.  Notwithstanding, with a dynamic leadership, we, the Liberians living in the Diaspora, can become an integral part in rebuilding our country. This can only be done by putting our petty differences aside, coming together and mobilizing our resources to help in its reconstruction. “We may disagree, but we should always remain agreeable…”  (Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr).

 Paul Jeebah Albert lives in Spencer, North Carolina. He can be reached at albrtpaul@aol.com