|
|
Liberia election provokes protests
BARING ANY unexpected eventuality, Liberia, the
first republic in Africa, has produced the first elected female
president in the continent, though this is not the first time a woman
has led the war-ravaged country.
George Weah, a former world ‘footballer of the
year’, and his party, Congress for Democratic Change (CDC), have
challenged the yet to be officially declared victory of Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf,
a former officer of the World Bank, alleging fraud in the run-off
election. The Supreme Court rejected the CDC’s claim and referred it to
the National Electoral Commission (NEC), which has begun an
investigation. According to the NEC, Johnson-Sirleaf got 59.4% of the
votes and Weah 40.6%. Weah had won the first round with about 30%, not
enough to form a government as the constitution requires a minimum of
51%.
Meanwhile, the 18 CDC members of parliament have
threatened to boycott the legislature if the alleged massive electoral
fraud is not adequately addressed. The CDC is the biggest party in the
national assembly. International observers judged the election free and
fair. But the thousands of people, mostly youth, who took to the streets
on 11 November to protest the allegedly questionable result, were not
surprised at their verdict. A 53 year-old unemployed man told UN news
agency, IRIN: "The United Nations is not neutral. The international
community is in cahoots with Ellen".
This reflects the general feeling of the protesters.
The high-handed response of the UN police in the capital, Monrovia, to
the protesters led to two people being injured and further fuels the
suspicions of complicity of the so-called ‘international community’ in
the electoral process.
The ‘international community’, a euphemism for world
imperialism and its various agents, like a leopard that does not change
its spots, is not naturally expected to be comfortable with Weah’s
support base, which is mostly dominated by youth, the unemployed and the
poor seeking a break from the old order. Although Weah does not put
forward any programme that is fundamentally different from that of
Johnson-Sirleaf or which could guarantee a turnaround of the devastated
economy, he is seen as untainted and neutral, a symbol of the much
desired peace and change.
Many of Weah’s supporters see Johnson-Sirleaf, a
former minister of finance who once supported militia leader Charles
Taylor in the civil war, as one of the elitist clique that has ruined
the country in its quest for power. Most of Liberia’s 100,000
ex-combatants, irrespective of which faction they were in, back Weah.
Such a social base and high expectations could push Weah in
unpredictable directions. Thus, imperialism preferred not to trust him
with power, even more so when a true blue imperialist pupil was
available for the job!
World imperialism has vested economic interests in
Liberia. The Firestone Harbel rubber plantation, owned by the US, is the
biggest in the world, and sizeable amounts of crude oil have been
discovered along the Atlantic. The country is the second-largest
maritime licenser in the world, with more than 1,700 vessels registered
under its flag, including 35% of the world’s tanker fleet.
From all indications, Weah can only postpone the
official announcement of Johnson-Sirleaf as the winner of the 8 November
election. Weah has, in fact, spoken against mass protests, showing up
the contradictions between the pro-status quo Weah and most of his
supporters, who instinctively know that their aspirations cannot be met
without rocking the boat.
However, the fact that Weah’s ‘appeal’ was ignored
by his supporters on 11 November suggests that he may not be able to
totally control the protesters. They believe that the presidency of
Johnson-Sirleaf will mean government in the interests of international
finance capital and its local agents and not for the poor masses of
Liberia.
The ‘iron lady’ has not hidden her resolve to weld
the Liberian economy with iron hoops to the self-serving, anti-poor
policies of the World Bank and IMF. When asked to react to the suspicion
of people against a close economic relationship with international
finance institutions, Johnson-Sirleaf said: "I don’t see anything wrong
with that. After all, we are going to take ownership of our economic
programme here, if we work with the IMF and the World Bank and they
provide the money, what is wrong?" (Lagos Guardian, 13 November)
Yes, Liberia may be allowed to evolve its
‘home-grown’ economic programme. It has a Harvard-trained, World
Bank-groomed expert as its new president. But, just like Nigeria’s
National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy, such economic
packages are drawn up by, and subject to, strict monitoring of the
imperialist finance institutions. They put their money where their
self-serving economic interests are best protected and investment can
yield super-profits, which is always at the gross expense of the poor
working people.
Liberia – along with other war-devastated countries,
like Somalia, Sudan and Côte d’Ivoire – has just been enlisted in the
Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) programme of the World Bank and
IMF, a step towards getting relief from its $3 billion ‘external debt’
burden. The creditors will not reduce, let alone forgive, this so-called
debt – which is miniscule to world imperialism but a huge amount to a
badly ravaged economy – without Liberia being made to pay a hard price.
Liberia is at the ‘pre-decision point’, the first
stage. This means that it should have started servicing its debt and
begun implementing harsh economic policies, as dictated by the World
Bank and IMF. The new government has to intensify neo-liberal policies
which include cuts in government spending, privatisation, trade
liberalisation, downsizing, etc, to successfully pass through the
three-stage programme and be entitled to cancellation of its
multilateral debt.
The neo-liberal attack that Johnson-Sirleaf is set
to prescribe as the ‘medicine’ for the socio-economic ailment Liberia
suffers, will further compound the perilous situation of the country.
Although the 14-year war badly destroyed the fabric of the country, the
economy had been in tatters long before, due to similar pro-rich,
anti-poor policies and the characteristic corruption of the pre-war
governments, one of which Johnson-Sirleaf had served – as finance
minister under William Tolbert, who was overthrown and killed in 1980.
Already the human development indicators of Liberia
(estimated population, 3.6 million) are horrific. The 85% plus rate of
unemployment is the highest in the world. More than 80% live below the
poverty line ($1/day) and the level of illiteracy is over 80%. In 2000,
the most recent Unesco statistics available, 61% of primary school age
and 18% of secondary school age children were in schools. With the
destruction of the education system and emergence of child soldiers
during the war, current figures will be much worse. Life expectancy is
41 years for men and 43 years for women. For over a decade, Monrovia has
been without electricity and water, let alone the remote villages or
towns.
Liberia needs huge resources to turn around its
education system, healthcare and infrastructure, and to guarantee jobs,
food, shelter and the other basics of life. Liberia is rich with natural
resources, potentially making it one of the most prosperous nations in
Africa. Its main exports are iron ore, diamonds, timber, rubber, cocoa
and coffee. It has the recent crude oil discoveries and maritime
registry revenue.
The major obstacles in its path to economic recovery
are the deadly embrace of imperialist domination of the commanding
heights of its economy and capitalism’s profit motive. The neo-liberal
policies of discouraging public spending on social infrastructure and
basic needs, which the new government is set to embrace as an article of
faith, will not provide any way out for the mass of the population.
The support which the CDC enjoys among the Liberian
masses and youth – based, of course, on the false assumption that Weah
is one of ‘their own’ – is a graphic illustration of the scope and
intensity of the mass support which a truly working people’s socialist
party could muster in the explosive situation that can develop.
Today, the organisations of Liberian workers are
weak, due to the devastating civil war. But the strike and protests in
April, including roadblocks in Monrovia, by Liberia Telecommunication
Corporation workers, showed that workers still retain the potential to
fight against neo-liberal attacks and raise political questions. The
experience of this election and the ‘iron lady’s’ government will,
undoubtedly, open up possibilities for the ideas of mass struggle and a
socialist alternative to gain support.
Peluola Adewale
Democratic Socialist Movement (CWI Nigeria)
|