AFRICAN PANORAMA
Liberia, a country ranked as the 2nd poorest country in the world, is set for a presidential runoff on November 8, 2011. Its shameful poverty status is not due to the lack of natural resources, because the value of its natural resources exported in the 1970s ranked Liberia as second to Japan in term of per capital income. In fact the exploitation of its resources in the 70s bred the fourteen-year civil war.
As part of the efforts to prevent another civil war, stakeholders and the World Bank instituted a capitalistic economic system which is guided by President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, who was democratically elected. After five years and a half, coupled with huge donations in billions of dollars, and $16 billion dollar private investments, basic necessities such as safe-drinking water, electricity, roads, hospitals, etc are lacking in many parts of the country. In fact Global Witness and International Transparency said corruption is rampant in Liberia.
With the gap between the poor and the elites growing, and the possibility that the government and big business might be negotiating new concessionary agreements, every concerned party is working to influence the results of the election. Big business wants to prevent any re-negotiation of sweet heart deals already signed; and is scheming for more sweet heart deals. On the other hand, many Liberians, who live in abject poverty, are hoping that either of the candidates would modify the concessionary agreements. More so, they hope that President Sirleaf or her opponent, Counselor Winston Tubman, descendants of Liberian elites, would end awarding sweet heart deals to investors.
The million dollar question is will free and fair elections improve the living conditions of Liberians or shift more benefits of Liberia's resources to big business? Some Liberians, especially President Sirleaf's supporters, believe that good things are yet to be achieved if the President is re-elected. Certainly, for some non-Liberians, free and fair election, held in country with "Plantation Economy," has not, and will not create an environment for everyone to share in a country's prosperity. For example, "Occupy Wall" protesters are focusing less on election results; rather, they are outraged at the economic system that has created an environment for big business to bankrupt the country. Back in the 1930s, when housing prices collapsed by 80% nationwide, due to depression," U.S. Citizens didn't end their outrage at elected officials, but also at the economic system that allowed big business to perpetuate greed.
Arguably, if free and fair election alone would reduce unemployment, then President Barack Obama would have created an environment for employment to increase. Instead, an economic system, that has been perceived to be reformed after the 1930's financial meltdown, ended up collapsing within few months after white America, in an unprecedented manner, elected the first black man to occupy the White House. Now, on President Obama's watch, eighty-nine percent of Americans say wealth should be redistributed because U.S.'s economic policy favors big business. (NY Times, 10/22/11). What an irony, since President Obama was elected to reform the economic system.
It is not only in Liberia and, or America where free and fair election has not benefited the poor. In India, the largest democratic country in the world, the gap between the haves and the haves-not continues to grow. Ironically, where there is no free and fair election, for example in China, only 36% of Chinese live on $2 per day as compared to 76% in India. In mother Africa, two countries, with significant natural resources (Sierra Leone, with diamond and Libya, with oil), have implemented two different economic systems. Libya, which instituted a socialistic system, but did not have election, has $150 billion dollar in cash reserves, zero external debt, 82% literacy rate, low rate of unemployment, etc. Sierra Leone, which conducts free and fair elections, but has an economic system that gives sweet heart deals to investors, has huge debt, high rate of unemployment, high rate of illiteracy, limited funds for government to provide basic needs for its citizenry.
But why is it that the process of election does not restrain investors from manipulating the economic system? Or how does Firestone, Mittal Steel, or Chevron, get the goodies, while ordinary Liberians hold the empty bag? The answer lies in the economic system, says Robert Reich, the former Secretary of Labor under President Clinton. In his recent book, called Super-capitalism, he concluded that the capitalistic system allows big business to dictate every policy of a nation-state.
Firestone would have advocated for an educational policy if Liberia were manufacturing tires, etc. However, since Firestone, Diamond dealers, Gold investors or Mittal Steels, does not need an educated workforce, Firestone, etc would not make profits if Liberia invested in education. Additionally, profit-making professions such as physicians, lawyers or accountants do prohibit a dramatic increase in the number of professionals. Why? Again, common sense suggests that an increase in the number of professionals does reduce profits as reported by Milton Freedman. In his classic book Capitalism and Freedom, Friedman describes the American Medical Association (AMA) as the “strongest trade union in the United States” and documents the ways in which the AMA vigorously restricts competition.
Now you can imagine why investors need partners at the Executive Mansion and at the Capitol Building in Liberia. This is because politics is a self-interest endeavor, according to the late U.S. Representative and Speaker, Thomas P. "Tip" O'Neill. A contributor begets a favor. Firestone, Mittal Steel, etc are going to want a friend at the Executive Mansion someone like President Sirleaf and candidate Tubman who do embrace "Plantation Economy." I guess, preferring to keep President Sirleaf, many praises were bestowed upon her just few months before the 2011 elections. In the 2009/2010 World Bank Report, the World Bank honored President Sirleaf as the "Global Reformer;" in May 2010, Newsweek Magazine called President Sirleaf the "Sub-Saharan Africa's Rebuilder; in September of 2010, UK Magazine, The Economist named President Sirleaf "Liberia's Best President Ever." In 2011, Harvard University honored President Sirleaf as its Keynote Speaker. Then of course, in less than one week to the October 11, 2011 elections, she received the prestigious Nobel Peace Prize Award. Some people, including her opponent, Presidential candidate, Winston Tubman, believe that the Peace Prize Award was intended to present President Sirleaf to the voters as the best candidate.
In a capitalistic society, whether in an advanced country or under-developing country, only those concerned parties with money usually dictate policies, be it free and fair election, or be it a rigged election.
By
J. Yanqui Zaza
October 30, 2011
LIBERIA'S ELECTION: MORE SWEET HEART DEALS FOR FIRESTONE, CHEVRON, ETC...
LIBERIA'S ELECTION: MORE SWEET HEART DEALS FOR FIRESTONE, CHEVRON, ETC...
