Violence on the post-African continent has long been viewed as an instrument for the allocation of resources i.e. as a determinant of who gets what, when and how. Its patrimonial social system has consistently ensured that accountability takes the form of redistribution, which is generally a matter of perception depending on its beneficiaries. While this perception may be true, in the case of Liberia, I found the global character of the conflict and its local economic implications an interesting subject matter. After watching the educational video titled ‘Iron Ladies; Road to Reconciliation’ these factors seemed to resonate on all levels of the society. As such, the objective of this essay is two-fold; first, reflect on the role of Liberia’s international partners, especially Firestone Rubber Company, secondly, land control and distribution after the 14 year civil war. The essay opens with a brief descriptive background of Liberia up to the civil war in order to give historical guidance to the essay. This will be followed by an assessment of Firestone Rubber coy looking at their roles, interests during and after the Liberian civil war and then an analysis of the allocation of resources, especially Land during and after the civil war. This essay concludes that the role of monopolies and land grabbing in Liberia is an example of how state accountability in Liberia and post-colonial Africa is becoming more an external affair. States are more accountable to the vagaries of their international donors than the people, a situation that nourishes the roots of violence on the continent.
Background
Settlement of freed slaves from the US in what is today Liberia began in 1822; by 1847, the Americo-Liberians were able to establish a republic. William Tubman, president from 1944-71, did much to promote foreign investment and to bridge the economic, social, and political gaps between the descendants of the original settlers and the inhabitants of the interior. In 1980, a military coup led by Samuel Doe ushered in a decade of authoritarian rule. In December 1989, Charles Taylor launched a rebellion against DOE's regime that led to a prolonged civil war in which DOE was killed. A period of relative peace in 1997 allowed for an election that brought TAYLOR to power, but major fighting resumed in 2000. An August 2003 peace agreement ended the war and prompted the resignation of former president Charles TAYLOR, who was convicted by the UN-backed Special Court for Sierra Leone in The Hague for his involvement in Sierra Leone's civil war. After two years of rule by a transitional government, democratic elections in late 2005 brought President Ellen JOHNSON SIRLEAF to power. She subsequently won re-election in 2011 and remains challenged to rebuild Liberia's economy, particularly following the 2014-15 Ebola epidemic, and to reconcile a nation still recovering from 14 years of fighting. The UN Security Council in September 2015 passed Resolution 2239, which renewed the mandate for the UN Mission in Liberia for another year. In July 2016, the UN handed over peacekeeping responsibility to Liberia and reduced the UN troop presence, which now serves a support role.
Actor Analysis; Firestone Rubber Company
Established in 1926, Firestone Rubber Company was favoured for a 1 (one) million acre piece of land for the value of 6 cents per acre for a period of 99 years. Firestone also provided a $5 million loan at a 7% interest rate to the government to pay the foreign debts it had and to build a harbour needed by Firestone. The loan was given in exchange for complete authority over the government's revenues until the loan was paid, thus solidifying its place as the main source of foreign revenue for the country. The loan took (and continues to take) a larger and larger portion of the Liberian government's incomes: it grew from 20% of the total revenue of Liberia in 1929, to 32% in 1930, to 54.9% in 1931 and nearly the whole revenue in 1932. Currently the company and the Liberian government signed a new 37-year deal raising the lease to 50 cents per acre. The company argues that it has been responsible for opening the country to global market for raw markets and foreign direct income. However this position is flawed in that, such acts has come at a dire cost to the economic recovery plan of the country. By sustaining Liberia’s economic dependence through uneven trade deals, high handed diplomacy, and deplorable working conditions, Firestone at best can be seen to be enhancing the patron-client relationship between the two partners.
Furthermore, new investigations into its role during and after the civil war calls into question the company’s transparency records in its adherence to international codes of conducts especially on human right protection. The relationship between Firestone leadership and Charles Taylor (instigator of the civil war) was remarkable as the warlord used the plant as his base of operations in a civil war. The investigation revealed that between 1989 and 1992, Firestone struck a deal with the warlord and channelled millions of dollars to Taylor in exchange for being able to keep the profitable rubber business in operation. In the words of the US chief of missions at the time, he said "I believe they facilitated a warlord in his insurrection and in the atrocities that he created…”. Furthermore, in a UN report titled "Human Rights in Liberia’s Rubber Plantations: Tapping into the Future" (2006), Firestone managers in Liberia admitted that the company does not effectively monitor its own policy prohibiting child labour. UNMIL found that several factors contribute to the occurrence of child labour on Firestone plantations: pressure to meet company quotas, incentive to support the family financially, and lack of access to basic education. The report also noted that workers' housing provided by Firestone has not been renovated since the houses were constructed in the 1920s and 1930s. On the country’s road to reconciliation, Liberia will need to revisit the activities, terms and conditions between international companies like Firestone Rubber coy. At the meagre cost of 50 cents per acre, the country can and should raise the social responsibilities of such companies.
Land Control & Distribution
While watching the documentary on Iron Ladies (more than 60 minutes), I noticed that only one thing was able to reduce the lead female character to tears. No, it wasn’t the level of carnage caused by the civil war neither was it the return of Charles Taylor. It was the land dispute she had with a bodyguard of the president and the failure of responsible agency to effectively adjudicate in the issue. After years of conflict, Liberia’s land management is in a state of disarray. Land records are missing, difficult to search for or at risk of deteriorating. From the outset, the Liberian government operated under dual systems of laws and policies — one for the coastal Americo-Liberians and the other for indigenous Africans living in the hinterlands. Land tenure for the Americo-Liberians were based on English common law (or “statutory rights”). The indigenous people governed themselves using their own “customary” fashion based on community rights. At the same time, the government has long allocated large land concessions to private sector investors like timber, mining, and agriculture firms — often without the knowledge of the people already living there. The concessions bar the indigenous communities from the land they have occupied for generations. It is this safe to say that, at the heart of all civil conflicts in Liberia has been land distribution. There will need to be a land reform policy that gives the country ‘lordship’ over the land. The country should be encouraged to diversify its methods of safeguarding land rights. The land administration framework should be automated by the use of technology to ensure confidentiality, accountability and assurance that information stored can be accessed when required for resolving land disputes.
Such a system should be easy to use, mobile, spatially enabled, flexible, quick to implement, scaleable, and cost effective, reflecting Liberia’s ethnically diversified country and lack of state wide infrastructure such as connecting roads (Liberia has a little above 657 kilometres of paved roads), Literacy rate (Liberia a literacy rate of slightly below 57%). Such a system would offer a safety lock against land grabbing activities by international companies such as Firestone Company, transnational logging and diamond mining along the Liberia-Sierra Leone border. Also, data can be pulled up to determine the effective distribution of land resources.
Conclusion
In thinking about African security especially in the 21st century, one has to put in mind that violence in post-colonial Africa shares more than just barbarism and ethnicity/cultural traditions in common. Most of the time they also have a history of being peripherally included in the economic structures and processes of the country, in this case Liberia. Also, a case must be made for African state accountability to its citizens in terms of equitable and effective distribution of wealth. Finally, the role of technology will also play a role in shaping the affairs of security studies on the continent.
Background
Settlement of freed slaves from the US in what is today Liberia began in 1822; by 1847, the Americo-Liberians were able to establish a republic. William Tubman, president from 1944-71, did much to promote foreign investment and to bridge the economic, social, and political gaps between the descendants of the original settlers and the inhabitants of the interior. In 1980, a military coup led by Samuel Doe ushered in a decade of authoritarian rule. In December 1989, Charles Taylor launched a rebellion against DOE's regime that led to a prolonged civil war in which DOE was killed. A period of relative peace in 1997 allowed for an election that brought TAYLOR to power, but major fighting resumed in 2000. An August 2003 peace agreement ended the war and prompted the resignation of former president Charles TAYLOR, who was convicted by the UN-backed Special Court for Sierra Leone in The Hague for his involvement in Sierra Leone's civil war. After two years of rule by a transitional government, democratic elections in late 2005 brought President Ellen JOHNSON SIRLEAF to power. She subsequently won re-election in 2011 and remains challenged to rebuild Liberia's economy, particularly following the 2014-15 Ebola epidemic, and to reconcile a nation still recovering from 14 years of fighting. The UN Security Council in September 2015 passed Resolution 2239, which renewed the mandate for the UN Mission in Liberia for another year. In July 2016, the UN handed over peacekeeping responsibility to Liberia and reduced the UN troop presence, which now serves a support role.
Actor Analysis; Firestone Rubber Company
Established in 1926, Firestone Rubber Company was favoured for a 1 (one) million acre piece of land for the value of 6 cents per acre for a period of 99 years. Firestone also provided a $5 million loan at a 7% interest rate to the government to pay the foreign debts it had and to build a harbour needed by Firestone. The loan was given in exchange for complete authority over the government's revenues until the loan was paid, thus solidifying its place as the main source of foreign revenue for the country. The loan took (and continues to take) a larger and larger portion of the Liberian government's incomes: it grew from 20% of the total revenue of Liberia in 1929, to 32% in 1930, to 54.9% in 1931 and nearly the whole revenue in 1932. Currently the company and the Liberian government signed a new 37-year deal raising the lease to 50 cents per acre. The company argues that it has been responsible for opening the country to global market for raw markets and foreign direct income. However this position is flawed in that, such acts has come at a dire cost to the economic recovery plan of the country. By sustaining Liberia’s economic dependence through uneven trade deals, high handed diplomacy, and deplorable working conditions, Firestone at best can be seen to be enhancing the patron-client relationship between the two partners.
Furthermore, new investigations into its role during and after the civil war calls into question the company’s transparency records in its adherence to international codes of conducts especially on human right protection. The relationship between Firestone leadership and Charles Taylor (instigator of the civil war) was remarkable as the warlord used the plant as his base of operations in a civil war. The investigation revealed that between 1989 and 1992, Firestone struck a deal with the warlord and channelled millions of dollars to Taylor in exchange for being able to keep the profitable rubber business in operation. In the words of the US chief of missions at the time, he said "I believe they facilitated a warlord in his insurrection and in the atrocities that he created…”. Furthermore, in a UN report titled "Human Rights in Liberia’s Rubber Plantations: Tapping into the Future" (2006), Firestone managers in Liberia admitted that the company does not effectively monitor its own policy prohibiting child labour. UNMIL found that several factors contribute to the occurrence of child labour on Firestone plantations: pressure to meet company quotas, incentive to support the family financially, and lack of access to basic education. The report also noted that workers' housing provided by Firestone has not been renovated since the houses were constructed in the 1920s and 1930s. On the country’s road to reconciliation, Liberia will need to revisit the activities, terms and conditions between international companies like Firestone Rubber coy. At the meagre cost of 50 cents per acre, the country can and should raise the social responsibilities of such companies.
Land Control & Distribution
While watching the documentary on Iron Ladies (more than 60 minutes), I noticed that only one thing was able to reduce the lead female character to tears. No, it wasn’t the level of carnage caused by the civil war neither was it the return of Charles Taylor. It was the land dispute she had with a bodyguard of the president and the failure of responsible agency to effectively adjudicate in the issue. After years of conflict, Liberia’s land management is in a state of disarray. Land records are missing, difficult to search for or at risk of deteriorating. From the outset, the Liberian government operated under dual systems of laws and policies — one for the coastal Americo-Liberians and the other for indigenous Africans living in the hinterlands. Land tenure for the Americo-Liberians were based on English common law (or “statutory rights”). The indigenous people governed themselves using their own “customary” fashion based on community rights. At the same time, the government has long allocated large land concessions to private sector investors like timber, mining, and agriculture firms — often without the knowledge of the people already living there. The concessions bar the indigenous communities from the land they have occupied for generations. It is this safe to say that, at the heart of all civil conflicts in Liberia has been land distribution. There will need to be a land reform policy that gives the country ‘lordship’ over the land. The country should be encouraged to diversify its methods of safeguarding land rights. The land administration framework should be automated by the use of technology to ensure confidentiality, accountability and assurance that information stored can be accessed when required for resolving land disputes.
Such a system should be easy to use, mobile, spatially enabled, flexible, quick to implement, scaleable, and cost effective, reflecting Liberia’s ethnically diversified country and lack of state wide infrastructure such as connecting roads (Liberia has a little above 657 kilometres of paved roads), Literacy rate (Liberia a literacy rate of slightly below 57%). Such a system would offer a safety lock against land grabbing activities by international companies such as Firestone Company, transnational logging and diamond mining along the Liberia-Sierra Leone border. Also, data can be pulled up to determine the effective distribution of land resources.
Conclusion
In thinking about African security especially in the 21st century, one has to put in mind that violence in post-colonial Africa shares more than just barbarism and ethnicity/cultural traditions in common. Most of the time they also have a history of being peripherally included in the economic structures and processes of the country, in this case Liberia. Also, a case must be made for African state accountability to its citizens in terms of equitable and effective distribution of wealth. Finally, the role of technology will also play a role in shaping the affairs of security studies on the continent.
No comments:
Post a Comment