Liberian student appeals to U.S. Senate
(Originally published in the Liberian newspaper The Revolution August-October 1975)
Marcus S.G. Dahn, a Liberian who is studying engineering in Ohio, wrote Senator Hubert H. Humphrey of the United States Foreign Relations Committee on the matter of U.S. foreign assistance policy towards Liberia. The result has been a rather interesting exchange of communications. These reached The Revolution,
and they are published here with the approval of Sen. Humphrey.
The Government of Liberia is invited to make available for publication in this paper any observations it may have about Mr. Dahn’s contentions.
Of course, the public is very interested in knowing the total external indebtedness of the Republic of Liberia, as well as how the Government accounts for the miserable plight of the masses despite the infusion into the country of massive sums of money.
Canton, Ohio
April 9, 1975
Dear Sir: As a concerned citizen of the West African nation of Liberia presently studying in America, I would appreciate the opportunity to express my views on U.S. foreign policy and its effects on the government and people of my country.
First of all, I would thank the American government for its long continuing support and friendship towards Liberia. We are very grateful for the generous aid which has assisted development in our country. The purpose of this letter, however, is not to commend the United States for its generosity. Instead, it is to plead that all future contributions and loans be severely regulated and restricted.
My reason for such a peculiar request is simple -- the Liberian government does not use this assistance for the purposes intended. Much of the money goes directly into the pockets of the projects so direly in need of funds. For this reason, except for improvements in the capital city and a few other small urban areas, Liberia has never lifted itself very far above a state of semi-primitiveness, even though it is now going into its 128th year as an independent nation, and lags behind the other developing African countries.
Our roads are a disgrace -- both in quality and in quantity. Hospitals and schools do not even begin to meet the needs of the people. There is no public transportation system. Electricity and pure water are provided only to city dwellers even though a huge dam built a few years ago was purportedly capable of supplying these necessities to the entire country. Newspaper headlines report loan after loan and agreement after agreement but where are the finished projects to show for such huge investments?
Liberia, like many other African countries, is a one-party state, thereby forcing every citizen to support the ruling party in a government run by a handful of men. Unfortunately, in the case of Liberia, it is also a family affair and has been so for generations. These leaders have always sought their personal aggrandizement and left the remaining 98 percent of the population to pick up the crumbs. The majority of my people live in undeveloped and isolated areas while the ruling class lives in luxury it affords through misappropriated funds and a motto of "Get our share and forget the masses."
The great division of classes existing in Liberia today is an indirect result of America's laissez-faire attitude in lending. Selfishness, corruption and bold nepotism flourish under such tacit encouragement. Because I am concerned about the survival, progress and prosperity of my country, I strongly feel that the U.S. government, as well as other lending agencies both public and private, must re-examine their aid programs to Liberia.
Funds should be withheld until a country which calls itself a democracy corrects its policy of favoritism, corruption and absolutism. But perhaps the great United States’ real interest lies not in helping a developing nation to its feet but instead is directed to protecting its many lucrative investments and concessions. The future leaders of Liberia understand the value of profit sharing and the need to cooperate with countries that will assist in developing our nation's resources, but we deeply resent our government allowing exploitation in exchange for loans and aid which do so very little for a majority of the people.
Frankly speaking, the U.S. government is surely aware of how corruption has hindered any real growth in Liberia. It is equally aware that the loose flow of money and aid has contributed to keeping most Liberians in a state of poverty and ignorance while the family power structure bypasses the welfare of the country as a whole in order to line their own pockets. Foreign donors should be aware of future unrest and be ready to accept the consequences when, at long last, the other 98 percent of the people finally rebel.
Every citizen must have a fair share in the decision making processes of his country. This includes being satisfied that outside aid is appropriated and spent for the betterment of all. Liberians cannot help but feel anger and frustration at the foreign powers which allow unfair conditions to exist when certain restrictions and guarantees within loan agreements, strictly enforced, would surely curtail some of the outright embezzlement of funds meant for us all.
It is my most fervent hope that lending agencies, government and private, wishing to contribute to Liberian development through loans or aid, would thoroughly examine their present policies and their consciences, in order to see that, at long last, the masses receive the benefits. Young Liberians are especially anxious to work for the development of our country.
Outside aid, used properly, could make such a wonderful contribution to our future dreams for building a strong, independent and democratic nation. But, all the aid in the world, used as it is now, will never do more than increase the bank accounts of our ruling class and degrade a proud and long suffering majority.
Truly yours,
Marcus S. G. Dahn
(Senator Humphrey replies.)
United States Senate
May 9, 1975
Dear Mr. Dahn:
I am indebted to you for a very intelligent and informed critique of American policy toward Liberia. I am taking the liberty of forwarding your letter to the Agency for International Development for comment. I, too, will be quite interested in the official explanation of our policy. With all best wishes.
Sincerely,
Hubert H. Humphrey
(USAID responds.)
Washington, D.C.
May 29, 1975
Dear Senator Humphrey:
Thank you very much for your letter of May 9, 1975 concerning the inquiry of Mr. Marcus S. G. Dahn. Let me assure you that Mr. Dahn's general allegations concerning the misappropriation of AID funds by officials of the Government of Liberia are indeed disturbing and would be of serious concern to me if there were more support for them on the basis of the facts of the situation.
Our loans and grants to the Government of Liberia have always been provided in strict conformity with the laws governing the expenditures of U.S. Government funds and specific restrictions on foreign assistance expenditure. All of our programs are regularly audited by the AID Office of the Auditor General as well as by the Inspector General of Foreign Assistance in the Department of State.
From time to time the General Accounting Office audits the program and reports to Congress. In over 30 years of providing assistance to the Government of Liberia there has not been a case involving the personal misappropriation of U.S. Government funds by an official of that Government or evidence that funds have been spent for prohibited purposes.
While it is true that in the past we did not provide assistance to the Government of Liberia to help build the infrastructure of Monrovia, more recently a substantial portion of our assistance has been directly concerned with resolving the critical development problem areas of rural roads, hospitals and schools identified by Mr. Dahn. For example, the John F. Kennedy National Medical Center was constructed and is being operated with AID assistance.
Our JFK Rural Health Lofa County Outreach project is designed to bring the benefits of modern medicine to the rural poor of Liberia. Our Rural Access Roads project will directly assist the rural inhabitants by opening access to many remote areas for making educational, health, and agricultural services available to them
. In fact, consistent with Congressional mandates and the priorities of the Government of Liberia, the central focus of our current assistance program in Liberia is on benefiting the rural poor. Per your request, a copy of this letter is being sent directly to Mr. Dahn in response to his letter to you. If I can be of further assistance, please let me know.
Sincerely yours,
John Murphy
Administrator
(Dahn responds.)
Canton, Ohio
July 1, 1975
Dear Senator Humphrey:
I am very honored and grateful for your interest in my letter of April 29, 1975, concerning the misappropriation of funds to Liberia. I also appreciate your sending a copy of the letter to the Agency for International Development. I was quite distressed, however, at the defensive response from John Murphy, the AID spokesman, and cannot allow what Mr. Murphy calls "mere allegations" to go unchallenged. Therefore, I am enclosing factual material from the following sources: recent issues of Africa Report magazine, the book "Liberia, the Evolution of Privilege" by Gus Liebenow of the University of Indiana, an article from Harper's Monthly, information from the Liberian Star, a daily newspaper published in Monrovia, and a portion of a letter from my brother who lives some 10 hours' drive from Monrovia.
The intention of my original letter was not to accuse USAID of any specific misappropriation but rather to state dissatisfaction with the general condition of lending and my concern with the corruption it encourages. No one can deny the good of AID projects (or of other American programs, notably the U.S. Peace Corps which is more responsible for real change than any other single outside influence) but I hold to my charge that 1) Monrovia receives much more than its share of development projects and 2) large sums of money and materials are lost or misdirected. An example of the latter: thousands of donated books end up being sold to school children at black market prices even though the USAID stamp is clearly visible.
Similarly, CARE food to schools is often sold in the market to the very children who should receive it free. As you can gather from the information I have enclosed, there are great economic and social problems in Liberia which stem from discrepancies between available money and what is actually spent on development. This gap is what I am so deeply concerned about. The ruling elite continues to benefit through corruption while the native people are deprived. It is only through the efforts of knowledgeable and responsible people like yourself, sir, that any meaningful change can take place.
Lending agencies must begin to feel a moral obligation, rather than merely a political interest, to the countries they deal with. It is then that my people in the interior will at last be able to uplift themselves.
Truly yours,
Marcus Dahn
(A final letter)
United States Senate
July 16, 1975
Dear Mr. Dahn:
Thank you for writing me again. I very much appreciate the interest you have taken in the matter of our foreign assistance programs in Liberia. The information you have provided me is disturbing, and I will hold on to it for reference during upcoming formulation of legislation for the next fiscal year in our Subcommittee on Foreign Assistance.
In the last couple of years, we have gone a long way in restructuring our foreign aid programs so as to emphasize effective developmental assistance and the alleviation of human suffering, but they are still in need of much improvement.
With the creation of our new Foreign Assistance Subcommittee, I am hopeful that we will now have the long-needed vehicle that will enable the Congress to further our objectives. The alleged misues of aid funds on the part of recipient governments is one area that is particularly in need of investigation. With all best wishes.
Sincerely,
Hubert H. Humphrey
Posted 5-19-06
