A Rejoinder to Between the Lines of President Trump's Speech on USAID Funding to Liberia

The article Between the Lines of President Trump's Speech on USAID Funding to Liberia offers a startling critique of the US government's position on USAID funding without providing meaningful solutions for Liberia. While the author's concerns about Liberia's reputation make sense, the article misses the broader point and fails to offer any constructive path forward. This article summarizes several observations.

The article appears to lack a clear focus. President Trump's reference to Liberia, among a handful of other nations, was not a deliberate singling out of the country. Instead, it illustrated the waste and inefficiencies detected within USAID's budget. The real issue is why Liberia made this shortlist. That question, however, is eclipsed by an emotional response rather than a sound analysis of how Liberia might be perceived in international financial circles.

The article offers no substantive policy recommendations or common-sense strategies for Liberia to mitigate the impact of potential USAID cuts. Liberia, like many developing nations, remains heavily reliant on foreign aid. Reducing USAID funding will likely lead to job losses and hardships in key sectors such as health and education. Rather than expressing disdain over these funding cuts, a more productive approach would have been to outline steps the Liberian government can take to prepare for these reductions.

Beyond the US, Liberia should anticipate reductions in foreign aid from other significant development partners, including the UK, France, and Germany. These countries will likely prioritize their defense budgets due to the reshuffling geopolitical landscape, particularly in response to reduced US contributions to NATO. The UK, for example, expects increases in defense spending as a percentage of GDP to be funded by reducing Overseas Development Assistance. Thus, Liberia must recognize the changing international financial landscape and proactively adapt.

In light of a reshuffling global economic order, Liberia's strategy of relying on foreign aid and natural resource extraction may need to be re-examined. The current high interest rates make fixed-income financial instruments more attractive to investors, reducing direct capital inflows into risky developing economies. This economic reality demands a strategic effort to attract investment and encourage domestic economic growth.

Successive Liberian governments have been embroiled in corruption charges. Media reports consistently highlight financial mismanagement and systemic corruption among public officials. The author, a county senator and former Minister of Finance, could have taken this opportunity to advocate for fiscal reforms. Instead, the article focuses on Ethiopia and other African countries' position on the Corruption Perception Index relative to US foreign aid, failing to address Liberia's mismanagement of its resources.  

The Liberian legislature has been criticized for disproportionately consuming national resources. Reports indicate that 103 lawmakers receive a significant share of the national budget, including excessive salaries, benefits, and personal vehicle ownership—a privilege not enjoyed by other government agencies. Addressing such inefficiencies would have made more sense for the article than deflecting blame onto the US government.

Liberia should heed the advice of Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Director-General of the World Trade Organization, who has urged African nations to focus on internal revenue generation and innovative financial strategies rather than perpetual dependence on foreign aid. This perspective, which is not addressed in the article, is critical to transitioning from a developing to a middle-income country in the twenty-first century. 

The concept of government efficiency, as adopted by the Trump administration, is not new. Historical examples such as Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal and John F. Kennedy's Camelot demonstrate the success of previous US governments in undertaking similar initiatives. Also, President Tubman's Special Commission on Government Operations (SCOGO) reformed fiscal budgetary processes and accounting systems and implemented austerity measures in Liberia. SCOGO was a team of senior Liberian officials appointed by the President in 1961, supported by a US consulting team.

Its primary role was to advise the President on various public administration challenges, including budget management and fiscal discipline. Instead of dismissing efficiency measures, the author should consider pushing legislation to revive similar initiatives to ensure more effective governance.

As a member of the legislature and former Minister of Finance, the article's author had the opportunity to propose common-sense solutions for Liberia to manage the impending reduction in USAID funding. Instead, the piece became an argument against US foreign aid policies.

A more constructive approach would involve advocating for common-sense domestic financial reforms, strengthening anti-corruption measures, and diversifying revenue to reduce dependency on foreign assistance. Liberia's future hinges not on an emotional diatribe of international decisions but on taking strategic measures to secure its economic stability and sovereignty.

Dr. P. Ernest Parker, Jr. is an Observer contributor dedicated to promoting ethical leadership in organizations worldwide. He is an author and assistant professor of accounting, leadership, and business analytics.