MONROVIA – Liberia is once again pursuing a seat as a non-permanent member of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). While this may seem like a diplomatic achievement for the government of President Joseph Nyuma Boakai, critics argue that the timing is far from ideal. The nation’s economy remains fragile, with poverty gripping a large portion of the population. Parents are struggling to send their children to school, and basic services are in decline. In such circumstances, diverting resources and attention to international diplomatic goals raises important questions about the government’s priorities.
Historically, Liberia has held a seat on the UNSC twice, in 1961-1962 and again in 1976-1977. During those periods, Liberia’s global standing was considerably different. The country had a relatively stable political structure, and although economic challenges existed, they were not as dire as they are today. The significance of securing a seat on such a prestigious international body is undeniable, but what does this mean for ordinary Liberians grappling with daily hardships?
In recent years, the economic landscape of Liberia has been marred by stagnation and mismanagement. Many households live below the poverty line, and public services remain woefully underfunded. Basic needs like healthcare, education, and infrastructure are deteriorating, leaving many Liberians feeling abandoned by the state.
According to critics, the government’s priorities are glaringly misaligned with the struggles of its citizens. For example, in the 2024 fiscal budget, six top government officials—including President Boakai, Vice President Jeremiah Koung, Speaker Fonati Koffa, Pro Temp Nyonblee Karnga-Lawrence, Deputy Speaker Thomas Fallah, and Chief Justice Sie-Nyene Yuoh—are collectively set to receive an eye-watering US$11.5 million. In a country where many people struggle to make ends meet, this expenditure feels excessive, especially when weighed against the pressing issues facing the nation.
The focus on securing a UNSC seat appears to many as a symbolic victory with little tangible benefit for the average Liberian. It is argued that the resources poured into these diplomatic efforts—such as the funding for government delegations to New York—could be better used to address “bread and butter” issues at home. Infrastructure needs urgent improvement, schools require more funding, and healthcare systems need revitalization. Meanwhile, parents continue to struggle to keep their children in school due to high costs and inadequate support.
The issue isn’t whether Liberia should engage with the international community but rather whether now is the right time for such a costly and symbolically focused pursuit. While diplomacy plays an important role in long-term national development, there is a strong case to be made that Liberia’s focus should be squarely on solving domestic problems before seeking global recognition.
Critics of the current government, especially from within the opposition, argue that President Boakai and his administration are using foreign trips and international engagements as a means of distraction. Instead of dealing with internal challenges head-on, the government is accused of wasting time and resources on diplomatic overtures that do little to alleviate the suffering of ordinary Liberians.
The most significant criticism comes from the massive budgets allocated to the country’s top officials, contrasted against the deteriorating living conditions of the populace. For example, President Boakai’s US$2.99 million budget, alongside the US$3.38 million allocated to Vice President Koung, strikes many as excessive in a country grappling with economic hardship. Calls for austerity and a focus on cutting unnecessary expenditures have been growing louder, yet the government seems set on continuing its current course.
At a time when Liberia is struggling to keep its economy afloat, prioritizing international diplomatic achievements, such as a seat on the UNSC, seems out of touch with the realities on the ground. The government should consider redirecting its energy and resources toward addressing domestic issues like poverty, education, and healthcare. This could not only improve the well-being of Liberians but also restore public confidence in the leadership.
While securing a non-permanent seat on the UNSC may offer Liberia increased global visibility, the real question is: what does global visibility achieve for the Liberian mother who cannot afford to send her children to school or for the father struggling to make ends meet? Before Liberia seeks a voice in international security matters, perhaps it should first address its internal insecurities—economic, social, and political.
Liberia’s ambitions on the global stage should not overshadow the urgent and critical need for domestic reform. President Boakai’s administration must take stock of the country’s most pressing needs and act accordingly. Real change will come not from symbolic achievements abroad, but from tangible progress at home.
