When the Ministry of Foreign Affairs proudly announced that Liberia had “deepened ties with Japan” during its National Day at Expo 2025 in Osaka, the statement was presented as if it were a milestone achievement. Yet beneath the surface of polished speeches and cultural pageantry lies a troubling reality: what exactly did Liberia gain, beyond vague promises and photo opportunities? At a time when ordinary Liberians are struggling to survive under worsening economic conditions, “deepened ties” is not an accomplishment, it is a slogan masking a lack of substance.
For decades, Liberia has leaned heavily on symbolic diplomacy, frequently mistaking appearances for progress. This latest trip to Japan, involving more than 40 delegates, is the most recent example of form over function. What concrete investments have been secured? What binding agreements were signed that will benefit the Liberian people? What practical outcomes justify sending such a large delegation at a time of fiscal austerity? These are questions the government has not answered, and until it does, the people are right to feel that their resources have been misused.
Foreign Minister Sara Beysolow Nyanti’s speech in Osaka carried the right rhetoric. She urged global partners to translate dialogue into tangible outcomes and reminded investors that trade and jobs, not just words, bring dignity to people’s lives. She tied Liberia’s development agenda to the Expo’s theme of “Designing Future Society for Our Lives” and showcased the ARREST Agenda, which stands for Agriculture, Roads, Rule of Law, Education, Sanitation, and Tourism, as the blueprint for progress. Her words were eloquent and aspirational, but the challenge with Liberia’s diplomacy has never been the lack of eloquence. The challenge has always been that speeches rarely translate into action.
Symbolism dominated the program. Japanese officials praised Liberia’s resilience, Japanese schoolchildren sang the Liberian national anthem, and traditional performances highlighted the nation’s cultural heritage. These are beautiful gestures, no doubt. But symbolism is not strategy. Symbolism does not reduce poverty, nor does it employ the thousands of young Liberians who remain jobless. Symbolism does not fix crumbling roads, reform the struggling education system, or expand access to healthcare. For too long, Liberia has mistaken cultural exchanges and friendly statements as success. True success would mean returning from such events with signed deals, concrete commitments, and timelines for delivery.
Japan’s State Minister of Foreign Affairs, Fujii Hisayuki, commended Liberia’s history as Africa’s first republic and even recalled the “Japan Freeway” in Monrovia, built years ago as a symbol of cooperation. But this only underlines the problem. The most visible fruit of Liberia’s relationship with Japan is a road project from the past, not a fresh initiative secured in Osaka. The warm words exchanged during the Expo were a reminder of history, not a celebration of new achievements.
The size of Liberia’s delegation also raises serious concerns about priorities and accountability. Why were senators, business leaders, commissioners, and a long list of government officials all needed for this trip? What specific roles did they play that justified their presence? Every individual represents taxpayer money spent on tickets, hotel stays, allowances, and receptions. In a country where hospitals lack basic supplies, schools operate without chairs or textbooks, and farmers struggle without access to modern tools, such spending becomes indefensible. If Liberia’s presence at Expo 2025 was so critical, why not send a lean but effective delegation focused on securing investment? Instead, what we witnessed was another episode of political tourism, lavish travel with little to show for it.
Contrast this with how other nations approach international expos and summits. Smaller delegations, often led by investment promotion agencies, return home with tangible outcomes: new factories, signed trade deals, or financing agreements for infrastructure. Ethiopia, Rwanda, and Ghana have all managed to leverage international forums to attract concrete projects that bring jobs and growth. Liberia, on the other hand, continues to settle for broad pledges and symbolic friendship, treating international exposure as an end in itself rather than a means to an end.
The government’s justification for this trip, “deepening ties,” is particularly disappointing given President Joseph Boakai’s pledge to lead a rescue mission. Rescue should mean accountability, frugality, and a relentless focus on results. Rescue does not look like sending 40 people abroad to return with a vague statement of friendship.
Liberians must ask hard questions: What did the government bring back from Japan that will directly impact the people? Where are the memorandums of understanding, the investment commitments, the trade partnerships? What is the monetary or developmental value of this trip? If the government cannot provide a transparent accounting of benefits relative to costs, then this delegation was not an investment, it was an expense that Liberia could ill afford.
It is important to stress that diplomacy is not inherently wasteful. Liberia must engage the world, build friendships, and showcase its potential. But diplomacy must be purposeful, strategic, and always tied to the needs of citizens. Cultural showcases and speeches have their place, but they cannot be the centerpiece of our foreign engagements. Liberia needs trade agreements that open markets for its farmers, partnerships that improve its energy and ICT infrastructure, and investments that create jobs for its youth.
The danger of the current approach is twofold. First, it breeds cynicism at home. When officials repeatedly travel abroad with no results to show, the people lose trust in the value of diplomacy altogether. Second, it signals to international partners that Liberia is content with symbolism. If we do not demand real investment, why would others go beyond polite words and cultural gestures? In this way, Liberia risks institutionalizing low expectations in its foreign policy.
President Boakai must recognize that the credibility of his administration is at stake. The Liberian people are patient, but patience is not endless. They expect leadership that delivers, not one that hides behind vague statements. A rescue mission cannot be powered by rhetoric alone. It must be built on discipline, measurable outcomes, and the courage to say “no” to unnecessary spending.
Liberia cannot afford to keep sending large delegations abroad only to return with slogans like “deepened ties.” If diplomacy is to mean anything, it must produce results that ordinary citizens can feel in their daily lives. The time for symbolic victories has passed. Liberia needs real victories, investments, jobs, and development. Anything less is an insult to the sacrifices of the people.
