|
 Establish National Development Plan for Liberia: A Model Expected to Rapidly Develop Liberia
Abstract:
The development of Liberia is the primary goal of the Liberian citizenry and elected officials alike. Liberians have a strong desire to see their country modernized and developed with better road networks, a productive healthcare delivery system, a sound educational system, and the implementation of all other modern infrastructural developments that are typically found in developed nations. Unfortunately, after approximately 200 years of existence, Liberia still remains both statistically and physically classified as one of the least developed countries in the world. This article presents a model that is intended to rapidly develop Liberia by providing a national development plan that can create sustainable development for years to come.
The model will allow Liberian decision makers to establish a national development plan and pass it into law, which will serve as a roadmap that current and future governments will use to develop the country. This article proposes a plan that will provide a minimal benchmark that each elected administrations must meet prior to the cessation of their respective administration, to ensure that Liberia's development is both continuous and congruent throughout the country. On the contrary, this plan is not intended to strip current and future administrations of their autonomy or ability to make developmental decisions. However, it is designed to keep administrations on course and alleviate the past tendency of having no national development standards in Liberia or arguably worse, having deficient and unsustainable developmental plans that are usually abandoned by future administrations. The proposed national development plan for Liberia is not, in itself, a menu of developmental projects that should be implemented in the country, as such should be left to the decision making power of elected and appointed development experts of the country, instead it is a guide that when implemented will propel Liberia from obscurity to prosperity.
Introduction:
Liberia must establish a national development plan and pass it into law so that each government will be compelled to implement a minimal portion of the plan during its tenure. The plan must clearly state the developmental objectives of the country by defining when, what, where, and how the plan must be implemented to avoid ambiguities and inconsistencies during its implementation.
Every Liberian desires to see the development of Liberia through the construction of intra and inter-city paved superhighways that will connect the various regions of the country and make the transportation of people, goods and services more efficient; the building of first-rate universities and other institutions of higher learning to increase the literacy rate and marketability of the Liberian workforce; the establishment of state of the art hospitals, clinics and out-patient facilities to ensure a productive healthcare delivery system; and a host of other necessary social, economic, and political infrastructures that are comparable to, perhaps, those that exist in the United States of America and other developed nations. These aspirations have always been articulated by sitting governments, who have either failed to deliver on their promises to develop the country or have inadequately implemented their development policies.
Consequently, after approximately 200 years and counting, Liberia still remains both statistically and physically one of the least developed countries in the entire world. Liberia's road networks are deplorable or nonexistent; its healthcare delivery system is very weak due to the inadequacy of current infrastructural and human capital; and the country's economy is weak to the extent that 17 out of 20 Liberians are unemployed and chronically impoverished. As it stands, it is yet to be seen when the various remote cities and towns outside of Monrovia will experience significant development and gain economic vitality. Therefore, considering the theory of adaptive expectation, which predicts future outcomes based on past results, the country is not expected to be significantly developed within the next 200 years due to the following problems:
Problem Statement:
Liberia does not currently have a national development plan that serves as a benchmark against which all other development policies must be based and measured. To ensure consistent national development, the country must make projections of the kinds of development (e.g., road, schools, and hospitals) that must take place within the country given a specified time frame (e.g., Road Completion Project 2007-2014); the specific locations at which such development must occur (e.g., Bong County); and how such plan must be implemented, considering budgetary and other constraints.
Because a national development plan has never existed in Liberia, the development of the country is characterized by debilitating inconsistencies. These inconsistencies are inherent in the fact that each government is given exclusive power to decide the developmental direction of the country. As a result of such unrestricted power, Liberian governments have unilaterally decided, for example, which highway should be constructed, when such construction should occur and how the construction should occur. As a result, these governments have not felt morally obligated or been legally compelled to develop the country by continuing development projects that commenced during previous administrations; nor have they fostered development that have had a significant impact on the entire country. Therefore, Liberia has been experiencing a high level of disorganization in the implementation of its developmental goals, as well as the discontinuation and abandonment of developmental projects by successive administrations.
Physical Evidence of the Failure of the Current Developmental Practices in Liberia:
Physical evidence gathered from across the country suggests that the current development practices of Liberia do not have the capacity to develop the country. The evidence is based on a chronological sampling of the last five (5) elected governments of Liberia and an analysis of their national development plans specific to the following areas: a) the national developmental policy of each administration; b) the construction of the highway connecting Monrovia and Maryland County; c) the construction of universities within each of the 15 counties of the country; and d) the development of the segment of the county of origin of the sampled presidents. This article is in no way ignoring the achievements of these administrations. On the contrary, the objective is to analyze whether each administration's national development policy has contributed to the sustainable development of Liberia in the areas specified. The analysis of the evidence will help Liberians to understand the importance of formulating a national development plan that will ensure the continuous and congruent development of the entire country.
The Tubman Government:
President William V.S. Tubman was best known for his national development plan of an economic "Open Door Policy", which increased foreign investments and economic growth in Liberia. However, during his 27 year era, President Tubman failed to connect the road network between Monrovia and Maryland County and many of the existing roads remained unpaved. In regards to university construction, while President Tubman successfully expanded the University of Liberia from Liberia College [1], there were no other universities constructed in other parts of the country. It is also worth noting that President Tubman often developed sections of Maryland County, where he resided, but neglected other parts of the county and the country as a whole.
The Tolbert Government:
During the 9 year tenure of President William R. Tolbert, Jr., he initiated developmental policies including, "Total Involvement for Higher Heights", "Rally Time", and "From Mat to Mattresses." These policies were intended to create what he called "a wholesome functioning society" and to win the "War against Ignorance, Disease and Poverty [1]." While many of President Tolbert's policies arguably curtailed some of the rampant socio-economic inequities that plagued Liberian citizens, there was a notable disconnect in his handling of national infrastructural development. For example, the road network between Monrovia-Harper Highway remained unpaved. Furthermore, the University of Liberia still remained the only public university operating within the entire country. And like his predecessor, President Tolbert developed parts of Bensonville/Bentol, where he resided, and left many parts of the country undeveloped.
The Doe Government:
President Samuel K. Doe's administration of 10 years brought about the "Green Revolution" national development policy [1]. The "Green Revolution" was enacted to make Liberia a food self-sufficient nation. Additionally, President Doe commenced the construction of vital government ministries and crafted plans for the construction of the highway between Ganta and Harper, a segment of the road network between Monrovia and Maryland County. However, the road network between Monrovia and Maryland County was left unpaved. With regards to university construction, he expanded the University of Liberia by constructing the Fendell Campus near Monrovia, but the remainder of the country still did not have universities. Lastly, President Doe developed segments of Grand Gedeh County, where he originated, and failed to develop most of the other counties within the country.
The Taylor Government:
During his 8 year tenure, President Charles G. Taylor enacted the development policies of "Vision 2024" and "7 Pillars of Development," which were intended to develop the country entirely by the year 2024. While President Taylor repaved the New Kru Town road network, the Monrovia-Maryland road network was left unpaved. Furthermore, there were no universities constructed during his tenure. Again, like his predecessors, one of his most well-known construction projects was the building of a mansion in Oldest Congo Town and other similar structures in Gbarnga, Bong County that were constructed solely for his personal use to the exclusion of the other counties of the country.
The Johnson-Sirleaf Government:
President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf's government is still less than 2 years old. As such, it is difficult to assess her administration as was done with the other sampled governments. Moreover, her national development plan could not be determined by this article. However, the Monrovia -Maryland road network still remains unpaved. Additionally, to date, there have been no reports of new university construction projects in Liberia. Lastly, it is still unknown whether President Johnson-Sirleaf will continue in the legacy of the previous four administrations by developing segments of her county of origin to the exclusion of other parts of the country.
Statistical Analysis of the Physical Evidences of Failure:
The physical evidence suggests that: a) 100 percent of all sampled governments discontinued or abandoned the developmental plans of previous administrations (e.g., President Taylor abandoned President Doe's "Green Revolution," for his "Vision 2024" policy, etc.); b) 100 percent of the governments abandoned the road construction between Monrovia and Maryland County; c) 100 percent of the governments failed to construct universities within the other 15 counties of Liberia. An interesting finding of this statistics is that assuming that past and present administrations endeavored to build at least one university within each county, only 6.7 percent of that goal has been achieved in approximately 200 years of existence of the country. As a result, students residing within 93.3 percent of all counties have not had access to a university education within those counties; d) 100 percent of the sampled Presidents, excluding President Sirleaf, have developed segments of their county of origin to the exclusion of the other counties. President Sirleaf was not included within this statistics given that there is no information on whether she has developed a segment of Bomi County where she originates.
Interestingly, this trend of sitting presidents to exhibit the tendency to develop their counties of origin to the exclusion of the other counties reveals that under the current system of national development, the only counties that will be guaranteed some form of development will be those counties that produce a president. In light of the trend, under the current status quo, it is highly probable that other counties of Liberia will have to wait at least 6 years to have a chance at development.
Therefore, above findings clearly suggest that the national development practices of Liberia, to date, cannot develop the country. These unilateral national development practices must be replaced by a comprehensive national development plan that will compel all governments to meet the mandatory developmental goals of the country during their tenure to ensure the rapid and systematic growth and development of Liberia.
Evidence of Success: U. S. National Systems of Interstate Highways:
Many countries have implemented national development plans with great success. The United States of America offers one of the best examples. This section uses the United States National System of Interstate Highways as a case study that can be used as a model for the construction of a comprehensive national development plan for Liberia, which, when implemented will contribute to the rapid development of the country.
Impressed with the German Autobahns (superhighways system) of the 1930's, Dwight D. Eisenhower began planning the creation of what is known today as the "The United States Interstate System." The purpose of the road network was to provide direct military access to all parts of the country during emergencies. In 1938, The Federal-Aid Highway Act was passed to study the feasibility of constructing a superhighway system. The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1944 was passed to legislate how the highway system would be constructed. The law specifically stated that the Interstate System should include up to 40,000 miles and must be connected by "routes, direct as practical, the principal metropolitan areas, cities, and industrial centers, to serve the National Defense, and to connect at suitable points, routes of continental importance in the Dominion of Canada and the Republic of Mexico" [2].
After addressing the questions of what, when and where the highways should be constructed, the American government provided answers to how the highways were to be constructed. Subsequently, the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1952 was passed to authorize the first $25 million to carrying out the project. In 1954 [2], legislators authorized an additional $175 million to annually fund the project between 1956 and 1957.
Following the administration of Franklin D. Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower was elected President of the United States. Like his predecessor, he continued to support and provide funding to the highways construction plan throughout his administration as specified by law in the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956. The enforcement and continuation of the Highway Act of 1938 from one administration to the next was the catalyst that ensured the development and completion of the highway system [2].
The key finding of this case study is that in less than 64 years, the U.S. Federal Highways Construction Plan achieved what Liberia still hopes to achieve. The United States, covering the area of 3,717,813 sq mi [3], which is approximately 86.5 times larger than Liberia, has been able to connect the entire country with intra and interstate super highway systems, a feat that Liberia (43,000 sq mi) has not been able to achieve in 200 years.
Based upon the success of this case study, we can reasonably conclude that given the requisite legal backing and adequate national funding, a comprehensive national development plan will successfully develop Liberia.
Description/Explanation of the National Development Model:
Three key approaches are used to describe the model for national development in Liberia: 1) The Benchmark Approach; 2) The Fractional Approach; and 3) The Legal Approach.
1) The Benchmark Approach:
The key assumption of the benchmark approach is that Liberia will be rapidly developed, if and only if decision makers of the country establish a national development plan that clearly states the developmental goals and direction of the country. Such plan must clearly define the kinds of developmental projects that are adequate and necessary for the successful development of the country; where such project must be constructed; when they must be constructed; and how the construction must be carried out. This approach can be expressed using a simple mathematical equation of the form:
ND = RD + NRD (1)
Where:
ND is National Development.
National Development (ND) represents the sum of all required development (RD) plus non-required development (NRD).
RD is Required Development.
RD represents the total minimal amount of national developmental projects that all governments are required by law to complete. This is the component of the national development plan that will always occur irrespective of the administration that is in power. Therefore, RD must be determined so that, under all administrations, every segment of the country is guaranteed needed development until the developmental needs of the segments are achieved. To ensure the successful implementation of RD, no administration will be allowed to deviate from the national developmental benchmarks that are set and enacted into law by the country. That is, this component is fixed across all administrations and can only be changed by amendments to the law and/or to accommodate events of extraneous and uncontrollable circumstances, including severe budgetary constraints, natural disasters, and other such emergency situations.
NRD is Non-Required Development.
NRD represents the total amount of developmental projects that a sitting government can complete in excess of RD, the amount of national development that is required by law. NRD is solely controlled by a sitting government and no administration can legally be held liable for the failure to complete its unilateral national development plan for the country. That is, each sitting government will still continue to exercise the power to decide when, what, where, and how it wants to develop the country as it deems necessary.
For about 200 years, Liberia's developmental policies have been based upon the exclusive practice of NRD. Unfortunately, NRD does not guarantee that all segments of the country will be developed during the tenure of a sitting government. While NRD may provide innovative methods of developing a country, NRD has been physically observed to be discriminatory, segregative, and non-inclusive. According to physical evidence gathered from various countries, NRD usually favors the developmental needs of people and segments of a country that are closely connected to the sitting government. Thus other groups without such connections to a sitting administration are continuously deprived of their development needs. For example, under the apartheid system of governance in South Africa, national development favored the white elitist class over the struggling blacks [7]. In the case of Liberia, during the tenure of the True Whig Party and Americo-Liberian rule, development usually favored the Americo-Liberians over indigenous Liberians, a situation which plunged most indigenous Liberians into chronic poverty and illiteracy. Furthermore, during President Doe's administration, development favored members of his ethnic group to the disadvantage of others. Therefore, a national development practice that is totally based on the principles of NRD will not significantly develop this country within the next 200 years due to its inconsistencies, exclusiveness, and other inherent deficiencies.
The major strength of the benchmark approach is that it effectively minimizes the degree to which any sitting government can deviate from the legislated national developmental goals. Additionally, this approach guarantees that the country's incomplete required developmental goals will transcend any sitting government, thus ensuring that development is a continuous process that must not cease to exist when a sitting government ceases to exist.
2) The Fractional Approach:
The fractional approach relies on the following assumptions:
a) A fraction of the country's annual budget must be committed to the completion of national developmental projects:
Mathematically, this assumption can be express in the form
ND = K*[NB] (2)
Where:
ND maintains its definition as described in equation (1).
NB is National Budget.
NB represents the national budget of the country. This variable is a key indicator of the country's capacity to sponsor all of its needs, including developmental goals. The size of the budget will determine the amount of development that will take place within the country on an annually basis.
K is a Fraction of the National Budget (NB).
K represents a fraction of the national budget that a sitting government must spend to complete its required portion of the national development plan. The national budget is a random variable which takes on different values every year. As a result, when the budget falls, a sitting government may use it as an incentive to suspend some counts of the national development plan, while a rise in the budget may serve as motivation to increase spending on national development. However, the unpredictability of the budget creates randomness in decision making regarding the allocation of funds to the national development plan. As a result, the plan becomes characterized by inconsistencies that have the propensity to undermine its implementation. Therefore, to mitigate such randomness, decision makers must carefully calculate K and pass it into law to ensure that its implementation will adequately foster national development on a consistent basis, even when the national budget remains small or unpredictable.
The rationale for the fractional approach is that it is practically impossible for any sitting government to complete the country's desired developmental needs during its 6 years tenure due to budgetary constraints. Hypothetically, a government that plans to construct 2 highways, 1 university, and 1 major hospital within each of the 15 counties of the country during its 6 years tenure will, almost 100 percent of the time, fail to achieve such goal due to budgetary and time constraints.
The total cost of developing a country could easily amount to billions of dollars. For example, it cost the United States 7.5 billion dollars to construct the I-90 highway, which is about 3,020.54 miles long and covers 13 states [2]. Due to the lack of data, the necessary estimates that determine a comparable cost of developing similar infrastructure in Liberia will not be generated. However, the point is that no government has the financial capacity to massively and simultaneously develop a country such as Liberia during its 6 years tenure due to budgetary and time constraints. According to budgetary and cost data gathered, the 2006 national budget of Liberia was 93 million dollars [5]; the highest budget Liberia ever ran was 600 million dollars in 1979 [6]; and the average cost of constructing I-90 across 13 states of the United States is 577 million dollars. Comparing the 2006 national budget of Liberia to the average cost of constructing I-90 suggests that with a budget of 93 million dollars, which is 558 million dollars within 6 years, a sitting government will not be able to completely develop all of the hypothetical developmental projects of the country. As a result, if a succeeding government abandons these projects and takes on other unrelated projects, the country's meager resources will be mismanaged and misused, thus undermining the development of the country. This is characteristic of the current developmental practices which have failed to develop the country.
The United States utilized the fractional approach to complete the construction of its interstate highway systems. For example, as stated, it cost the U. S. 7.5 billion dollars to construct I-90 [2]. The average budget of the United States over the past 13 years is 1.95 trillion dollars [4], which can be used as proxy data to reasonably estimate the average U. S. budget between 1944 and 1996 when most of the highways were completed. Assuming that the average U. S. budget between 1944 and 1996 was just half of the 13 years average, it can be reasonably estimated that the average U. S. budget during the construction period was 975 billion dollars [2]. Expressing this amount as an unadjusted fraction of the total amount spent on the construction of I-90, it can reasonably be argued that the U.S. spent 0.77 percent of its national budget on the construction of highway during the period. Substituting 0.77 percent for K and 975 billion dollars for NB in equation (2) above, we get:
ND = K*[NB]
ND = 0.77% *[975 billion dollars]
Assuming that Liberia adopts this fractional approach during the tenure of President Sirleaf and equates K to 40 percent, and the country's budget remains at its 2006 value of $93 millions for the next 6 years, one can reasonably estimate the total projected national development budget that the Sirleaf administration will spend on national development. Substituting the value of K and NB in equation (2), we get:
ND = K*[NB]
ND = 40% *[558 million dollars]
ND = 0.4*558
ND = $223,200,000.00.
This is the amount of money the Sirleaf administration will be legally compelled to allocate to national development during its 6 years tenure, if the proposed national development plan was enacted into law. Otherwise, under the current developmental practices of Liberia, the country may never experience this amount of development during her 6 years tenure, if the president unilaterally withholds such funding without any consequences.
As simplistic this approach may seem, its systematic implementation is a powerful tool that can speedily develop Liberia since it ensures the continuous and incremental development of the country under all administrations.
b) Each sitting government must complete a fraction of the nation's developmental projects:
The fractional approach is mathematically express in the form:
ND = Z*[RD] (3)
Where:
ND and RD maintain their definitions as described in equation (1).
Z is a Fraction of Required Development (RD).
Z represents the percent of the total national developmental projects that each sitting government is required by law to complete. Since it has been established that the development of Liberia cannot be achieved by a single administration during its 6 years tenure, Z will ensure that each government will be compelled to complete a fraction of all the country's required developmental needs during its tenure.
The rationale for the fractional approach has already been justified in section (a) of the fractional approach concept. However, to further clarify the approach, let's consider the hypothetical construction of the highway between Monrovia and Maryland County. If the cost of constructing the highway is 100 million dollars, which is 7 million dollars more than the 2006 budget of the country, the sitting government may abandon the project due to its high cost during its 6 years tenure. If two successive governments also abandon the project, the project will be delayed for a total of 18 years, which is an example of how most of the highways in Liberia have been left undeveloped over the past 200 years.
The fractional approach framework provides a speedy and systematic solution to constructing the referenced highway within 18 years. Under this approach, decision makers will set, taking budgetary considerations into account, the fraction of the highway that must be completed by a sitting government prior to the expiration of its tenure. If the fraction is set at 35 percent, then Z = 35 percent. Assuming that the highway covers 100 miles, then RD = 100 miles. Substituting these values into equation (3), we get:
ND = Z * [RD]
ND = 35% * 100
ND = 35 miles.
Therefore, since each government is required by law to construct 35 percent or 35 miles of the 100 miles highway during its 6 year tenure, the highway will be completed by three consecutive governments within the same 18 years in which the identical highway was expected to be abandoned in the absence of a workable national development plan for the country.
The major strength of this approach is that it successfully distributes national development across successive administrations, instead of the current practice that places all of the pressure of national development on a sitting government, thus leading to the abandonment of needed development of the country.
(3) The Legal Approach:
The key assumption of the legal approach is that after a national development plan of the country is established, it must be passed into law to ensure its systematic and continuous implementation by all administrations. Under this approach, each government will be legally compelled to complete their required portion of the developmental projects of the country.
The legal approach is mathematically express in the form:
ND = L*[RD] (4)
Where:
ND and RD maintain their definitions as described in equation (1).
L is The Legal Enforcement Coefficient of Required Development (RD).
L represents the degree to which the law governing the implementation of the national development plan is enforced. The value of L ranges from zero (0) to one (1), with 1 being the strongest and 0 being the weakest enforcement coefficient. According to this model, the country will implement all of its required developmental goals if and only if the legal enforcement coefficient is equal to 1. For example, let's consider three (3) hypothetical scenarios, where L = {0, 0.5, 1} and RD = 100 developmental projects. Substituting these values into equation 4, above, we get:
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
ND = L*[RD] ND = L*[RD] ND = L*[RD]
ND = 0 * 100 ND = 0.5* 100 ND = 1* 100
ND = 0 ND = 50 ND = 100
These estimates suggest that there will be no development in the country if the law governing the implementation of the national development plan is not enforced.
The rationale for this approach is to give each government the compulsory incentive to develop the country. It has been observed that one of the key explanations for underdevelopment in undeveloped countries is the lack of accountability of decision makers to the people they lead. Most leaders of poor countries squander or mismanage the resource of their countries without been held accountable by law. As a result, these leaders are embellished with excessive power that gives them the capacity to determine when, where, what, and how the development of the people and their country must be allocated. Therefore, vital developments are denied some citizens of the country and their regions, thus leading to chronic poverty, illiteracy, unemployment, and disease.
The lack of legal controls during the implementation of national development has given most governments unhindered power to mismanage the developmental goals of the country. To remedy the manipulation and exploitation of the developmental needs of the country by any government, the legal approach will compel each government to implement all developmental projects where, how, and when they must be implemented.
Conclusion
Despite the strong desire of Liberians and their governments to see their country modernized and developed with better road networks, a productive healthcare delivery system, and the implementation of all other modern infrastructural development that are typically found in developed nations, Liberia still remains both statistically and physically classified as one of the least developed countries in the world, after approximately 200 years of existence. Liberia's national developmental goals are inherently deficient because they are vulnerable to manipulation and exploitation by an unproductive practice of development that gives too much power to a sitting government to unilaterally decide when, where, how, and the kinds of developments that must occur in the country. As a result, the country is yet to be significantly developed.
This article presents a model that will allow decision makers of Liberia to establish a comprehensive national development plan and pass it into law so that the country will experience rapid, continuous, and congruent development. The model uses three approaches, including, Benchmark, Fractional, and Legal Approaches to describe how significant and sustainable development can be rapidly and systematically achieved in Liberia. The Benchmark Approach specifies that the country must clearly define the kinds of development (e.g., road, schools, and hospitals) that must take place within the country given a specified time frame (e.g., Road Completion Project 2007-2014); the specific locations at which such development must occur (e.g., Bong County); and how such plan must be implemented, considering budgetary and other constraints. This approach aims to minimize the degree to which any sitting government can deviate from legislated national developmental goals and guarantees development project will be sustained throughout the country from one administration to the next. Citing a case study of the U.S. National System of Interstate Highways, the Fractional Approach defines the percent of the national budget that must be set aside by each administration; and also stipulates the fraction of the national development plan that each administration must complete prior to the expiration of their tenure. This approach ensures the consistent allocation of resources to national development; and successfully distributes national developmental projects across successive administrations. Finally, the Legal Approach ensures the enforceability of the established national development plan. Without a legal approach, there is no way to legally hold sitting governments accountable for the non-implementation of the national development plan. Each of these approaches are essential to a strong national development plan for Liberia, that when established and passed it into law will cause Liberia to experience the kind of development that is typical of other developed nations.
Reference:
[1] Liberia: Past and Present, http://www.liberiapastandpresent.org/ (Last Accessed: May, 2007).
[2] The U.S. Department of Transportation (Federal Highway Administration) Website (Last Accessed: May, 2007).
[3] World Atlas: http://www.worldatlas.com/ (Last Accessed: May, 2007).
[4] The U.S. Office of Management and Budget Website (Last Accessed: May, 2007).
[5] The Analyst Newspaper: NTLA Passes National Budget: Saturday, July 1, 2006.
[6] The Perspective Website: Liberia's Budget Drops to US$520M - Pres. Sirleaf: Posted Jan 30, 2006 (Last Accessed: May, 2007).
[7] The Apartheid System of South Africa: www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Torture/Apartheid_TPOC.html (Last Accessed: May, 2007).
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Cleveland, OH
Phone: 216-577-3177
June 3, 2007
|
LiberianForum on Facebook!
