The U.S. Embassy’s Statement indicts Weah and his government far more than Congressman Chris Smith’s statement
Martin K. N. Kollie writes…
I thought to share a few pointers. Please READ.
In a futile endeavor to seek solace and public empathy, I see a number of public officials and pro-Weah zealots reposting a statement from the U.S. Embassy near Monrovia. Why are they running around as though they have been granted clemency for prevailing State plunder?
Do they really understand what diplomatic tone entails? It may appear soft in dealing with sensitive issues in order to avoid conflict in the public with the receiving/host country but it’s skillful, strategic, and strong at the backdoor. CDCians need to read on “Backdoor Diplomacy (conducting business or politics out of the public view)”.
So, what did the U.S. Embassy near Monrovia say? Let’s analyze.
“Representative Smith is a member of the House of Representatives. He represents one of the many diverse viewpoints of our elected officials, which is a strength of our democracy. He does not, however, speak directly on behalf of the Biden-Harris Administration or the U.S. Embassy. The U.S. Embassy has consistently raised concerns over corruption in our private conversations with the government and in our publicly available reports, including on investment climate and human rights. Liberians in government have recently been designated as corrupt actors by the U.S. State Department and U.S. Treasury Department. We have long worked with government and civil society actors in anti-corruption efforts in Liberia and share the belief of many Liberians that corruption is a primary barrier to the development of the country”. Michael Ardaiolo, Public Affairs Officer, United States Embassy, Monrovia
Key interpretations to consider:
1) First Sentence: The first sentence indicates that Congressman Chris Smith is not ordinary but he is an elected public official and his voice matters because it is a representation of how strong America’s democracy is;
2) Second Sentence: He can speak for the government through the Legislative branch but not directly for the executive branch which Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are presiding over.
I want you to underline the adverb directly which only shows emphasis. The statement did not say that Rep. Smith cannot speak for the government. It only emphasized that he is not the chief spokesman or the chief foreign policy proponent of the Biden-Harris Administration.
For instance, a lawmaker in Liberia can introduce a bill to sanction another country and lobby with his colleagues to pass this bill without seeking any permission from the executive. The law of two-thirds is powerful than the entire executive branch including President Biden.
3) In the second sentence, the U.S. Embassy did not outrightly denounce the statement of Congressman Chris Smith. The diplomatic technique that the U.S. Embassy used in this sentence is called “Politics of Pacification”.
This is a type of diplomacy that is intended to prevent further aggravation, uproar, or incitement in the public between two countries. So, the embassy pacified or placated, or appeased the Weah-led government in this sentence.
By saying, “Chris Smith does not speak directly for the Biden-Harris Administration” has calmed them down. What a skillful diplomatic tone. Does Pres. Weah has experts on diplomacy and foreign relations to interpret these coded languages or common diplomatic techniques to him? I really do not think so.
4) Sentence Four: The U.S. Embassy indicts the Weah-led government for corruption and said that it has consistently raised alarm both in private and public about corruption. Sentence four further indicts Weah and his government for poor investment climate and human rights violations. So, what different is the U.S. Embassy saying from what Congressman Smith said? At least Smith only highlighted how corrupt the Weah-led has been and continues to be, but the U.S. Embassy has gone far beyond to highlight the issue of human rights violations and poor investment climate.
5) Sentence Five: The U.S. Embassy made specific reference to corrupt actors within the Weah-led government who have been designated by the U.S. State Department and the U.S. Treasury Department. This is even more damaging.
6) Sentence Six: The U.S. Embassy said that they have been working with civil society actors and anti-graft agencies to fight corruption in the Weah-led government. This clearly implies or infers that the Weah-led government is CORRUPT and the extent to which such corruption has engulfed the Weah-led government is a cause for concern.
7) Furthermore, the U.S. Embassy shares the belief of many Liberians on corruption in the latter part of sentence six. The public perception of corruption in Liberia is very high according to Transparency International (TI). Most Liberians believe that the Weah-led government is very CORRUPT and that corruption remains a barrier to development according to this report. The U.S. Embassy shares this belief too.
So, why are CDCians, including Ministers and Deputy Ministers, clapping and celebrating? Do they really understand why they are clapping and what they clapping for? Do they understand the socio-economic, political, and diplomatic implications of both the U.S. Embassy’s statement and Rep. Smith’s statement?
They are celebrating their own crucifixion or demise. This latest statement from the U.S. Embassy is far more damaging and indicting than Congressman Chris Smith’s statement.
The U.S. Embassy’s statement is a bold confirmation of Rep. Smith’s previous indictment. The U.S. Embassy near Monrovia managed to have used these three (3) diplomatic techniques to calm down the pressure of Mr. Weah and his surrogates: Pacification, Backdoor Diplomacy, and Soft Tone (Diplomatic Tone).
After all, the Weah-led government symbolizes kleptocracy and institutionalized thievery. I totally agree with Representative Chris Smith.
Rogue Regime. Killer Government. Mafia State. The Banana Republic. Zombie Nation. Junta Judiciary. Corrupt Legislature. Zero President.
Martin K. N. Kollie writes from exile…


  1. Thanks a bunch for sharing this with all of us you actually recognize what you are speaking about! Bookmarked. Please additionally seek advice from my website =). We will have a hyperlink exchange arrangement among us!

  2. Howdy! I could have sworn I’ve been to this blog before but after
    browsing through some of tthe post I realized it’s new to
    me. Nonetheless, I’m definitely delighted Ifound iit annd I’ll be bookmarking and checking back

  3. Thanks for your posting on this web site. From my experience, there are occassions when softening up a photograph could provide the digital photographer with a dose of an artsy flare. More often than not however, that soft clouds isn’t what precisely you had at heart and can often times spoil an otherwise good picture, especially if you thinking about enlarging it.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here