…a whipped child wails louder and longer than an adult. Even, some smart children know when to be quiet. This seems to be true in the case of the George Weah saga. Mr. Weah’s destructive ramblings and obdurate contest of the internationally declared free and fair’ Presidential elections do not only prove that Liberians made the best choice in electing Ellen and Joe, but also indicative of the kind of leadership Liberia would have enjoyed (or should I say suffered) had Mr. Weah won the elections.

Many contemporaries like me, have given credit to Mr. Weah’s candidacy because he challenged the democratic process, helped weed out the political parasites, and strategically contributed to Ellen and Joe’s victory. For this, had he conceded honorably, he would have cultivated a rewarding political future and gone down in history with respect. As proven by Ellen and Joe’s political careers, you lose several times to get a victory; Ellen and Joe had persevered after several personal and professional losses, yet today their victory is history.

Let’s look at this scenario critically. Primarily, Mr. Weah lacks both the capacity and dynamics of leading a country and responding to the complexities of politics, economics, and other social & human services issues. Though Liberian’s were cognizant of his limitations, they respected and welcomed his effort. This in itself was a victory for him and the country. Secondly, in as much as he had the right to contest the leadership of his country, the people had the right to elect the candidates they felt were most capable to lead them. The elections transcended gender, ethnicity, rhetoric, religion, warring affiliation, and financial capabilities; in prospect, Liberian’s for the first time made a decision based on the candidates’ qualifications, aptitudes, fortitudes and their own hunger for peace and progress.

Many of the candidates who were even more qualified than Mr. Weah and had more to lose from their defeat have conceded; does he think Liberia owes him the presidency? If his desire to develop Liberia was sincere and if he was of tolerant mind, he would have used his popularity, accomplishments during the elections, and lessons learnt from his defeat to develop himself for future prospects. I have stated before that though Mr. Weah’s intent may have been genuine, he lacked the competence to lead Liberia especially in its critical state. I was of the opinion that considering Mr. Weah’s youth and potential, had he been any wise, he would have used the next six years to develop himself, participate somehow in the socio-political and economic development of the country, and gain some experience; surely he would have been a formidable candidate in subsequent elections.

Relatively, the onus of proving that the Liberian people had made the right/wrong choice would have rested on the performance of Ellen and Joe. However, in addition to losing credibility with the Liberian people and the international community, Mr. Weah has expedited his political downfall. Not only has he harmed his chances of any political future, he has also damaged whatsoever laudatory reputation he had developed as a soccer star or a humanitarian.
Mr. Weah had intimated that he would rely on the best brains money could buy to advice him; are they responsible for his impulsive decisions and statements? Is it just that he is a belligerent sore loser or a combination of all the above and more?

If Mr. Weah was indeed well advised or surrounded by good advisers, he would have known that his proclamations that he is the President of Liberia and that the inaugurations will not be held hurt his case against the NEC and is tantamount to treason; least to mention the implications it has on the peace process and the way forward.

---