05/06/2025
Martin K. N. Kollie the Mirage: Here is What You Must Know About the Truth Behind Liberia’s Diplomatic Triumph
At one point, Martin vehemently opposed Liberia’s pathway to the United Nations Security Council, the very process he now celebrates with selective applause. When Minister Sara Beysolow Nyanti took up the diplomatic lead to activate Liberia’s UNSC bid, Martin did not only question her competence, he publicly attempted to blackmail her into rejection, stating on January 30, 2024, that she had been declared persona non grata in multiple UN postings and that “Beysolow must be rejected.” https://www.facebook.com/share/12EzNGHrhbj/?mibextid=wwXIfr
He labeled her unfit for national service and even accused her of using her position only to “travel abroad.” When she wrote to former President George Weah to formally begin the transition process for the seat Liberia had already secured endorsement for, Martin dismissed the move entirely and scoffed, “Why write GMW? What power does he have at UNGA?” This was not policy disagreement. This was sabotage. And while Martin launched his smear campaign, we defended her—because we knew that credentials should outweigh conspiracy, and vision should silence vendetta. Today, Sara Beysolow Nyanti is rightly celebrated as a national treasure, leading Liberia’s diplomacy with elegance, credibility, and clarity. But let me be clear—this is not the central response.
The real issue is Martin’s deep contradiction: this is the man now claiming diplomatic expertise, despite spending years insulting every brick in the house he now pretends to have built. His recent article “Weahplomacy: The Hubris of Fanciful Fantasy” attempts to erase fact with florid metaphors, casting the Weah administration as diplomatically bankrupt, morally chaotic, and internationally disgraced. But here is what you must know. Liberia’s election to the United Nations Security Council is not the product of fantasy—it is the result of diplomatic strategy initiated under President George Weah, formally endorsed by ECOWAS and the African Union during his administration.
On July 9, 2023, at the 63rd Ordinary Session of the ECOWAS Authority of Heads of State and Government held in Bissau, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia was unanimously endorsed as the sole ECOWAS candidate for the UNSC non-permanent seat for the 2026–2027 term. https://frontpageafricaonline.com/news/ecowas-heads-of-state-and-governments-endorse-liberias-candidacy-for-un-security-council-membership/
This endorsement was not a backroom favor—it was recorded under Count D, Numbers 46 and 47 of the final communiqué, signed and adopted by all 15 West African heads of state and government. The document was officially signed by H E General Umaro Sissoco Embaló, then Chairperson of the ECOWAS Authority and President of Guinea-Bissau. Just five days later, from July 13–14, 2023, at the 43rd Ordinary Session of the African Union Executive Council held in Nairobi, Kenya, the African Union unanimously endorsed Liberia’s candidacy at the continental level. The decision is found in Doc. EX.CL/1446(XLIII) under the section titled “Endorses New Candidatures of Governments Submitted by Member States”. https://allafrica.com/stories/202307180406.html
This African Union decision made Liberia the official candidate of the African continent—a rare diplomatic consensus. And who delivered this? President George Manneh Weah and Foreign Minister Dee-Maxwell Saah Kemayah. It was their lobbying, negotiation, and deliberate positioning within multilateral spaces that produced Liberia’s uncontested bid. Read the ECOWAS endorsement and the AU endorsement attached to this writeup here. These were not ceremonial gesturesthey were strategic, coordinated victories won under President Weah’s administration. And in June 2025, Liberia received 181 votes out of 193 at the United Nations General Assembly, becoming one of the most broadly supported candidates on the ballot.
Yet, in his attempt to undermine this historic moment, Martin points to the presence of U S sanctions during the Weah administration as a sign of diplomatic failure. But recently, the United States has continued to expand its use of sanctions, even against multilateral institutions and traditional allies. In 2025, for instance, the U S government invoked Executive Order 14203 to threaten sanctions against officials of the International Criminal Court for pursuing investigations into Israel’s conduct in Gaza. Read more here. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/imposing-sanctions-on-the-international-criminal-court/
Similarly, sanctions were lifted on settlers. https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2025/1/21/trump-lifts-us-sanctions-on-israeli-settlers-in-the-occupied-west-bank
Similarly, in the same year, the U S significantly eased sanctions on Syria—not because Syria had reformed, but because strategic interests shifted following the fall of Assad’s regime. Source: https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sb0148 #:~:text=WASHINGTON%20—%20Today%2C%20the%20Department%20of,of%20all%20sanctions%20on%20Syria.
As an African with an ardent interest in diplomacy, I must emphasize two critical academic perspectives on this issue. First, Daniel W Drezner, in The Hidden Hand of Economic Coercion (International Organization, 2003), argues that sanctions are primarily instruments of geopolitical leverage, not measures of moral standing. Second, Clara Portela, in her work European Union Sanctions and Foreign Policy (2010), reveals that sanctions often serve as symbolic pressure tactics used to signal disapproval without disrupting long-term engagement. In both frameworks, the presence of sanctions does not negate a nation’s ability to secure international alliances or diplomatic victories.
In fact, Liberia under sanction pressure was able to deliver one of its most respected global achievements a milestone endorsement from ECOWAS and the African Union, which directly contradicts Martin’s core argument. If sanctions were a disqualifier, Liberia would never have made it to the ballot, let alone swept 181 votes in New York. This is the contradiction Martin cannot escape: the very process he fought, dismissed, and demonized has now succeeded and he wants to take a seat at the table he tried to burn. But the record is clear. Liberia’s seat at the Security Council was built through years of deliberate, intelligent, and patient diplomacy not through metaphors, not through rants, and certainly not through Martin’s shifting narratives. Let the record stand. And let Martin, just this once, sit this one out.
Worse still, Martin reduces Liberia’s diplomatic rise to a collection of scandals, the most frequently cited being passport fraud. But again, here is what Martin refuses to contextualize: passport fraud is a global administrative challenge, not a uniquely Liberian disgrace. In 2014, Nyle Churchwell, a senior U S passport office manager, was convicted and sentenced for issuing passports to criminals using fraudulent documentation. See the official DOJ report. https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdtx/pr/passport-office-worker-ordered-prison-passport-fraud
The UK, too, admitted in 2007 that more than 10,000 fraudulent British passports had been issued some to individuals linked to al-Qaida. The Guardian reported this here. https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/mar/20/terrorism.alqaida #:~:text=An%20estimated%2010%2C000%20British%20passports,the%20Home%20Office%20admitted%20today.
And according to the European University Institute’s 2021 study, Document Fraud in the Migration Process, such abuses happen in both developed and developing countries, driven not by diplomacy, but by administrative vulnerabilities and global crime syndicates. Yet Martin uses Liberia’s case to argue that Weah’s leadership “rendered the state an international pariah,” when in fact, it was during Weah’s presidency that Liberia’s candidacy was globally embraced. On sanctions, Martin does no better. He uses U S sanctions as if they are a universal measure of legitimacy, when in reality, sanctions are diplomatic tools, not moral judgments. In 2020, the United States sanctioned the International Criminal Court prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, and another senior prosecution official, Phakiso Mochochoko for investigating alleged American war crimes a fact verified here https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/12/14/us-sanctions-international-criminal-court
Also, in 2025, used Executive Order 14203 to threaten the ICC again over Israel. Read more https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2025/03/what-do-the-trump-administrations-sanctions-on-the-icc-mean-for-justice-and-human-rights/. As Daniel Drezner explains in The Hidden Hand of Economic Coercion, sanctions are often political chess moves, not ethical scorecards.
Martin also intentionally refuse to alert you on the ban. In 2022, CAF Security and Safety Department banned stadiums in Mali, Senegal, Liberia, Central Africa, Namibia, Malawi, and Burkina Faso. Check here. https://salonesportsvillage.com/the-team-that-you-support/ #:~:text=The%20Confederation%20of%20African%20Football,World%20Cup%20qualifiers%20for%20Africa. His attempt to lump in temporary FIFA and CAF bans further exposes his misunderstanding. Kenya, Congo, Zimbabwe, Ethiopia, Chad, and others have faced similar football sanctions. https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/articles/cx2513r30v6o.amp These are internal governance issues in sports not indicators of diplomatic isolation. But that is the issue with Martin’s writing it is saturated in metaphors but empty in policy depth. First, he writes as if diplomacy can be measured by flag placements and photos. Then, he attacks the very people and processes that delivered Liberia one of its greatest global achievements. And now, he tries to rewrite the same history he protested. But the facts are public. The timeline is clear.
