Published: September 23, 2026
Liberia’s women should not have to force their way into the decisions that shape the peace they helped win.
That is the obligation behind the tributes delivered at the United Nations as President Joseph Boakai launched Liberia’s third national action plan on women, peace and security. The recognition was deserved. The harder question is what those women can expect when the speeches end and the government returns to the business of allocating money and authority.
The gathering offered a powerful account of courage. Women organized in markets, churches and mosques. They pressed armed men and political leaders to negotiate. They fed displaced families, encouraged fighters to disarm and carried the peace agreement back into communities that needed to understand what had been promised in their name.
These were acts of political leadership, often undertaken without the protection or resources available to the officials whose failures they were trying to overcome.
Boakai put it plainly: “They were not invited to the peace process. They made themselves impossible to exclude.”
A government that understands that history should make inclusion routine. Women should not need another extraordinary campaign to secure a meaningful voice in appointments, security decisions, public spending or the institutions responsible for justice.
Leymah Gbowee’s recollection of Boakai helping her in 2003, after prospective donors dismissed her appearance, gave the occasion a personal dimension. It was a welcome account of support when support mattered. The presidency now gives him far greater means to act. His responsibility is to turn that recognition of women’s leadership into a government practice that survives his tenure.
The new action plan, covering 2026 to 2031, provides an opportunity. Its priorities include prevention, protection and access to justice, participation, recovery and financing. According to the government’s presentation, it assigns activities, responsible agencies and indicators. Those commitments give citizens something concrete against which to judge performance.
The immediate test is the budget.
Finance Minister Augustine Kpehe Ngafuan supplied the standard himself: “Plans without budgets are assumptions. Budgets are where governments reveal their real priorities.”
We agree. His reported increase in the Gender Ministry’s allocation is welcome, but a larger ministry budget alone does not establish that this plan is adequately financed. The public needs to see what implementation will cost, what the government will provide and when the money will reach the people expected to do the work.
The next national budget should identify funding for the plan’s activities across the responsible institutions. Subsequent reports should show actual releases and expenditure alongside allocations. A promise entered in a budget becomes useful only when it finances a service, pays for necessary work or removes an obstacle people face.
Grassroots organizations deserve particular attention. The peace hut testimonies described women contributing food, money and time to hold communities together. Their commitment deserves support; it should never become an excuse for government to expect essential peacebuilding work to continue indefinitely at their expense.
Funding arrangements should allow credible community groups to apply without navigating procedures designed for large organizations with professional grant writers. Public money must carry clear reporting requirements. Those requirements should be proportionate, understandable and accompanied by practical support.
Participation also needs a more demanding definition. Appointing women matters, but so do the responsibilities they receive, the resources they control and their ability to influence decisions. A woman can occupy a seat and still be excluded from the exercise of power.
The government should publish clear baselines and regular progress reports for its participation targets. In security institutions, recruitment must be accompanied by fair promotion, safe working conditions and effective responses to harassment. Otherwise, numerical gains may conceal institutions that remain hostile to the women entering them.
The plan’s justice commitments require the same seriousness. Women who survived wartime sexual violence deserve a process that respects their choices, protects their dignity and provides practical support. The government’s stated commitment to gender-sensitive accountability must be visible in the design, staffing and financing of the institutions it is preparing.
Gbowee’s proposal to observe Aug. 18 as Liberia Peace and Security Day also merits consideration. Its strongest purpose would be educational: helping children understand how the war ended, what civilians endured and how ordinary people organized to change the country’s course. The women themselves should help shape that account.
Finally, the National Steering Committee should publish an annual assessment that communities can understand and challenge. Grassroots women should participate in reviewing implementation, with room to identify failures as freely as officials announce successes. The government should also explain what the first two action plans achieved and which unfinished commitments the third must address.
Liberia has every reason to honor its peace women before the world. That honor carries an obligation at home. When they next ask for resources, access or action, they should find that the doors praised as having been forced open have finally been left open.
Discussion about this post