As Charles Taylor steps down, President George Bush still has a moral obligation to the country, writes Declan Walsh in Monrovia
For a month he fudged, hedged and delayed. The world urged him to move, but he refused. Now that Liberia's crisis has come to a head, the President's moment of truth has finally come. President Bush, that is, not Taylor.
As the much-reviled Charles Taylor finally left Liberia, the US sent its warships within a few miles of Monrovia. Both developments came too late for some.
US hesitation has cost hundreds of Liberian lives. Over a month ago, on the eve of his much-heralded whirl through Africa, President George W. Bush promised to halt Liberia's plunge into chaos.
Mr Taylor had to step down, he demanded in strident language usually reserved for Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. US soldiers would be deployed, although it wasn't clear how many or in what capacity.
The words were guarded, but the implication was clear. Charles Taylor had to go, by force if necessary. But then Mr Bush fatally stalled.
Shortly after Air Force One left Africa, violence engulfed Monrovia again. Rebels advanced to the city gates, their guns pounding buildings packed with huddling civilians. The dead and dying flooded into makeshift hospitals. Hunger and disease stalked the deserted streets. All the while Mr Bush dithered. He was waiting for more advice, he said.
Then last week he eventually sent the first marines - seven of them.
Reluctant American engagement with the Liberian crisis has been a story of tragic missed opportunities.
Mr Bush set up a potent set of expectations but failed to step up to the plate. Instead, like thousands of refugees sheltering from fighting in the city's sports stadium, he cowered under the bleachers.
It is not too late to help, but a month ago it would have been so much easier. A trained military force, even a small one, could have deterred the third rebel offensive on Monrovia. To see why, one only needs to witness the rebels' chaotic fighting tactics.
Most fighters on both sides are drugged-up teenagers whose chief inspiration appears to come from the Rambo films. To prepare for fighting they jack themselves up with marijuana and moonshine.
Then they throw themselves into the line of fire, roaring obscenities and wildly spraying ammunition from the hip or above the head. They rarely take aim or use combat tactics.
Michael K. Francis, the outspoken Archbishop of Monrovia, predicted that, if faced with US marines, "these young fellows would just throw away their guns and run away".
It may not be quite so simple. But as fighting lulled last month, even a small US force could have easily secured Monrovia to stave off another rebel offensive, and force the leaders to the negotiating table.
It didn't.
In place of soldiers, Mr Bush sent a team of military specialists on an "assessment mission" to Monrovia. In retrospect it was little more than an elaborate stalling device.
Certainly, the 32-strong team gathered valuable information. They visited refugee camps, aid agencies and military positions and received an ecstatic welcome from desperate Liberians, who saw them as forerunners of a rescue force. Some members of the team were visibly touched by the warm reception.
The mission also served another purpose: to give Mr Bush a reason to deflect questions as he toured Africa.
Every time he was asked, the US President said he was awaiting his team's recommendations. But as soon as fighting resumed, most of the team was evacuated by helicopter.
Curiously, those recommendations have never been made public.
Then Mr Bush sent three warships to the Liberian coast with over 2,300 troops on board. But the fleet was kept at the safe distance of 100 miles offshore, far beyond the long lenses of the television networks. It would have been embarrassing, it seems, if they carried images of dying Liberians juxtaposed with those of stationary American battleships.
Up to yesterday President Bush had stressed that his troops would play a support role to the Nigerian-led African peacekeeping mission currently deployed. But the US must lead, and not follow, in Liberia. Other western missions in neighbouring countries have shown how it can be done.
A small, heavily armed British force intervened in Sierra Leone in 2001, stabilising the military flux at a critical moment and providing the stability for a much larger UN force to operate.
A year later France sent 4,000 troops to Ivory Coast, halting the rebel march on the capital, preventing a bloodbath and paving the way for political negotiations.
These heavy-handed military interventions, full of imperfections, may smack of interference by former colonial powers. But their goal is to assume responsibility for their past injustices, not to perpetuate them. The US owes similar debts to Liberia. Americans helped build Liberia in the 19th century; in the 20th century they helped destroy it.
The small, muggy country, founded by freed US slaves in the 1800s, is the closest thing the US has to a former colony in Africa. Liberians view the US as a big brother. Pancakes and doughnuts are served for breakfast, motorists drive on "freeways" and it is the only African country to use American electrical plugs.
But until 1990 the US propped up a string of Liberian dictators for reasons of Cold War self-interest.
During the 1980s the then president Ronald Reagan turned a blind eye to the brutal abuses of then president Samuel Doe because of considerable US ties in Liberia. Monrovia hosted a CIA spy station with international eavesdropping capability, a Voice of America transmitter and a sprawling US embassy. Liberia received more aid per capita than any sub-Saharan African country.
Mr Doe, a semi-literate soldier who shot his way to power, also fomented tribal tensions that brought about civil war in 1989. Charles Taylor started the rebellion that sparked seven years of civil war and, indirectly, led to the chaos that now engulfs the country.
Charles Taylor's forced departure from Liberia yesterday was a crucial move towards peace. So, too, is the deployment of Nigerian peacekeepers intended to fill the vacuum as he goes.
But African military missions, if history is a guide, can easily go wrong. Regional peacekeepers lack resources and training and can become embroiled in fighting. The US has a moral and historical obligation to lead the way in Liberia.
Although President Bush's hesitation has already cost lives and time, it is not too late. But hurry he must.