If ‘Change is to Come’ to America’s Africa Policy: Ten ‘Think Points’ for the Obama Administration 

By ‘Dapo Oyewole

If ‘change is to come to America’, the wind of change that has just blown through the terrain of its domestic politics must now blow the sails of its foreign policy in new directions. This will require, amongst other things, a change of the policy lenses through which the US perceives Sub-Saharan Africa, and a review of the policy tools and approaches it employs in engaging the continent.

Circumstances leading to the election of the incoming US government, to an extent, typifies one of those extraordinary paradigm-shifting moments in a country’s political history when the sharp tensions between hope, fear and despair culminate in intense social pressures that become a tipping point for radical national change - either in domestic or foreign policy, or both. Prior to the November 2008 elections, at no time in recent political history has America’s foreign policy featured so centrally in its domestic social and political discourse, or been such a crucial determinant of voters’ electoral decisions. Usually, it is domestic issues that mostly inform voter behaviour and shape the priorities addressed on the campaign trail. The international issues, such as foreign policy, are more often secondary add-ons. But not this time.

This is partly because the consequences and costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and a retinue of other international challenges are now being felt hard at home. And, perhaps until the last term of the outgoing US government, the link between domestic well-being and foreign policy has never been so well demonstrated to the US public. However, while much debate has taken place during and after the recent Presidential election campaign about the US’ policy in Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, China, Russia and Pakistan, little has been said about Africa other than references to the President-Elect’s ancestry –which will not be the basis of his foreign policy, even if it contributes to his worldview. 

Thus, as President Obama’s team go through the long shopping list of foreign policy priorities that they must grapple with after the inauguration, it is important to highlight the fact that Africa is one continent they must not and cannot afford to ignore. This is because leaving Africa on the backburners of policy attention, as often done in time past, could be a mistake which will attract to America economic and security challenges in the near future. Reflecting on the past eight years and even beyond, it is apparent that the US needs a new policy approach towards Africa to really change ministry. Below are some of the key issues that have to be factored into the design of a new Africa policy architecture.

The US and Africa need each other

The US needs Africa, and Africa needs the US. This is nothing to be ashamed about on either side. It’s simply realpolitik. At no time since the sizzling heights of the cold war has Africa been of greater immediate and long-term strategic importance to America’s domestic and international interests on multiple facets. Whether it’s in tackling terrorism, promoting democracy, ensuring global peace and stability or securing alternate sources of oil for America’s increasing energy needs, the US needs Africa more today than ever.

As America’s domestic demand for oil continues to increase, the US’ need for more sources of oil is becoming more and more of a critical issue on the political agenda, both as an economic security challenge and as a national security priority. Continued political instability and hostility in some parts of the Middle-East has forced a rethink of the traditional sources of oil for the US. Today, about 18 percent of U.S. crude oil imports comes from Africa, and this is expected to grow to 25 percent by 2015. However, the emerging giants, China and India, also have rising oil needs as their economies continue to grow rapidly and their process of industrialisation goes into higher gears. All eyes are on Africa’s oil. Oil that the US desperately needs.

Africa also needs the US with equal, or in some aspects, greater urgency. For individual countries and for the continent collectively, the US remains one of Africa’s largest trade partners and can be one of Africa’s strongest allies in spurring economic growth, strengthening democratic institutions, ending conflicts, tackling poverty and combating decimating diseases such as HIV/AIDs, tuberculosis and malaria. However, that is if China’s increasing economic clout, catalysed by massive investments in infrastructure building projects in Africa in exchange for access to natural resources, does not succeed in gradually diminishing or supplanting the US’ influence in Africa.

Africa in not static, its evolving

Africa today is not the same as Africa a decade ago. Though so much more needs to be done, especially in rural areas and the poorest countries, Africa is better-off today in some aspects than it was merely a decade ago. While some things have stayed the same in some areas, much has also changed in others- in politics, polities, economies and societies. The region is fast democratising, albeit with many challenges; civil society is more active, visible and audible; its economies, though largely incomparable to the West’s, have some of the fastest growth rates in the world and some segments of Africa’s societies are increasingly becoming more globalised in their activities, practices and orientation. Though corruption, repression, poverty, conflict, instability and disease are still rife in some parts, accountability, peace, stability and progress exist in others. The continent is extremely diverse and applying the ‘one size fits all’ approach in policy analysis, design, or implementation, often fails. However, today, one common thread can be noted running through the social pulse and policy direction of most African countries and that is the hunger not for aid and pity, but for trade and dignity, bolstered by a keen desire within civil society and the private sector for effective and functional democracies, and a bulging youth population eager to be part of the global community.

Unwilling to remain typecast as Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness; the primitive region depicted in the movie ‘The Gods Must be Crazy’; the Western world’s quixotic safari or the shameless host of an unending pity-party for handouts from richer countries, much of today’s Africa yearns for development and people are striving, where they can, to modernise and develop Africa’s economies, its institutions and infrastructure. Where governments are weak or unwilling, civil society and the private sector are pushing the envelope and seeing returns in most regions. Increasingly, groups of thinkers, reformers and technocrats are emerging on the political scene and expanding the boundaries of public policy debate and practice. Africans are hungry for development, but development on their own terms with Africa at the steering wheel, determining its own speed and direction. It however cannot achieve this alone. It needs partners it can trust. Can the US be one of the them? 

For the US to remain influential in Africa and be Africa’s ‘trusted partner’ in achieving its development goals, it will need to read the pulse of this fast evolving continent, realising that business cannot continue as usual if we are to see ‘change we can believe in’ in US-Africa relations. As Report No. 56 of the Council of Foreign Relations’ Independent Task Force published in 2006 rightly states, the US’s approach towards Africa needs to be based on ‘more than humanitarianism.’ I would add that it also needs to go beyond paternalism and opportunism. There is a need to go beyond the traditional framework of aid, charity and humanitarian assistance, whereby the US uses it wealth to assist, instruct or pressurise African countries to do its bidding. What is needed is a new paradigm of partnership based on shared dialogue in meeting shared goals and dealing with mutually identified challenges that will produce shared benefits both domestically and internationally, for Americans, citizens of respective African countries and the world. A few aspects of what should inform this new paradigm are highlighted below.

Impose less, listen more

The US needs to start listening more. There are many strategic objectives it wants to pursue, but the chances of success are much higher if it listens and negotiates more through meaningful dialogue, not bullying, megaphone diplomacy or sabre-rattling. For example it needs to step back from pushing a clearly resistant and reluctant Africa from accepting its plans for establishing a US AFRICA COMMAND (AFRICOM) on African soil. This only fuels suspicion and resentment and creates grounds for anti-American groups to whip up sentiments that can result in negative actions against American interests. It will merely create sitting targets for attacks from these anti-US groups, be they organised international terror groups or disaffected locals. There is a whole lot more that can be done to assist in strengthening African security forces and maintaining peace and security on the continent without a full-fledged US military base on African soil. The funds earmarked for establishing a base will help more in providing training, equipment and added enabling capacity for African Union troops to actualise its Rapid Reaction Brigades that can be effectively deployed to conflict flash points like Darfur, Eastern Congo, Northern Uganda, Somalia or even in tackling pirates in the Somali coast. If the Americans listen to Africans more and build trust and confidence first by demonstrating a real commitment to bolstering the capacity of Africa’s security forces, Africans may become less suspicious and less resistant to the pursuance of some the US’ interests in Africa.

Show leadership in ending conflicts in Darfur, Congo and Somalia

It’s an open secret that the US has become shy when it comes to conflict intervention in Africa. After the fiasco in Somalia and the failure to intervene in Rwanda, the US has remained in a somewhat paralytic quandary in terms of how to effectively contribute and participate in conflict prevention and peace keeping operations on the continent. However, if the US is to be seen as a true partner for maintaining peace and security in Africa, it needs to exorcise the ghost of Somalia that still haunts it and learn from the failures in Rwanda. Today, as what the US calls “genocide” in Darfur rages on; the conflict that has killed almost three million people in the Congo stares the world squarely in the face and volatile Somalia is set to erupt again, America, like many other international and domestic actors, seems unable to develop an effective strategy to decisively and effectively intervene and end these conflicts.

 It goes without saying that security and stability in Africa can only mean greater security for America and the international community, because it is often in conflict-affected areas that criminal groups thrive, terror cells operate freer and illegal immigration increases. It is in the interest of the US to show strong leadership (through multilateral approaches) in conflict intervention, especially in places like Darfur, Congo and Somalia. Corrective action against the repressive government of Pres. Robert Mugabe and the coup plotters in Guinea are best taken in concert with the UN and the African Union, but with a strong US, putting its money where its mouth is and standing up for what it says it believes in: democracy.

Demonstrating greater interest and leadership, through decisive action, whilst working with the UN, the African Union and other international and domestic stakeholders in resolving these conflicts must be at the forefront of its peace and security policy agenda in Africa. If it can do this with a good blend of diplomacy, consensus building and a well-considered dose of assertiveness, it will win more support in the region for some of its own strategic interests. It will also prove to the world that though one US administration was quite good at starting conflicts, the new administration may be equally good at ending them. 

Separate foreign policy, science and religion in tackling HIV/AIDS

While tackling HIV/AIDS remains the highest point of outgoing George W. Bush’s legacy in Africa through his President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), a small adjustment needs to be made: the US needs to stop supplanting science with selective morality by preaching sexual abstinence in Africa as a foreign policy position based on the outgoing President’s religious beliefs. It may be welcome as a moral suggestion but not as an instruction articulated through foreign policy. George W. Bush’s administration withdrew support for family planning clinics and provision of contraception, and instead pushed for sexual abstinence as a primary tactic for fighting HIV/AIDS. While the principle can be understood on a moral level, what cannot be understood is making foreign policy a tool for shaping or dictating sexual habits in other parts of the world. Preventing the spread of HIV AIDs in Africa and internationally must remain at the forefront of the US’ global health priorities. This is both in Africa’s and the US’ health, economic and security interests. However this is best done not by preaching and indirectly enforcing sexual practice and behavioural changes through foreign policy, but by strengthening and contributing to holistic approaches advised by scientists, supported by moral messages about abstinence. Investing in campaigns for safer sexual behaviour have proven to be more effective. Going forward, a clear distinction needs to be made between the President’s religious beliefs and the country’s foreign policy.

Tackle poverty not just through aid, but through trade

It also worthy to note that perpetual poverty is not the natural state of an African continent that is replete with resources, in a world filled with plenty. Poverty in Africa is mostly a result of corruption and the failure of, political and economic governance within the continent and additionally, the super-competitive ‘dog-eat-dog’ international financial system which is controlled by the richer western nations with minimal meaningful input from the poorer countries. The protectionism of richer countries and the snobbery of the international financial system also help little. And finally, it also reflects the greed driven exploitation of some multinationals – in cahoots with some corrupt African officials - that plunder Africa’s resources, destroy the environment, ship away profits to western economies and give little back.

But Africa is moving beyond blaming others for its woes and is now making practical, and in many cases, fair suggestions, of how to tackle poverty on the continent. For example, it has asked richer nations like the US (the US being one of the better performers through its AGOA programme), to give it a fairer chance to trade profitably in the US market instead of just receiving aid. How? By removing barriers to the US markets so that African countries can profitably sell their goods and earn their keep. They have also asked for the removal of agricultural subsidies which makes it possible for US farmers to overproduce finished agricultural goods and then flush African markets with them at cheap prices, thereby out pricing local farmers and further impoverishing them. Give Africa a level global economic playing field to trade on and with good governance, soon it will not need aid.

Invest in infrastructure to spur economic growth and employment

Africa is not just a continent with kwashiorkor ridden children with begging bowls. It’s a continent with people who are willing to work hard to earn a living and a private sector that is dynamic and innovative, but disabled by lack of, or limited, infrastructure. As such economic productivity is not as high as it could be and employment levels are low. Thanks to corruption, poor governance and limited foreign investment, fifty odd years after independence, the continent still lacks adequate modern infrastructure which can be the engine for enabling it to increase its economic productivity and performance.

Homes, hospitals, roads, schools, trains, bridges, seaports, airports, regular electrical power supply, telecommunications, higher internet bandwidth, mechanised farming equipment etc are the tools the continent now desperately needs to unleash the potential of its private sector and foster economic prosperity. These are what the continent urgently needs to radically transform its economies. China understands this and is building the infrastructure Africa needs at a rapid rate. The US may also want to think of more innovative ways to meet Africa at its point of need, while still achieving its own goals. With proper dialogue and appropriate caveats, these goals of both regions could be mutually complimentary.

Beware of the China Factor

The Chinese model of supporting development in Africa, which is based on a ‘judge not’ and ‘no conditionality’ policy of respect for the sovereignty of African states, seems to have gained much sway in Africa. While there are valid concerns in civil society about how this approach may limit transparency, fuel corruption or undermine democratic values, the Chinese are putting their money where their mouths are and they are refining their processes as they go along. As a result, African heads are now beginning to turn East rather than West for support in meeting their development needs. Why? Because they can tell the Chinese what they need and want and get it without much ado. Instead of the usual norm in which some Western donor nations dictate to Africans what they need, when they will get it, what they should use it for and how – while they exploit natural resources on the continent with less accountability. The Africans fed up with this approach needed a different tune. The Chinese realised this early and played the right song and they now seem to have their finger on the pulse of Africa’s economic rhythm. Trade between both regions will hit the $100 billion mark in December 2008. The Chinese also probably realised that the supporting votes of fifty three African countries at the UN is a valuable political gain, which China would be only too happy to secure – bearing in mind that China’s veto powers at the UN Security Council can also be very useful to African countries who have campaigned for decades without success for a permanent Security Council seat.

China and Africa seem to be cementing a mutually rewarding economic and diplomatic quid pro quo arrangement that meets both their needs. Will America be able to do the same? Will America be able to feel the new rhythm on the continent? Will it change its diplomatic dance to suit the new beat? Or will it sing a different tune as well? Whatever it does to play a much better tune will, to a great degree, determine the extent of the US’ economic and political influence in Africa going forward. But beware of a watchful and formidable China ready to compete.

Restructure USAID and increase the capacity of the Department of African Affairs

If the US truly seeks to succeed in a new policy approach towards Africa, it will need a combination of new policy lenses, fresh minds, innovative ideas and restructured institutions.  USAID , which is the humanitarian face of America on the continent, needs to be strengthened financially and in its human resources, and be allowed to function as an autonomous development agency separate from the State Department – much like the UK’s Department for International Development (DFID) is separate from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO). As the US change its global image, It would indeed help people on the ground to know the distinction between the US’ humanitarian development support and development support as a political foreign policy tool, as people have lost trust in America’s ability to divorce the two. An autonomous development focused USAID, can be the US’ public diplomacy tool to reposition America in Africa, and heal hearts and minds by healing rifts, building trust and regaining confidence in a region where people have lost trust in the US having their best interests at heart and often suspect US humanitarian support as a Trojan Horse for achieving other strategic objectives.

The Department of African Affairs on the other hand, is one of the youngest and smallest in the State Department. If Africa will become one of the most strategic regions to the US, in the next decade or so, then investing in strengthening the capacity of the Department now would be advisable. For a robust foreign policy engagement with African countries and the continent as a whole, this department needs added capacity, both in personnel and finances. It would also help if the analysts and advisors in a revamped Department of African Affairs are au fait with the realities of today’s Africa -its politics, its challenges, as well as it opportunities - and not still mired in cold war thinking, neo-colonial ideas or incurable pessimism about Africa. The department needs eggheads who, beyond academic theory, can analyse and understand today’s Africa and create innovative and effective policy bridges between both regions.

Seize the opportunity for change

At this crucial juncture that could signal the redrawing of the US’s foreign policy architecture under the Obama Presidency, the US needs to review and redefine its interests in and its policy approach towards Africa. President-Elect Obama’s ‘wind of change’ needs to blow away what has otherwise been mostly a disjointed array of undefined, knee-jerk, paternalistic, opportunistic and ad-hoc interventions as opposed to a clear, holistic, robust yet respectful and principled strategy for engaging a continent that is encumbered by myriad challenges, yet pregnant with multifarious opportunities.

If President-Elect Obama promises to bring change to America, his government can also help to support change in Africa through a revamped, clear, responsive and coherent Africa policy that is more supportive, respectful and cognizant of an African continent determined to rise from its chequered past into a more prosperous future. If some of the trends we are beginning to see emerging in better governance, economic growth and political stability in most parts of the continent continue, then we can confidently say change is gradually coming to Africa. But if the US wants to be a catalyst of this process of change and continue being influential in the region with local support for its policies and positions, it should position itself as a reliable partner, a facilitator not an instructor, in making that change happen in Africa.

President-Elect Obama inferred during his campaign that he believes that Africa’s challenges need to be tackled holistically in a manner that address both the symptoms and the root causes of some of the continent’s social, political and economic problems. If this is at the core of his chosen approach, then he is heading in the right direction. But as the African saying goes, ‘you cannot shave a man’s head in his absence’. As such, the US must ensure that in restructuring and redefining its relationship and policy approach towards Africa, it does so in a manner that ensures that the views, voices, priorities, aspirations and dignity of today’s Africans are reflected and protected in its new Africa policy. For Obama’s process of change to be complete, change has to come to US-Africa relations. Change we can build on.

* ’Dapo Oyewole is a World Fellow at Yale University & Director of CAPPS, an Africa-focused policy think tank. E-mail: dapo@thinkafrica.org

Robot  # 1 | 01.01.2009 07:17

At this crucial juncture that could signal the redrawing of the US’s foreign policy architecture under the Obama Presidency, the US needs to review and redefine its interests in and its policy approach towards Africa. President-Elect Obama’s ‘wind of change’ needs to blow away what has otherwise been mostly a disjointed array of undefined, knee-jerk, paternalistic, opportunistic and ad-hoc interventionsas opposed to a clear, holistic, robust yet respectful and principled strategy for engaging a continent that is encumbered by myriad challenges,yet pregnant with multifarious opportunities. ...Read the full article.