What Africans Don’t Understand About U.S. Policy

           I have been blessed in my life to know Africans from a young age and have strong, longstanding friendships with African men and women.  From them, I have learned a lot about how African people think and how they behave.  This has been invaluable for me in figuring out what to recommend to the policymakers for whom I’ve worked.

            However, some of the Africans I have known for quite a while still don’t understand how U.S. government policy on Africa is developed nor what role the United States has played and should play in Africa.  That role is often overestimated as well as underestimated.  Let me humbly attempt to put things in perspective.

First of all, the United States was not a colonial power like the United Kingdom, France,  Belgium, Spain or Portugal.  That means our country didn’t shape the circumstances in African countries like the colonial powers did.  Our people are not widely embedded in African countries with relationships that span generations.  Many of us lack an affinity for Africa, and to some, the continent might as well be the dark side of the moon insofar as its obvious relation to our lives.

            Of course, African nations and people do impact our lives.  We use products from Africa that are critical to our society – not just oil but also elements that go into the construction and operation of our daily devices such as computers, cell phones, catalytic converters, and increasingly important, renewable energy machinery.  Many of us live in proximity to African-born or first-generation Africans, work with them or go to school with them.  Some of us embrace those relationships as I have, while others barely acknowledge them.  Unfortunately, lessons that could be learned in person about the real Africa are missed and not provided elsewhere through the media or our education system.  Thus, many of us have a false idea of Africa as that land of conflict, plague and misrule.  There is all that in Africa, to be sure, but there is so much more – some lessons in fact that we could adopt for our lives.

            From the beginning of the colonial period in the 19^th century until the dawn of African independence in the 1950s, the U.S. government took its lead on Africa from its European allies who had colonies on the continent.  That is not my opinion, but rather what an older State Department colleague told me many years ago.  Such lack of deep understanding of African traditions and history have contributed to tragic miscalculations during the Cold War period such as in actions taken in South Africa and the now Democratic Republic of the Congo in the 1960s and other countries since that time. Our government, despite trade relations that went back for a century, didn’t have the deep connection to make coherent Africa policy then, and in some ways still doesn’t.

            It is, therefore, not surprising that many Americans underestimate what Africans are capable of achieving on their own without the need of outside support.  There are and have been for quite some time very brilliant Africa managers, scientists and technicians who too often are forced to leave their homelands and labor in foreign countries like ours.  Consequently, their achievements are not seen as “African”.  It is interesting to consider what Africa might be today if so many of its strongest were not kidnapped into bondage or had not left on their own in the years since slavery ended.  Dreams of a modern Wakanda are indeed somewhat fanciful, especially without the presence of the mythical mineral vibranium, but a more developed Africa would certainly be a reasonable expectation.

            There are those who recoiled at former President Donald Trump’s “America First” stance, but in fact, U.S. policy, like those of other nations, has always focused on what is in the best interest of this country.  In my humble opinion, our policy has often been too short-sighted though.  In comparison, the Chinese are well known for their five-year plans, while we look to what our needs are today.  I have told many of my African friends that U.S. policy toward the continent is shaped by what the Department of Defense and the intelligence community thinks will best protect our homeland.  That is their job, and they pursue it diligently, but when you discount human rights and good governance in developing foreign policy, you make a mistake that can have long-lasting repercussions.

            Leaders considered allies can die suddenly, as has happened in recent years.  Governments can be voted out of office or even overthrown.  Who thinks about what would happen in such cases?  Are those who replace the government we favored kindly disposed to us, or will our relationship be one of convenience, forged in suspicion and resentment and subject to sudden change?  Such unstable alliances can be fragile or even false.

            I and others who believe in human rights and good governance have been labelled do-gooders and naïve for focusing on such issues, but wouldn’t multinational companies prefer working in countries where there is rule of law and honest court systems, where their employees won’t be hauled off to jail suddenly for supporting the wrong political candidate or where corruption eats up profits and dooms projects to failure?  What’s naïve or simple-minded about that?  Short-term, so-called pragmatic policies sure haven’t been as successful as promised, now have they?

            All too often, we, and I mean not just government but also Africa advocates, focus on personalities in African leadership and not the African people they are supposed to represent.   For example, in years past there were many Africa advocates who were reluctant to publicly criticize Milton Obote or Idi Amin in Uganda despite the horror they brought to their citizens.  A mature relationship acknowledges not just the usefulness of a government, but also its weaknesses in delivering for its people what they are owned as citizens and human beings.  Criticizing bad behavior must no longer be seen as criticizing the country and its people, but rather efforts to safeguard the interests of those people from leaders who have failed them.

            When the Peace Corps was founded in the 1960s, its motto was that if you give a man a fish, you feed him for a day, but if you teach him how to fish, he can feed himself for a lifetime.  Somewhere along the line, we have gotten off track and focused on current humanitarian needs instead of long-term empowerment.  The U.S. Agency for International Development, for whom I was honored to work, believes in empowerment of African people, but it is often overruled on policy by agencies looking to gain African support for the theme of the day – be it opposition to the Russians or Chinese or supportive votes in international councils.

            Finally, communicating with the U.S. government on American foreign policy isn’t done as it is in Africa.  Most notably, the Congress doesn’t work quite like legislatures in Africa.  Foreign policy actually is shaped to a great extent in an activist Congress, especially the House of Representatives.  The African Growth and Opportunity Act was devised in the House, not the executive branch.  In the American system, Congressional staff have much more influence on policy than in other countries.  You may see a Member of Congress to plead your case, but staff members prepare the Member for your meeting, give an assessment post-meeting and are responsible for follow-up.  If a staff member believes in what you’re presenting, they can press the issue with their boss.  If they don’t, your issue will fall between the cracks, as a myriad of issues is always coming for any Member of Congress.

            Also, demonstrations or even meetings can have some positive impact for you, but in all my years living in the Washington area, I have seen numerous such public events, though less so since the advent of COVID-19.  I don’t say they are worthless, but people in Congress are inundated with issues advocates proclaim as life and death, but there are so many, Members of Congress and their staffs have to choose between the many worthy issues, and some get put on the back burner.

            On the other hand, if you have expatriates who are citizens in a Member’s district or state go to their local offices, you are considered voters, and voters must be listened to, especially if you can relate your concerns to how people in the district or state feel, such as those in churches and citizen organizations.  Ethiopian Americans have pursued this method with California politicians recently and continue to do so.

            So, the formulation of U.S. African policy is somewhat complex, but it can be understood if you get the basics of how it is created and implemented.