| Front Page |
Washington, DC, July 8, 2004 (United States Congress) DOCUMENT – I
want to thank CSIS for giving me this opportunity to talk about
U.S.-Africa policy today, and to thank all of the members of the
Africa Policy Advisory Panel and the staff who spent long hours
working on the reports that were submitted to the Secretary of State
and are before you today. It was a pleasure for me to work with such
accomplished experts, and I believe that the reports produced by the
Panel are full of sound analysis and important recommendations.
But as good as this work is, these reports simply are not enough. To
translate sound thinking into policy that will yield real results, we
need a sea change, across the partisan divide and throughout
government, that brings a new seriousness and commitment to our
engagement in Africa. We need to be operating in a context in which
we all acknowledge that it is inexcusable for a presidential
candidate to say, as one did four years ago, that Africa "doesn't fit
into our national strategic interests, as far as I can see them."
We need consensus that our policy should involve more than reacting
to crises and more than batting down emerging threats. We need
sustained, not sporadic, engagement if we are to foster the real
partnerships that we will need in the years ahead.
We must not repeatedly "rediscover" Africa with a flurry of flashy
new initiatives that are usually financed by squeezing resources out
of the last round of initiatives, or worse, out of basic development
efforts.
And we need to stop personalizing our relationships, relying on "our
man" in this or that capital, allowing one person to embody the
prospects of progress for millions. Instead of falling in and out of
love with various heads of state or opposition leaders, we need much
more serious thinking and engagement with the next generation of
African leaders, whether they enter the private sector or the
political arena, or become driving forces in civil society.
I believe that we need to think in very concrete terms about why
Africa is so important and so indispensable to pursuing our most
important foreign policy interests. Then we need to think about how
to cultivate the right kinds of long-term relationships with African
partners, and that means focusing on Africa's future. Finally, we
need to acknowledge that today, we are not prepared, at the
nuts-and-bolts level, to pursue the policies that are in our interest
- and we need to make the necessary changes to get our posture right.
Africa and Our First Foreign Policy Priority
Since the attacks of September 11th, 2001, many Americans have come
to understand that state sponsorship of terrorism is one kind of
serious threat that must be addressed, but also that the absence of a
functioning state is another. For several years now I have worked to
call attention to some of the manifestations of states' weakness in
various parts of Africa both in terms of humanitarian and economic
collapse and in terms of such phenomenons as piracy, illicit air
transport networks, and trafficking in arms, gemstones, and people. I
believe that we must think more carefully about the relationship
between criminal activity, corruption, and humanitarian crisis so as
to help make these states less appealing to criminal opportunists,
including terrorists.
Our first foreign policy priority is to combat the terrorist forces
who would do us harm. Africa is unquestionably an important part of
that effort. The 1998 embassy bombings, the 2002 bombings in Mombasa,
and the consistent and credible reports of terrorist organizations
operating in north, west, and southern Africa leave no room for
doubt.
Short-term fixes to concerns about the terrorist presence in Africa -
military strikes on terrorist training camps or freezing the assets
of traders involved in laundering terrorist assets - may address some
immediate threats, but they do little to ensure that our children
will not face the same problems in the years to come. We must develop
policies to help bring lasting stability to these terribly unstable
places, to build solid relationships and gain access to solid
information.
This seems an obvious point in many ways, but translating general
agreement into action is no easy thing. Take the case of Somalia. I
applaud the Administration's East African Counter-Terrorism
Initiative, which recognizes that there are real threats in Somalia.
We know that some of the most troubling actors on the international
scene are the only ones involved in providing basic services to some
people in parts of Somalia such that parents can send children to
an extremist school, or to no school at all. Shouldn't our strategy
have a Somalia component, rather than just focusing on states around
Somalia, as the East African Initiative does?
I raised this issue at a hearing I chaired in early 2002, and deduced
that we had no real strategy. I have asked about it since at hearings
and in meetings. No real answer. For two years in a row, the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee has approved authorizing legislation
containing a provision that I authored calling for a Somalia
strategy, but none has been shared with us. I worked with the
appropriators to ensure that last year the Foreign Operations
appropriations bill contained language calling for a report on our
strategy in Somalia, is due this month. This is about American
interests. It is not a remotely partisan issue. Moving forward should
not require pulling teeth.
A word of caution is in order when talking about the need to combat
terrorism in Africa by working to shore up weak states. Our post 9/11
engagement should not mean a return to Cold War myopias or the
convenient but short-sighted patron-client politics of the past.
Another dawning realization in this country is that subordinating
basic human rights to accommodate larger strategic goals is a tactic
that often comes back to haunt us. In Liberia and in the Congo,
U.S.-backed dictatorships utterly destroyed the institutions of the
state and society, leaving civilians few tools for building a better
future, and warlords ample opportunity to continue looting these
countries' wealth. Regimes that thrive on corruption and injustice
eventually create weak and broken states it could not be more clear
that our long-term national interests are on the side of
accountability and respect for basic human rights.
Cultivating Future Partners
If, as I believe is the case, the U.S. must aim to foster stability
in Africa as a part of our fight against terrorism, then we must do
so by working to cultivate future partners.
In the midst of immediate crises and political intrigue, it can be
easy to overlook major demographic trends. But we do so at our peril.
The intelligence community has long recognized the importance of
demography for future stability. In July of 2001, just months before
the terrorist attacks of September 11th irreversibly changed the way
we think about our security and about the world, the Central
Intelligence Agency published a report on "Long-Term Global
Demographic Trends: Reshaping the Geopolitical Landscape." The report
makes for provocative reading.
Despite the devastating effect of HIV/AIDS, the number of young
Africans will continue to grow dramatically. In fact, the report
indicates that "the size of youth bulges will decrease in all regions
of the world except for Sub-Saharan Africa over the next 20 years."
All of the ten countries projected to have the largest youth bulges
in 2020 are in sub-Saharan Africa. And the report raises real
questions about whether African economies will be able to generate
jobs for these youths, and about whether African realities will be
able to meet the raised expectations and aspirations of increasingly
urbanized populations with access to the same media messages that our
own children see. To quote directly from the report:
"The failure to adequately integrate large youth populations in the
Middle East and Sub-Saharan Africa is likely to perpetuate the cycle
of political instability, ethnic wars, revolutions, and anti-regime
activities that already affect many of these countries. . . .
Increases in youth populations will aggravate problems with trade,
terrorism . . . and crime and add to the many existing factors that
already are making the region's problems increasingly difficult to
surmount." Vast youthful populationscoping with unemployment,
alienation, and a sense of humiliation? It is hard not to feel a
sense of alarm in contemplating this scenario. And when one thinks
about what the world and the future looks like for many of Africa's
children today, that sense of alarm is heightened.
UNICEF reports that about 11% of children are enrolled in primary
school in Somalia. 52% of Ethiopian children under five suffer from
moderate and severe stunting due to malnutrition. And UNICEF
estimates that in Nigeria alone, nearly a million children had been
orphaned by AIDS by 2001. Too many African girls do not have the
power to make healthy choices that can keep them HIV-negative. Too
many African children have already seen the cruelties of war - too
often as soldiers on the battlefield. Think of the terrorized youth
militia members of Zimbabwe, or the children abducted by the Lord's
Resistance Army in Northern Uganda, and ask yourself what the future
will bring.
Ten years ago today, the Rwandan genocide was coming to an end, and
that small country's future depends upon the children who survived
that horror. Earlier this year, the Senate passed a resolution I
authored commemorating the Rwandan genocide, and calling for a focus
on the future of the Rwandan people, so that they may enjoy full
civil and political rights and feel free to voice legitimate
disagreements honestly and publicly without fear of violence or
intimidation. But today we find that the Rwandan government is
considering a request from the parliament - which is dominated by the
ruling party - to dissolve one of the country's leading human rights
groups and four other civil society organizations. The parliamentary
commission that made these recommendations interpreted even
disagreement with government plans to consolidate land holdings as
support of genocidal ideas. If current trends continue, what will the
future look like for Rwanda's children? The U.S. should not be
silent.
The U.S. is engaged in a global fight that will take years to wage
and cannot be won without cooperation around the world. What kind of
partners will these children become? What will they believe about
America? Already credible research suggests that many African states,
and many African states with Muslim majorities, are viewing the U.S.
with suspicion, anger, and fear. For those fortunate to live in
democratic states, what kind of voters will they become?
There is so much that is strong and admirable and encouraging about
so many African communities. We must think about how to help our
African partners make the most of those strengths, and we need to
prove to them that we share their interests in building a better,
more peaceful, more prosperous, more just future.
How? By not losing sight of the enduring relevance of promoting basic
human rights. By resisting the temptation to turn away from the
un-glamorous work of increasing access to basic healthcare and
education in favor of flashier projects. By taking the long view, and
by refusing to embrace a charismatic leader instead of engaging in
the hard slog of fashioning policies to support institutions rather
than people. And by moving beyond rhetoric in the fight against
corruption.
I am delighted by the emphasis that is placed on transparency in the
Panel's report on Crafting a U.S. Energy Policy for Africa. We know
that the diversion or waste of oil revenues in oil-rich African
states has had terrible human costs. IMF estimates show that one
dollar in four of Angolan state revenues over $1.5 billion a year
cannot be accounted for from 1996 through 2001. At the same time, one
in four Angolan children died in infancy of preventable diseases. We
know that this corruption creates a business climate that discourages
private investment and hampers growth. Now we need to do something
about it.
The Administration needs to take concrete steps to promote the
transparency of both company payments and government receipts in the
oil sector. We need a coordinated, concerted effort to get that
information to citizens of the countries in question, to empower them
to use this information to ask tough questions and to demand better
governance. And we need to put solid leverage behind the demand for
transparency including leverage at export credit agencies.
Getting Our Posture Right
To make the kind of long-term, sustained effort that I am talking
about, it is time for the foreign policy community and the U.S.
government to think seriously about the resources we devote to our
engagement with Africa. I speak not just about money, but about
people, attention, and political will.
After 12 years on the Subcommittee on African Affairs, I have
traveled widely enough to know that understaffed embassies in Africa
are more the norm than the exception. We have wonderful, capable,
deeply committed foreign service officers working in Africa. I admire
them and I am deeply grateful for their service. But they are too few
in number particularly when it comes to seasoned, expert people.
Tiny embassy staffs are trying to cover huge, complex countries too
often without adequate effort or capacity to get out of the capital
city. We have no permanent presence in northern Nigeria or eastern
Congo, despite the fact that the stability of whole swathes of the
continent can hinge on events in those areas. We have no permanent
presence in Zanzibar or in Mombasa. Jeffrey Herbst and Princeton
Lyman are right to call attention to the inadequacy of our diplomatic
presence on the ground.
And in the latest round of post-September 11th "rediscovery" of
Africa, we run the risk of drowning out the counsel and efforts of
the few seasoned diplomats we do have engaged on the ground with the
louder voices of bigger agencies and bigger budgets. I am delighted
that EUCOM is reinvigorating the Department of Defense's efforts to
engage in Africa, and I believe that CENTCOM's efforts in the Horn
are vitally important. DOD's engagement is clearly in our national
interest, it is an appropriate part of mature relationships with
African states, and I value the efforts and the views of our
excellent military officers and civilian experts working for the
Department of Defense. But it is not the responsibility of the
Department of Defense to drive our foreign policy, and we must make
sure that the vast resources at the disposal of the Department of
Defense do not, de facto, put them in the driver's seat wherever they
choose to engage. That puts an inappropriate burden on the Department
of Defense, and it virtually guarantees that important aspects of our
policy will be left behind, and that signals about U.S. priorities
will be misinterpreted.
In the same vein, unprecedented resources are currently being devoted
to the fight against HIV/AIDS. I wholeheartedly support this effort.
I co-chair the CSIS Task Force on HIV/AIDS with Senator Frist, I have
consistently voted to support more funding for the fight against
AIDS, I believe that the President's call for a $15 billion
commitment to fighting AIDS will be remembered by history as one of
his finest hours, and I recognize that failure to tackle the pandemic
with all the vigor and urgency we can muster jeopardizes every effort
to cultivate thriving, stable African partners. I have every
enthusiasm for this issue, but while I recognize that our policy in
Africa must be about fighting AIDS, but it must be about more than
that as well. When the resources to fight AIDS swamp the resources
available for every other priority but there is little change in our
embassy staffing on the ground, we risk forcing important issues onto
the back burner while our people try to cope with the tremendous
administrative burden of implementing our AIDS programs.
So we need an adequate presence on the ground, which we do not have
today. And we need to ensure that the part of our government charged
with directing our foreign policy efforts is indeed playing that
leading role with, of course, appropriate and vigorous oversight
from the elected representatives of the American people in the
Congress. But we also need to make sure that senior leaders in the
Administration any Administration are responsive to our voices in
the field, are proactive in their approach, and demonstrate the
political will to build the relationships with African partners that
I believe are so important to our future.
Concluding Remarks - Sudan
We have a recent and truly admirable example of this kind of
high-level attention in Secretary Powell's recent trip to Darfur. I
commend the Secretary and the many U.S. officials who have been
working to respond to this urgent crisis. As we gather here to
contemplate U.S.-Africa Policy, a brutal campaign conducted by
Sudanese military forces and government-backed militia forces has
left tens of thousands dead, over a million displaced, and hundreds
of thousands at immediate, urgent risk. The massacres and widespread
rapes, the destruction of villages, mosques and farms all of this
violence and horror have given rise to a second, even more costly
wave of suffering, as civilians are left with no capacity to sustain
themselves as the rainy season approaches.
There seems to be some disagreement about whether what is happening
in Darfur is or is not genocide. Frankly, I believe that to argue
over the semantics is to miss the point. What is happening is
appalling, it is an affront to all humanity, to all faiths, and we
cannot stand by and simply watch this unfold if we are to be the
people and the country we wish to be.
Right now our priority must be to avert continued humanitarian
catastrophe. But over time, we must again return to the long view.
The tremendous investment of diplomatic resources, taxpayer dollars,
and political will in resolving the north-south conflict Sudan thus
far an investment that I applaud will be squandered if we fail to
address the underlying issues of disenfranchisement and
marginalization that are at the heart of the conflict in Darfur. We
cannot have order without accommodating demands for justice. We
cannot hope to have a true partner in the Sudan of the future without
turning our attention to the conditions of the Sudanese people today.
In the same vein, we cannot hope to paper over the crisis in the
Democratic Republic of the Congo, which has not benefitted from the
same high-level attention and focused political will that have been
brought to bear in Sudan, despite the fact that millions have died in
Congo's recent spasms of conflict. We need to make a commitment to
rebuilding long-term stability, to creating conditions in which
Congolese parents can reasonably hope for a better life for their
children. We need a policy to cope with the unraveling of the rule of
law in Nigeria again, one that takes the long view and is backed up
with the necessary diplomatic resources.
There is so much to be done, so many opportunities to foster real
partnerships and help cultivate real allies. I hope that today marks
the start, not the conclusion, of a concerted, bipartisan effort to
strengthen U.S. policy in Africa. It is not just Africa's future, it
is our future, that is at stake.
Home | Contact us | Links | Archives