Following is the text of a speech that I gave in Michigan.
Africa Is Changing: Is that Good News?
Prepared for International Affairs Forum
Traverse City,
Michigan, March 21, 2013
Robert E. Gribbin
Where is Africa going? I get asked this question a lot. My usual response is
that some parts of Africa are doing quite well. They are vaguely democratic,
politically stable, socially at peace and making satisfactory economic
progress. A number of wars have ended in recent years. However, at the other
end of the spectrum stand troubled states like Zimbabwe, the Central African
Republic and Mali. Ditto for the Sudans
and the Congo which are mired in never ending conflict. Yet that thumb nail
sketch does not do justice to the successes and failures on the continent. This
talk probably won’t either, but it is intended to provoke thought about the
current situation, what might transpire in the next five years or so, and what
the U.S. could be doing about it.
Overall
In looking critically at the last decade, one must conclude that Africa is
better off. There is less conflict, more democratic government and more
wide-spread economic growth. More kids are in school, roads have improved,
there is better water and sanitation, communications have evolved, for example
independent FM radio stations and cell phones are everywhere. The continental
economic growth rate exceeded five percent per year for the past decade.
Economies are better managed, private sectors freer and trade more widespread.
African nations as a group are taking more responsibility for the continent,
both in terms of regional security – peace keeping forces in Sudan, Somalia,
the CAR and Mali are African - and in terms of economic and social progress
encompassed in the Millennium Development Goals to which they have subscribed.
Nations like Ghana, Uganda, Tanzania, Namibia, Botswana, Mauritius, Senegal and
Rwanda have made dramatic economic progress and many others now have economic
growth exceeding population growth.
American Interests
At the outset, let’s enumerate American priorities so we can keep them in mind
as we dissect the issues. First, we must recognize that it is not our sole
responsibility to “rescue” Africa from its ills, but we do have an obligation
to help. Furthermore we have interests in Africa that we want to protect
I would sum up our interests as follows:
1. - access to oil (Africa currently supplies about 20 percent of our imports.
This should rise to over 25 % within five years.)
2. – fostering of democratic intuitions (It’s true that democracies are better
global citizens across the board) .
3. - containment of international blights – terrorism, drugs, piracy,
trafficking in persons, illegal migration, AIDS, malaria.
4. -- reduction of conflict (Africa currently has three active wars – Sudan, Mali
and Congo. Plus hot spots in Chad, CAR and Nigeria. Violence elsewhere, Somalia
for example, has tapered off.)
5. -- humanitarian aid to the vulnerable (usually victims of
conflict, natural disaster or pervasive poverty).
6. -- Economic development, trade and investment opportunities (American
know-how and capital are competitive. African markets are growing).
7. -- African support internationally (In UN institutions, Africa holds swing
votes, but often casts them in unhelpful ways).
African interests:
To give Africa equal time, let me sum up their interests vis a
vis the United States:
-- Responsible global leadership, solution to problems
-- Economic assistance, trade and investment
-- Respect for their sovereignty
The Record
During the first four years
of the Obama administration – and despite Africa’s strong hopes for new vibrant
attention from a son of Africa sitting in the White House – it was business as
usual. Certainly, policies and programs persisted and were strengthened. Many programs registered incremental
successes, but there was no great new initiative. The challenge now before the U.S. and Africa
is to build on progress to date. Let’s
look at some of the challenges.
Climate Change
While we worry about and are
ravaged by extreme weather in America, our system – by and large – can handle it.
Africa is much more fragile. Climate
change that results in drought generates enormous problems for the hundreds of
millions of subsistence farmers. As a
result some starve, others become malnourished, children die, disease
flourishes. Pastoralists move herds into alien areas where they are not welcome
exacerbating conflict over land and water.
The Sahara creeps southward. Most of the current conflicts in Africa:
Darfur, Somalia, South Sudan, Congo and Mali have roots in land issues. Meanwhile, the lack of opportunities in
rural areas reinforces the process of urbanization. Youths flock to the cities,
but unfortunately, newly arrived migrants find little hope in Africa’s now
teeming cities. Lagos, Kinshasa, Nairobi
and Johanesburg are melting pots for millions, but smaller cities like
Ndjamena, Bangui, Bamako and Dakar are also bursting at the seams.
Surprisingly, despite the poverty and crime that characterizes them, these
cities have struck an equilibrium that permits daily life to proceed fairly normally.
Indeed the social fabric of
Africa has changed dramatically over the past twenty years. African
institutions are evolving a bit as a consequence.
Politics
Prior to gaining independence
in the 1960s African states were subjected to the tyranny of colonialism. It was an exploitative system designed to extract
resources to the benefit of the colonial power. There was minimal focus on the
development of indigenous governing institutions. So after independence it was not surprising
to find that new rulers mimicked the harsh reality of colonial rule by
instituting one man single party systems.
Despite the rationale that such systems reflected the African cultural
value of consensus, the systems were exploitative and benefited only a chosen
few. The fragility of these new
governments led to dozens, if not a hundred military coups d’etat continent
wide. By the end of the cold war in the
late 1980s, stymied by poor growth and unresponsive governments, Africans had
come to realize that there were better methods for exercising political rule. So a new wave of multi-party constitutions
swept the continent. Thus began the
process of democratic growth that characterizes many African nations today.
The first step was to adopt a
constitution that provided for multiple parties, elections and constraints on
presidential powers. Dozens of nations
did so in the late 1980s early 1990s. Ideas of accountability and a loyal opposition
were new and difficult to respect. Accountability because up until then few
leaders had had their power limited or had been called to answer for their
corruption, nepotism or brutality. The
concept of a loyal opposition, the idea that disagreements could be civil
rather than violent, and that you could have opponents rather than enemies was
difficult to absorb and remains a stumbling block today. Even so, free and fair elections were an
important first step.
When I was ambassador in the
Central African Republic in 1993, the nation held its first free election. The revised constitution was in place, some
15 individuals contested for the presidency.
For most it was an ego trip, but four of them represented substantial
ethnic blocks. Tribalism is the currency
of politics in most of Africa. So the issue was which candidate could cobble
together enough cross tribal support to win.
Incumbent president Andre Kolingba, a former general who came to power
via a coup d’etat, was among the contestants, but he was from a small riverine
tribe. As the election drew near, the
people began to realize that they really had power and that their vote
mattered. Emotions heated up. Election day however, was calm. Citizens stood in lines – sometimes for hours
in order to cast their vote. I visited a
dozen polling places and remember sitting in a hot school room observing a team
of poll officials and poll watchers count votes via the light of a single
kerosene lantern late into the night. As
votes were tabulated nationwide it became clear that President Kolingba would
lose. His team then sought to disrupt the finally tallying but with no
success. Ange Patasse was elected. He did not turn out to be a very good president
and was overthrown by the current president Francois Bozize in a coup several
years later. But the electoral process left
an indelible mark on the citizenry and when again they will be empowered to
chose, they’ll be ready.
Unlike in the CAR elections
elsewhere have not always gone according to plan, but the aftermaths have been
better. Nigeria’s selection of Yar Adua as
president in 2007 was deeply flawed from a procedural point of view, but being
the best they could do at the time was accepted by the populace and reluctantly
endorsed by the U.S. On a better note after Yar Adua died in office in 2010,
Nigeria successfully adhered to constitutional succession and swore in Vice
President Goodluck Johnson as chief of state.
He was freely and properly elected to his own term in 2011.
Similarly, Kenya’s 2007
election was marred by tribal violence and widespread irregularities. Only implementation of a carefully negotiated
power sharing agreement averted continued violence. However, the Kenyans
learned a lesson. Subsequently they revised their constitution and prepared
carefully for the election held two weeks ago.
Despite glitches, and only several incidents of violence, the process
was fair and the results will ultimately be accepted by all.
These are only several
examples. Elections and peaceful transitions
tend to occur again once you have done it a couple of times. Tanzania has an exemplary record of three
such transitions. Botswana, Ghana, Senegal, Benin stand out in that regard as
well and now Malawi, Burundi and Liberia have joined in.
Besides the aspect of
allowing competition , key elements underpinning the strengthening of democracy
in Africa are freer medias and access to them – newspapers, radio stations, internet, cell
phones; increasingly literate
populations, growing economies and expanding
civil society. By civil society I mean
church groups, service clubs, bar associations, women’s rights groups, human
rights associations, journalist associations, student forums, political
parties, labor unions – in short any and all such organizations that are not
creatures of or dependent upon government. The more there are and the more independent
they feel they are, the stronger the democratic fabric of the nation. Part of America’s policy approach to fostering
democracy in Africa includes support to civil society organizations.
One of the modern
responsibilities of governments is to grant, observe and protect the human
rights of its citizens. Virtually every
African government has such clauses in its constitution. Additionally all
African states are parties to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights
as well as the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Problems are in the details. Impoverishment and neglect are the basic
causes of rights violations in Africa, but there have been many cases of
deliberate violations. In almost every
African state the judiciary is a weak institution. It is inadequately funded and staffed. Thus
the rule of law and rectification of wrongs through the courts is rarely
satisfactory. Concomitantly, prisons are
almost always inadequate. Conditions are
uniformly poor. Even in peaceful countries soldiers, police and
bureaucrats are often violators rather than protectors of human dignity. In
conflict zones such as eastern Congo and Darfur intimidation, brutality and rape
are all too common.
In 1996 when I arrived as
ambassador in Rwanda there was no legal system. What had existed before the
genocide had collapsed. Judges,
prosecutors and clerks had fled, court rooms were looted and abandoned. And
importantly there was no statute in the legal code governing genocide. Meanwhile there were 100,000 people jailed
for genocide related crimes in prisons built for 15,000. Obviously there was a crisis, but how to deal
with it? How to balance the deaths of a
million people against the rights of those accused of killing them? First was to cooperate with the new
authorities in the drafting of a genocide statute that would pass international
muster; second was to rebuild the judicial system; third was to try to improve
conditions in the prisons. We, the
United States, did all three. Experts
aided in the drafting of new laws. We provided funding to refurbish courtrooms
and to train lawyers and judges; and working with the International Committee
of the Red Cross we helped alleviate some of the worst prison conditions.
In looking at modern Africa,
you cannot helped but to be impressed by economic progress. By no means is Africa out of the woods or off
the dole, but still by registering growth rates of 5 percent per year and better over the last
decade, it is catching up. Reality,
however, is that the overwhelming number of people are rural subsistence
farmers or urban poor. So where is
Africa’s growth coming from? First,
resources - almost a dozen African states are petroleum producers. Nigeria and
Angola lead the way, but Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, Chad, Congo and South Sudan
are producers. Newcomers along the West African littoral including Cote
d’Ivoire and Liberia are now in the game as is Uganda in the east. Oil, or diamonds, gold, timber, copper,
bauxite and coltan can be a curse as well as a blessing. Governments of countries endowed with such
wealth have not necessarily used it wisely.
Funds have been spent lavishly or siphoned away into personal coffers. Often
there is an extremely wealthy governing class, but only a little trickle down
to the people. That is beginning to
change, albeit slowly, with the rise of more politically astute populations
that demand accountability.
Nations such as Ghana,
Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Ethiopia, Namibia, Rwanda, Mauritius and Senegal that
are not endowed with ground wealth have developed mixed economies that are
diverse and resilient. They have banked
not only on improving agricultural production via modern inputs and free
markets, but also have supported industry such as manufacturing, textile
production and even off shore banking and call centers. The policy breakthrough
that has enabled much of this growth was reformed economic policies that
dismantled state controls and freed the private sector. Better education and
more economic opportunities result in an emerging middle class. This in turn is politically stabilizing in
that when a society offers multiple roads to success, there is much less
pressure on elites to contest for political power and the largess that control
of government traditionally provided.
Despite improving prospects
African states are hampered by woefully inadequate infrastructure, limited access
to finance, restricted markets, unresponsive governments and an uneducated
labor force. Donor states and
institutions including the United States, China, the European Union and the
World Bank all have various programs to help Africa along, but the need is much
greater than the resources available. So
progress is slow.
From the American side, for
example, our assistance program for Africa last year totaled 6.9 billion. But of that only 1 billion went to
development objectives. The remainder was humanitarian aid for health issues, disaster
relief, refugees and internally displaced persons; plus military aid, much of
it to support peace keeping operations. Given the economic imbroglio currently Washington,
it is unrealistic to expect dramatic movement in these figures at any time in
the near future.
A major focus for the United
States in Africa, both from our government but also from American
philanthropists, has been in the health sector.
Africa has long been the incubator of terrifying diseases like Ebola and
other hemorrhagic fevers that kill within days, but traditionally other
maladies - malaria, measles, cholera, malnutrition, tuberculosis and smallpox
have taken toll of millions of human lives. The latest of the scourges is, of
course, HIV AIDS. AIDS started in
Africa, probably in the Congo, and it is in Africa where its toll has been the
greatest. When I was in Uganda in
1988-91 I was a member of the Mountain Club of Uganda. We went rock climbing,
hiking and climbing in the Ruwenzoris, the fabled mountains of the moon. About
twenty of the club members were graduate or medical students at Makerere
University. They were Uganda’s brightest and best, but they all subsequently
died of AIDS.
Thankfully today, death’s
scythe does not cut such a clear swath.
President Bush initiated PEPFAR (President’s Emergency Plan for Aids
Relief) a program designed to improve health services specifically with the
objective of providing retro-viral medicines. This anti-AIDS effort was joined by the Gates
Foundation, the UN and others. Today about
five million people in Africa are benefiting from retro-viral medicines. Death rates are lower and because of education,
infection rates too are lower. Even so,
AIDS sufferers fill half of the hospital beds in Africa. This, of course, complicates
already overburdened health systems.
Security issues loom high on
lists of concerns in Africa. Obviously security is prerequisite for domestic
harmony, economic growth and political evolution, all of which are in our
interest. Yet the threats to peace are
many. Most are homegrown relating to who is going to control the
political/economic pie. While the U.S. does not want to dictate outcomes per
se, we do seek an end to internal conflict and cross border violence. To this
end we cajole, negotiate, and strive to convince all concerned to sort out
difficulties in a peaceful fashion.
Conflict, based essentially
on a quest for power, has plagued Africa for generations. The good news today is that conflict has
subsided. Proxy cold wars have ceased,
the liberation of southern Africa zeroed out race based wars. The Rwandan
genocide, civil wars in Burundi, Liberia, Chad, Sierra Leone and Cote d’Ivoire
are over. Even long running conflict in
Somalia has abated as a legitimate government spreads its authority. Yet alongside the recent conflagration in
Mali, strife continues in Sudan and the Congo.
I suggest that conflict has
receded because of better politics - that is more accountable government and
via democracy greater opportunities to redress wrongs within the system. I also attribute reduction of conflict to
improved international mediation, negotiation and peace keeping mechanisms.
African leaders are in the forefront of efforts to solve conflict while African
troops constitute the bulk of peacekeepers on the continent. At home more professional militaries tend to
discourage coups d’etat - although as last year’s coup in Mali indicates -
these things still happen.
Sudan is the locus of two
conflicts: one in Darfur and the other the continuing struggle between the
north and the south - now two separate nations that teeter on the brink of open
war. The Darfur situation has
stalemated, a million folks are displaced either internally or as refugees in
Chad where help is provided by the international community. Violence still
occurs, but is mitigated by a UN Peace Keeping presence. Sadly, no resolution
is in sight.
Regarding the north south
conflict, the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement settled many issues leading to
the plebiscite that resulted in South Sudan’s independence in 2011, but it did
not resolve the question of oil revenues - oil is pumped in the south but
pipelines transit the north- or the status of southerners who dwell in border
provinces. African presidents have
compelled Presidents Bashir of Sudan and Kir of South Sudan to talk and it
appears that oil may flow again and that a demilitarized zone will be
established along the border. I am not
confident, however, that either side will honor its commitments, so predict
that violence will continue.
Right now the eastern Congo
seems to be quieting down somewhat following the latest agreement by neighboring
presidents to refrain from meddling across the border in the Congo. There after decades of conflict - again
mostly tribally based - normal life has collapsed. But the central government in far off
Kinshasa has little ability to rule; the UN Peace Keeping Operation has proven
to be only marginally effective and national security issues are at stake for
Rwanda and Uganda as well as access to Kivu’s mineral wealth. So my prognosis for Congo is that conflict
will continue, albeit hopefully at a lower level.
Mali is the embodiment of the
maxim that if something can go wrong, it will.
Mali’s fragile and corrupt democracy succumbed to a military coup d’etat
in early 2012. On account of confusion
and weakness in the capital, the Tuareg people of the northern desert seized
the occasion to declare their own state dubbed Azawad. They in turn were
co-opted by regional terrorists, led by a group called Al Qaeda in the Islamic
Maghreb, who imposed a harsh Islamic rule.
Undoing this chain of events requires several reverse steps. First, the terrorists must be defanged and
destroyed. The French led mission is accomplishing this and the deployment of African
troops there will help stabilize this area.
Secondly, democratic civilian government must be restored in
Bamako. Thirdly, the new central
government must arrive at some accommodation with the Tuaregs regarding the
status of the north. It is not guaranteed that any of these steps will cure
Mali’s ills, but they will get it back on the right track.
In addition to moral suasion,
our latest big stick is AFRICOM, the relatively new U.S. military command for
Africa. Although AFRICOM is logical from
the U.S. perspective as it is designed for more efficient military thinking and
operations, it is somewhat a puzzle and even an affront to African nations. They fear it as a hegemonic statement of
America’s imperial ambitions on the continent.
To an extent that fear is well founded. The American military is a huge
hammer and the nails in Africa are usually quite small. Despite an initial pledge not to go to war in
Africa, activities in Libya, Somalia and now the Sahara belie that promise. Additionally military resources overshadow development
oriented monies available from USAID or the Millennium Challenge
Corporation. The expansion of American
military activities on one hand and the reduction of civilian on the other results
in the militarization of American diplomacy. This is the last thing that Africa
needs. It is up to the State Department and ambassadors in the field to find
and strike the proper balance.
As if poverty, drought,
disease, poor government, tribalism, civil conflict and religious tension were
not enough, Africa is also a venue for terrorism, both of international and
local varieties. International terrorism is opportunistic. In Africa it has
glommed onto those with pre-existing grievances. That is not to say that it is less dangerous
for having done so. To the contrary having a local host probably makes it more
dangerous.
Africa has shown itself to be
vulnerable to international terrorists.
Most incidents, the assassination of diplomatic personnel in Khartoum,
bombings of embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam, attacks in Abuja, the
massacres in Benghazi, the takeover of northern Mali and the attack at the
Algerian gas installation occurred because the opportunity arose and no one was
prepared or ready to challenge the perpetrators.
The groups that pose the
greatest threat now in that regard are Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and its
affiliates who are being challenged in the Sahara; Al Shabaat, the Somali
organization that is reeling from military pressure in Somalia; and Boko
Harum, a fundamentalist Islamic organization
in northern Nigeria. So far, none of
these groups have shown an ability to operate out of their home regions. The anti-terrorist effort must be to first
contain them there even as undertakings are made to defang and destroy
them.
The first line of defense is
to strengthen the abilities of African security services to identify and
destroy such challenges. Most are
willing to do so. In East Africa, fifteen
years after the embassy bombing, Kenyan anti-terrorist abilities are more
robust. In Somalia the joint African Union force has pushed Al Shabaat back. In
Nigeria, the government is fully aware of Boko Harum that it correctly views as
threatening Nigeria first. In Mali, France
in conjunction with several West African states as well as the Malian military has
retaken the north.
America’s role in these
undertaking has been suitably restrained.
We help train and support the AU force in Somali and have not shied away
from some specific anti-terrorist actions.
We will help finance, train and support the intervention force in Mali
as well. In Nigeria we will remain in
contact and share information with Nigerian security services, but a more
expanded role is unlikely. However, you
can bet that there is already underway a rather intense dialogue between the
Departments of State and Defense as to what else the U.S. might or ought to
do. State, I would hope is arguing for restraint
while the military with more gadgets, men and money than current wars, is
looking to expand its footprint.
Conclusions
America’s interest in a
peaceful, prosperous, democratic Africa is undiminished. Such a state of affairs would suit us best.
We would have reliable partners capable of administering their own affairs in a
responsible fashion. This would enable
us all to work the problems of poverty and development in the most productive
fashion. The bright note is that overall
Africa seems aimed in this direction.
Our record in pursuit of these objectives is spotty, especially as our
rhetoric usually outpaces our actions.
Since more money, except perhaps for military expansion, is unlikely,
the Obama administration in its second term is going to have to work these same
issues in a more effective fashion.
That’s called diplomacy.
Thank you.
