America Loves Africa Like a Glutton Loves his Lunch

This a column that I wrote in December of 2008, a little over a month after Barak Obama was elected as the 44th President of the U.S.

Thirty months later, it is perhaps time now to consider the accuracy of my cautions against being overly optimistic about the changes that Obama would bring to U.S. foreign policy.

photo credit - African Loft

It may seem more than odd to citizens of the various African nations how past administrations of the United States government have consistently professed their concern for the well being of Africa and Africans while at the same time acting contrary to their words.

As we approach the dawn of a yet another U.S. administration we should reflect on the history of U.S. relations with the respective nations of the world while anticipating the actions that will result from the policies formulated in Washington regarding Africa.

As Barack Obama takes office, we all have hopes for a new day that will see an improvement in American attitudes and actions – not only towards African nations, but towards all the nation of the world. But as Africans, we are particularly hopeful for a more reasoned and intelligent approach towards the nations of Africa by this “Son of an African.” Having said this, we must be mindful that America is a country where a woman deemed qualified to stand for election as Vice President of the United States believed Africa to be a country rather than a continent.

It is no secret that many Americans tend to have little interest in global affairs and focus almost solely on matters that take place within the borders of their own country. It is also often the case that many Americans, when they look at other countries, are mostly concerned about what those countries can provide for them and their well being. But the motives of many Americans are often shrouded in the language of brotherhood.

It was not unusual for individuals around the world to find the reasons given by Americans for the invasion of Iraq to be laughable. The American people seem to have barely known who the Iraqis were at the start of the war in 2003. The American people, by in large, seem to demonstrate very little respect for Iraqis or their culture. So it does not seem very plausible that Americans have such a great concern for the rights of Iraqi citizens as to be willing to shed American blood and wring dollars from the treasury of the United States solely in the pursuit of happiness for those people. The hand wringing protestations of innocence, that occurred when Americans were accused of being more interested in Iraqi oil than the Iraqi people, drew skeptical glances from every quarter of the globe.

And now we come to Africa. America came late to the feast that was made on the flesh of a continent that has lain almost prostrate since the invasion of the colonialists. But America seems intent on making up for lost time. Many U.S. multinational corporations have joined with those from Europe that loot the resources of African nations with impunity. And like the pirates of centuries ago, they have the hubris to obey no laws but their own. And they do this, while they urge their governments do demonize the national leaders of those countries from which they wrest their bounty.

As we approach the dawn of a yet another U.S. administration, now is not the time to be overly optimistic. Africans should be hopeful – but watchful.

Those of us who are old enough to remember the American President, John F. Kennedy should also remember the early days of the Peace Corps. The Peace Corps was a wonderful concept. Young Americans went abroad and shared their skills and expertise with the peoples of less fortunate nations in order to improve the quality of life around the world. What people in those less fortunate countries were not told was that the Peace Corps was also a tool in the Cold War that was being waged between the U.S. and Russia and their respective allies.

According to its congressional mandate, one of the duties of the Peace Corps was to “counter Soviet development efforts in the Third World.” It seems that it would have been a difficult bit of logic to see the benefit to the recipient by promoting development on one hand, and countering someone else’s development efforts on the other hand. It might be that the U.S. would deny its designs to hinder any efforts by the Soviet Union to lend a hand to the developing world; but if that were the case, why then would the congressional mandate also provide that Peace Corps volunteers be instructed in the “menace of Communism?”

It is most likely the case that the CIA used the Peace Corps as cover in its early days. Sam Brown, a former director of the Peace Corps has stated that he had once been assured by the CIA that it had not used that organization for cover since 1975. The Peace Corps had been founded in 1961 by the great American hope of that day – President John F. Kennedy, who had ordered that the Peace Corps not be used for CIA cover. But it appears that this happened nevertheless.

The United States does not declare that it is in a cold war at the moment, but it takes little research to see that the competitive posture of the United States relative to the rest of the world is still in place. Many Americans are frantic over the prospect of China becoming a greater economic influence in Africa than the West. And if Americans are frantic about China, they are absolutely maniacal when it comes to the prospect of a greater Islamic influence on the Continent.

It should be no surprise to Americans that they are not held in the highest regard by many nations around the world. Even the aid that the United States holds out to recipient nations often comes with some rather distasteful stings. One of these many strings is the attempt to use civil society to engage in social engineering. Many people around the world hold that donor support to civil society is just another manifestation of neocolonialism in the post-Cold War era. Aid to civil society is often seen as being aimed at influencing the character of political administrations by projecting Western perspectives and world views on those communities. This type of interference is believed to be detrimental, in that it undermines the ability of local organizations in recipient nations to set their own priorities and their own agendas and to give voice to their own ideas of social and political development. U.S. aid is also believed to serve as a means of extending global markets for American companies.

And now we come to the era of Obama. I personally believe that President Obama will have every intention of respecting African nations as well as their peoples, cultures, traditions and their abilities to govern themselves. I also believe that the Obama Administration will carry a lot of baggage from previous administrations that will work counter to the President’s intentions. And it is my belief that the character of the American people will put pressure on the Obama Administration to take the posture of “America First” and to only consider the interest of the various African nations when the interest of those nations coincide with perceived American interests.

As Americans, we are a nation that, at the time of its occurrence, applauded the obliteration of the Native Americans and their culture – even though today we shed crocodile tears over the “plight of the Red Man.” We are a nation that, at its very founding, held that the African was less than human, and wrote that creed into our Constitution and laws – even though today we heave heavy sighs at the injustice of chattel slavery. We are a nation that stood by and let flawed foreign policy send troops into Vietnam and lay waste to much of that nation – even though now we have heard a tearful apology from one of the architects of that policy, Robert McNamara. We are a nation that pasted little American flags on the bumpers of our SUVs to display our support for the “preemptive” invasion and occupation of Iraq – even thought the majority of the country today believes that the invasion and occupation was unwise – if not unjust.

Africans should not think that Americans, in order to reach their goals of comfort and well being, will hesitate to travel a road over the dead bodies of Africans. They traveled that road over the bodies of dead, Native Americans, Vietnamese, and Iraqis.

Africans must consider the possibility that while Americans profess their love for Africa and insist that Africans must be free in order to live in democratic societies, it is likely the case that Americans love Africa like a glutton loves his lunch.