Africa and American “Support”
Published in Al-Bayan
(U.A.E.) on 10 August 2009
by Ahmad Imraabi (link to original)
Some ten years ago, U.S. President Bill Clinton went on a tour of several countries in sub-Saharan Africa. The tour was called "Developmental Investment," and, therefore, Clinton was accompanied by scores of U.S. businessmen.
What Was the Outcome?
Rather than setting up industries and irrigation projects to expand agriculture, hospitals or universities, institutes and schools, the U.S. established a series of military air bases all over the continent and sent special forces, supported by intelligence networks. Because of this, the name was changed from "Developmental Investment" to "War on Terror," which involved going after al-Qaeda elements.
Now, the secretary of state under Obama has set out on a similar tour, of which the present reflects the past and the agenda of the secretary of state is sure to contain nothing but more security cooperation between the U.S. and Africa for anti-terrorism efforts. In matters of economic and development cooperation, the U.S. has only lectures and instructions to give, which is just one aspect of the art of public relations.
In her time in Kenya, Mrs. Clinton announced, "we are committed to our promise to Africa... committed to its future and we'll be partners of the African people."
Such words are meant to attract applaus,e but actually are lacking in substance. If the U.S. were really committed to the concern it expressed for developmental construction in the poor continent, it would announce specific projects, such as building dams for electricity production and the expansion of food crops cultivation to help the population of the starving continent achieve food self-sufficiency.
As an extension of the verbal lectures, the secretary of state called upon the ruling elites of African countries to eradicate corruption. Such appeals will stir mere amusement among African leaders. The U.S. and the whole world know that the corrupt states are the ones that enjoy U.S. support in the context of the major U.S. plan to "combat terrorism;" i.e., to wage war against internal groups and organizations that oppose the U.S. policy in Africa or adopt anti-Israel ideologies.
What Was the Outcome?
Rather than setting up industries and irrigation projects to expand agriculture, hospitals or universities, institutes and schools, the U.S. established a series of military air bases all over the continent and sent special forces, supported by intelligence networks. Because of this, the name was changed from "Developmental Investment" to "War on Terror," which involved going after al-Qaeda elements.
Now, the secretary of state under Obama has set out on a similar tour, of which the present reflects the past and the agenda of the secretary of state is sure to contain nothing but more security cooperation between the U.S. and Africa for anti-terrorism efforts. In matters of economic and development cooperation, the U.S. has only lectures and instructions to give, which is just one aspect of the art of public relations.
In her time in Kenya, Mrs. Clinton announced, "we are committed to our promise to Africa... committed to its future and we'll be partners of the African people."
Such words are meant to attract applaus,e but actually are lacking in substance. If the U.S. were really committed to the concern it expressed for developmental construction in the poor continent, it would announce specific projects, such as building dams for electricity production and the expansion of food crops cultivation to help the population of the starving continent achieve food self-sufficiency.
As an extension of the verbal lectures, the secretary of state called upon the ruling elites of African countries to eradicate corruption. Such appeals will stir mere amusement among African leaders. The U.S. and the whole world know that the corrupt states are the ones that enjoy U.S. support in the context of the major U.S. plan to "combat terrorism;" i.e., to wage war against internal groups and organizations that oppose the U.S. policy in Africa or adopt anti-Israel ideologies.