On the US-African Summit
7 min readUS-Africa Summit: The world perceives poorest men in a multi-billion dollar room in Washington; Harmless initiative with ill-intention
By Amer Mayen Dhieeu
On our time, African leaders has let another record go down the history of our beloved continent beside the scramble of African in 1850s. I wonder how my African leaders will take the room temperature of White House having been lecture by the president of the world richest country in the globe. Over the last two days, “Over fifty African heads of state, government, and delegations of their key advisers and private-sector associates fly to Washington, DC to meet the American President, also known as the most powerful man in the world, reported by Joe Adama”.
The mission of Africa-US summit is still unclear regardless of the rumours that the mission is to strengthen U.S.-African bilateral trade. Obama is said to have “also announced billions of dollars in private investments in Africa”. If the rumours are true, Who is Africa among the fifty heads of African state? whom interest is the summit being held and what are the relative gains for African leaders? Before I discuss these questions detail, I would like to shed light on this harmless initiative with ill-intention.
US-Africa Summit: Harmless initiative with ill-intention
While African leaders were boarding their flights with hope for a better deal with Washington: the world biggest economy, some other countries and of course the citizens of their respective countries are not feeling the same hope. Although the objective of the summit is clear in which the mission is to strengthen Africa-US bilateral trade relationship, the initiative is poorly design.
In international relation, expectation is that any country interested in making bilateral relationship with another country can either send its minister of foreign affairs to that country for diplomatic talk or a delegation to delegate trade relationship interest between the two countries. Ever in the history of bilateral or multilateral relations did one country have courage to invite one whole large continent for economic market show. A continent of fifty four states with less commitment to Pan-African brotherhood.
We all know that each of African country having their heads of state babysit in Washington is looking not only for trade relations but also for peace and stability in their given countries. Example of these countries are South Sudan, Somali and Mali. Although economical trade is highly needed to keep these countries running, one of their biggest priority is peace and stability. If such countries take a leave to attend such summit that will or will never work in the future, what exactly will the summit bring to their respective countries beside bilateral trade relation.
Nevertheless if the US intention was to help African countries strengthen their economies for better Africa, Why some of African leaders were left out and yet still, the summit is between US and Africa? In one of the article publish in allafrica blog, it is indicated that some of African heads of state that were “omitted were Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe, the subject of U.S. diplomatic sanctions, Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir, who has been indicted for crimes against humanity by the International Criminal Court (ICC), as well as the leaders of the Central African Republic (CAR), Eritrea, and the Western Sahara”.
Despite his indictment “by the ICC, Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta was included, in part because Nairobi is seen as a “key regional partner” of Washington”. In analysis the US-African summit is clearly a game change only for the United States in a sense that it will give them a space to chose with open eyes which African country or countries will suit their bilateral economic relations interest best rather being perceives as an initiative that will nursed Africa out of her poor economy status.
The question is, how clear is the message carry by this initiative to African heads of state? Some economic experts might see it as scramble of African resources by the world biggest economies. A week ago there was one famous article that I failed to track down for reference. In the article it was explain that both China and the US are highly interested in investing in Africa however “China never broaches these sensitive subjects” with African, leaders in group. In most African countries like South Sudan “China has invested millions of dollars, particularly in the infrastructure and extractive natural resources sectors, including oil”.
Never did China involve itself in African politic but always focuses on peace and stability in Africa in order to practice her bilateral relationship in a secure and safe place. The question remain if the US-African summit was a strategic plan to win some of African rich countries for bilateral relationship as I see it, how is China going to response to this strategic initiative?
Is United State the only country that African countries need be annexed to, for economic stability?
In the past three days, “Obama has been addressing men and women with multi-million dollar personal property portfolios in both their nations and in the West” but sadly from countries that are either affected by poor economy, bad politic or insecurities. Nonetheless, Africa is subjected to corruption, nepotism and poor government’s system in all aspects. Winning bilateral economic relationship “only” with the United States will not solves problems in states such as South Sudan, Somali and Mali rather put more money to the pockets of the leaders comfortably sitting in the couches of the White House.
There are more things needed to be done in these countries and it need not just signing the oil or resources deal with the United States. At the meantime, the US is the global policeman focusing on almost everything happening in international arena. The time that the Unite State will spend will always be share not only with African fifty four states but of the world too.
In addition, the harmless initiative with ill-intention has already begun its work in the Washington DC with South Sudanese migrants sponsored by the UN to be in American soil purposely to establish their personal lives. These Individuals divorces with their main objective that UN sacrifice their resources to be in the United State and were seen in videos dividing themselves along ethnic line in support of individuals such as President Kiir and the Rebel leader Riek Machar instead of calling with one voice for peace and stability in South Sudan. These people were seen dancing, shouting and singing for president Kiir’s arrival, something never been done in any of Western countries.
Not only did the United State of America’s harmless initiative with ill-intention start with African heads of states. Last week United States was hosting young Africans girls and boys reportedly for training purpose under Young African leaders Fellowship. Something that was question by some other young African fellows, leaving questions hanging to whether Washington is sincere with their helping hand in Africa. In regard to this Initiative, Adama wrote that “Kenyans elect their leaders through the popular vote, how are the youth in the training program expected to ascend to power?” This question is similarly going in all directions to all African Youth who were invited to Washington.
The United State did it best to provide them with similar knowledge however in African countries lead by dictators and regimes, it is unlikely that the knowledge given to these young fellows by the initiative will be use as directed due to the pressure given to young people by the big old guys in the government, just like in South Sudan.
In Summary, the US-Africa summit is nothing but a market show that Americans host in White house to help them make their decision of which African states best suit their bilateral economic relations interest. Secondly, the summit did not meet international relation ways of seeking diplomatic relation.
As American and other countries may see it, the summit was an open market prepare for African leaders who were invited to their customer’s house instead of them inviting their customer to their respective countries. I hope the babysitting days are over and therefor should the safely return back in peace.
About Post Author
