November 14, 2012 by Tolu Ogunlesi Leave a Comment
Taken at face value, a Barack Obama presidency should be a big deal for Africa.
On election day, I attended an
all-nighter organised in Lagos by the US Diplomatic Mission to celebrate
America’s democracy. Two large screens relayed CNN’s coverage while a
succession of speakers — including a recently re-elected Nigerian
governor — took to the stage to reflect on America and its democratic
ideals.
Outside the hall sat a mock polling
booth, where guests filled a ballot paper and dropped it in a box,
watched over by life-size cardboard cut-outs of the two contenders.
In the early hours of the morning, the results were tallied and announced. Obama took 219 Nigerian votes to Mitt Romney’s 30.
A friend standing with me when the
results were announced couldn’t help wondering aloud who those 30 people
were who had chosen Romney over Obama.
As I pointed out in a recent CNN piece,
Nigerians, like the rest of sub-Saharan Africa, have an “instinctive
fondness” for Obama, and for an obvious reason: he is a “son” of the
continent — his father was born in Kenya; his grandmother still lives
there.
Just before I left the event, a friend
observed that he still hadn’t found a single Nigerian who could point to
any reason why they were rooting for Obama, beyond his African roots.
That obsession with Obama appears to
obscure the fact that his predecessor — the white, Republican George W.
Bush — demonstrated a more obvious commitment to the continent during
his first presidential term.
In 2003, a few months after the US
invasion of Iraq, Bush signed into law a bill establishing the US
President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, in fulfilment of a promise
made during his State of the Union Address earlier that year.
Under the terms of the plan, Bush
pledged $15bn towards fighting HIV/AIDS. In 2008, he renewed the
commitment for another five years.
Before him, President Bill Clinton —
honoured by the Congressional Black Caucus, months after he left office,
as America’s “first Black President” — created the African Growth and
Opportunities Act, a landmark piece of legislation that opened up
American markets to African countries.
Obama, on the other hand, has
demonstrated what has been interpreted as a studied detachment towards
sub-Saharan Africa. His only visit in his first four years, to Ghana in
2009, lasted less than 24 hours.
Dr. Folarin Gbadebo-Smith, Director of
the Lagos-based Centre for Public Policy Analysis, argues that Obama is
in a “conflicted position” — compelled to exercise caution in his
engagement with Africa “for fear that such a position will become
ammunition in the hands of the lunatic right, Tea Party types and those
who insist he is not an American and is really a Muslim.”
But if the affection of the continent
towards Obama — at an all time high in 2008 when he first took office —
has cooled in the last few years (ostensibly as a response to his
perceived nonchalance), his re-election appears to have reawakened the
enthusiasm.
“We look forward to the deepening of
relations between our two countries during your second term in office,”
Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki said in a congratulatory message. From
Nigeria came a message by a presidential spokesperson, saying “President
Jonathan looks forward to continuing to build on Nigeria and Africa’s
developmental collaboration with the United States in the next four
years.”
With the pressure of re-election now
gone, Smith says “the second term would be a more opportune time for
Obama to work with Africa.”
While Michelle Obama visited the
continent in 2011, the least that many Africans will be expecting from
Obama during his second term would be a powerfully symbolic visit of his
own to Africa.
But that trip, if it ever happens, would
be the easiest of the Africa-focused tasks in the Oval Office in-tray.
And it would also do little to clarify the monumental complexity of
dealing with a rapidly changing African landscape.
For one, there’s China’s aggressive
engagement with the continent, which appears to be happening at the
expense of countries like America.
In 2009, Obama’s first year in office,
China overtook America as Africa’s largest trading partner. America’s
discomfiture with that state of affairs bubbled to the surface last
August, when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, during a visit to
Senegal, lamented that “the days of having outsiders come and extract
the wealth of Africa for themselves, leaving nothing or very little
behind, should be over in the 21st Century.”
There is also the aftermath of the Arab
Spring. The murder of the US Ambassador to Libya, Chris Steven, is
evidence of how much things have changed in the region in the last two
years.
And then there is the rise of extremist
Islam in West Africa. In January 2009, Mrs. Clinton told a US Senate
committee that “combating al Qaeda’s efforts to seek safe havens in
failed states in the Horn of Africa” would be a key part of America’s
Africa policy.
The years since then have seen the rise
of Boko Haram in Nigeria, Africa’s most populous nation, and of
extremists in Northern Mali.
Last June, the White House unveiled a
new sub-Saharan Africa strategy built around four “objectives”:
Democracy, Trade & Investment, Peace & Security, and
Development. But it remains to be seen whether Obama will unveil an
Africa project on a scale comparable to AGOA and PEPFAR.
Not that he is obliged to, anyway.
And with the American economy still in
dire straits, and requiring full time attention, he is unlikely to get
much backslapping at home for expending his energy on matters that have
no direct bearing on America’s near future.
- Ogunlesi, winner of the
2009 Arts and Culture prize in the CNN Multichoice African Journalism
Awards, contributed this piece for CNN African Voices.
No comments:
Post a Comment