To what extent does Africa need the international community?
Are neo-colonial influences undermining the strengths of our regional organisations?
After an era plagued with under development, poverty & conflicts, Africa is now heading into a decade dominated with improved infrastructure & trade, with enormous efforts geared toward strengthening institutions & enhancing democracy across the continent.
Our future is what we make of the opportunities we have today.
Is Ghana a Beacon of Democracy in Africa? Presidential Elections Hailed as Free, Fair and Transparent!
Post Election Crisis in Côte D'Ivoire is dividing Africa. A country caught between the struggle for democracy and the neo-colonial influence.
During a visit to Ghana by the president of France Emmanuel Macron, both men gave a press conference and during the press conference a question was directed to president Akufo concerning Africa’s continuous reliance on European countries. Akufo's response to the question has kept the continent moving. He began by apologising for the comments he was about to make. Read the full response below.
I hope that the comments I am about to make will not offend the questioner too much and some people around here.
I think those are fundamental mistake with most of the issues in the question:
We can no longer continue to make policy for ourselves, in our country, in our region, in our continent on the basis of whatever support the western world or France, or the European Union can give us.
It will not work. It has not worked and it will not work. Our responsibility is to chart a path which is about how we can develop our nations ourselves. It is not right for a country like Ghana, 60 years after independence to still have its health and education budget being financed on the basis of the generosity and charity of the European tax payers.
By now, we should be able to finance our basic needs ourselves, and if we are going to look at the next 60 years as period of transition, a period whereby we can stand on our own feet, our perspective has not to be what the French tax payers decide to do with whatever surpluses they have in France. They are welcome. They are appreciated whatever interventions that French tax payers through their governments make to us are appreciated.
We are not going to look a gift horse in the mouth. But this continent with all that has happened is still today the repository of at least 30 per cent of the most important minerals of the world. It is a continent of a vast arable and fertile land. It has the youngest population of any of the continents of the world, so it has the energy and the dynamism. We have seen it, these young men who are showing so much resilience and ingenuity in crossing the Sahara, finding ways to go across with rickety boats across the Mediterraneans. Those energies, we want to have those energies working inside our countries and we are going to have those energies working in our countries, if we begin to build systems that tell the young people of our country that their hopes, their opportunities are right here with us. Migration in the movement of people is being presented in manners which suggest somehow it’s a new phenomenon. There is nothing new about it. It’s as old as man the movement of people and it has always been linked to the same thing; the failure of where you are to provide you with an opportunity so you move somewhere else.
Those of you, who are familiar with 19th century European History, will know that the biggest wave of immigration in 19th Europe came from Ireland, came from Italy. Waves upon waves of Italians and Irish people left their countries to seek the American paradise, largely because Ireland was not working, Italy was not working. Today you don’t hear it. Italian young people are in Italy, Irish young people are in Ireland. We want young Africans to stay in Africa.
That means that we have to get away from this mind-set of dependence, this mind-set of what can France do for us. France will do whatever it needs to do for its own sake and when those coincide with ours “tant mieux” as the French people say. But our main responsibility as leaders as citizens, is what we need to grow our own countries, what are the institutions that work, that will allow us to have good governance, to have accountable governance, make sure that the money that are placed at the disposal of the leaders are used for the interest of the state and not for the interest of the leaders. To have systems that allow for accountability, that allow for diversity, that allow for people to be able to express themselves and contribute to fashioning the public will and the public interest.
Our concern should be with what do we need to do in this 21st century to move Africa away from being capped in hand and begging for AID, for charity, for handouts. The African continent, when you look at these resources, should be giving monies to other places. We have huge wealth on this continent. In our own country of Ghana, we need to have a mind-set that says, we can do it, others have done it, and we can also do it. And once we have that mind-set, we will see the liberating factor for ourselves. We keep talking about how it was that Koreans, Malaysians, and Singaporeans who got Independence at the same time as us. We are told of at the time of Ghanaian independence our per capital income was higher than that of Korea. Today in Korea is part of the first world, so is Malaysia, so is Singapore, what happened?
Why did they make that transition and 60 years after independence we are where we are. Those are the matters that should concern all of us as Africans, as Ghanaians, and not, when I say so with the greatest respect for the French president, the corporation of France is something that I am as you know, is a strong friend of France; I am Francophile so I don’t have any difficulty with that. But I am talking about our own propulsion, what we need to do to get our countries to work, so that we can create the conditions that would allow our young people to forgo this hazardous effort to get to Europe.
They are not going there because they want to, they are going there because they don’t believe they have any opportunities in our countries, so that should be our focus and I believe that without that, if we change that mind-set , that mind-set of dependence, that mind-set which is contingent on aid and charity we would see that in the decades ahead of us the full flowering of the African peoples would take place and that new African personality that was talked about at the time of our independence will become real and imminent in our times. That’s what I am saying, I hope I am not upsetting the questioner or even some of my friends who are here, but these are my strongly held believes and this is the reason why I have adopted as the slogan of my presidency of my period of the supreme office of Ghana that we want to build a Ghana beyond aid. A Ghana which is independent, which is self-sufficient, that is capable of standing on its own feet and building its own life. We can do it if we have the correct mind-set to so.
Ever since the 1st Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) that held in Beijing in 2000, China has consistently increased it financing commitment to Africa via concessionary loans. Since 2006, this financing has been purportedly doubled at each FOCAC meeting; i.e from $5 billion in 2006 to $10 billion in 2009 and $20 billion in 2012.
The president of the People’s Republic Xi Jinping wooed the continent during this year’s 6th Ministerial meeting holding in Jonesburg South Africa, with his country’s record $60 billion announcement, i.e three times what was pledged at the previous FOCAC meeting in 2012.
As was highly expected, this new round of available funding will focus on some key areas that include; agriculture development, renewable energy, skills training, health, peace and security and infrastructure development.
The $60 billion package includes $5 billion of free aid and interest-free loans, $35 billion of preferential loans and export credit and $5 billion dollars of additional capital for the China-Africa Development Fund and the Special Loan for the Development of African SMEs, and $10 billion of funding for a China-Africa production capacity cooperation. It also includes aid for drought-stricken countries and thousands of scholarships for African students. Xi in his announcement, also state that the Chinese government will cancel outstanding debts for Africa's least developed countries in the form of zero interest loans that mature at the end of 2015.
The caveats with this Chinese pledges is that, it is difficult to tract its disbursement and its funding success or failures, since most of the money comes in via Chinese state own corporations with a tract record not being transparent. Another cloudy area is whether the new announced funds included part of what was announced at the previous FOCAC meeting in 2012, or is it all new money. Experts have challenged China to be more transparent with its pledges and how they are disbursed. Some experts have warned that the headline numbers could possibly include double-counting, and how much money is eventually disbursed is unclear.
In announcing the new pledge, the Chinese president Xi Jinping echoed what most African States men like hearing, i.e Africa belongs to the African people and that African affairs should be handled by the African people. This, as he claimed is in line with China’s non-interference policy.
President Mugabe of Zimbabwe, amongst others hailed and praised the Chinese president for his country’s generosity stating "Here is a man representing a country once called poor, a country which was never our coloniser. He is doing to us what we expected those who colonised us yesterday to do”
Climbing Value Chains: Options for African Policy Makers
Africa’s economic landscape has changed considerably over the last twenty years. After two decades of sustained economic growth, Sub-Saharan Africa’s GDP is almost $1.5 trillion. Its middle class rose to 350 million people in 2010, up from 126 million people in 1980 and in 2010, consumer spending stood at approximately $600 billion.
Yet, despite all these improvements, Africa’s position in the global trading system places the continent at a great disadvantage in terms of trade dynamism and developmental potential. The continent’s predicament is usually characterized by African firms being stuck at the bottom of global value chains, primarily exporting raw materials while importing finished goods.
In 2011, Angola produced 1,785,000 barrels of crude oil per day but its refinery capacity represented a meager 39,000 barrels a day, half of its daily consumption rate of 88,000 barrels. The difference is met through a costly import bill. Another example of inefficient integration in global value chains is in the coffee sector where Germany alone, a non-producer of coffee, exports more coffee than the whole of Africa combined, with the value of its exports almost double that of Africa!
The reasons for Africa’s failure to participate more effectively in global value chains are numerous. They range from inadequate transport, energy and telecommunications infrastructure to cumbersome border procedures, poor business environments, lack of technology, skills and low institutional capacities.
In this blog, the objective is not to focus on the challenges but on the opportunities presented to African firms by the rise of regional and global value chains. The argument put forth is that in the short-to-medium term, most opportunities for African firms to integrate into regional and global value chains are likely to be within agroindustry, trade in tasks (for goods or services) or industrial migration.
Opportunity 1: Agroindustry
Agroindustry may present the most straightforward opportunities for Africa to link to regional and global value chains. This is primarily because population growth, increased dietary changes, rising incomes and urbanization in many parts of the developing world (particularly Asia) shall continue to drive up demand for agro-based products. In this market environment, Africa has great potential for increasing agriculture based exports.
Opportunities exist for value chains upgrading in many sectors especially rice, maize, sugarcane, dairy, cocoa, cotton, tea, coffee and oil palm. However, constraints to value chains upgrading are difficult to pinpoint since they are specific to each value chain and its corresponding markets (local, regional or global). This highlights the need for policy makers to deepen their understanding of relevant value chains so as to ensure that policy interventions are well targeted and efficient.
With more than 450 million hectares of land, the continent is home to nearly 50 percent of the world’s arable land. Private sector’s interest in African agriculture is at an all-time high. This is evidenced by the massive increases in agriculture related land acquisitions over the last few years. With the right policy mix, negotiations of better land deals and investments in technological upgrading, transport and standards infrastructure, Africa could commercialize its agriculture sector and position itself to capture many higher segments in regional and global value chains.
To achieve this goal, governments and business leaders will need to revamp their policy frameworks in support to farmers and agribusinesses. Scaling up agricultural research and facilitating access to affordable capital, water, energy, transport and inputs shall also be key.
Opportunity 2: Trade in tasks
With globalization and the rapid improvement in transportation and communication technologies, international trade is increasingly characterized by trade in intermediate goods with different countries contributing to the production of a final good.
A product might read “Made in China” or “Made in Japan” when in actual fact it was made in two, three sometimes four countries with each country specializing on the production of a specific task or input along the value chain. This process is generally referred to as trade in tasks or trade in intermediates. The figure below depicts the various components that go into the construction of a Boeing 787:
Source: Boeing Co
If one includes additional parts not shown in the figure above, a total of 10 countries participate in the construction of the Boeing 787.
Trade in tasks is the way through which most East Asian nations climbed the global value chains ladder. It is also likely that most opportunities for African firms to integrate global value chains will be through trade in tasks. After all, focusing on the production of a “task” or “input” along the production chain is far less daunting and capital intensive than breaking into global markets with a final product like a personal computer or a television. Once plugged into a global value chain and as technological know-how increases, African firms may then look for opportunities to move up the value chain.
The concept of trade in tasks for goods also applies to services value chains. According to OECD estimates, the global offshore services industry has grown from a little less than 50 billion USD in 2005 to more than 250 billion USD in 2010. Depending on a country’s endowments (its language, availability of skills, etc.) policymakers may wish to explore opportunities to tap into information technology outsourcing (ITO) or business process outsourcing (BPO) markets. In BPO services, firms could capture many of the lower-value chains such as network management, payroll and call centers, accounting or document management. In ITO, some of the higher value-added activities such as support to IT infrastructure and software development are within the range of certain firms and countries.
Opportunity 3: Industrial migration
Finally, industrial migration particularly from Asia may offer opportunities for African countries with conducive investment climates to rapidly upgrade their production systems. This is because currency appreciation and/or rapid increases in wage rates in Asia are likely to push labor-intensive firms to relocate to countries where labor costs are lower.
Industrial migration may also be driven by Africa’s rising consumer spending levels which is projected to surpass 1 trillion USD by 2020. Countries with enticing business environments could position themselves as future manufacturing hubs for either regional or global exports and we may already be witnessing a move in that direction. In 2008, the Chinese electronic company Hisense set up shop in Egypt and together with its local partner Sun TV is currently estimated to produce 100,000 LDC TVs a year. In Kano, Nigeria, Hong Kong based Lee Enterprises produces plastics, steel, ceramic tiles and leather hides. There are many more such examples on the continent.
Industrial migration is happening, creating numerous opportunities for value chains upgrading and the structural transformation of African economies. Whether African countries benefits from this process will depend on the extent to which industrial migration happens within a policy framework that encourages local production, employment and gradual technological transfer.
Conclusion
Africa’s current trade structure is unsustainable. Policies and incentives must be put in place at national level to restructure the composition of exports and gradually move from the production of primary commodities towards more value-added goods and services. In this particular regard, there may be a need to reconsider the adequacy of existing investment, export and industrial promotion frameworks to see whether they provide all the elements needed to accelerate industrialization.
In the short to medium term, most of the opportunities for African firms to integrate regional and global value chains are likely fall within the three areas mentioned above. The “quick-wins” are likely to be concentrated in agroindustry sector. Trading in tasks in both goods and services value chains shall also present a menu of opportunities for African firms. Finally, policymakers will need to keep a “watchful eye” on the unfolding industrial migration process in order to entice strategic industries and capitalize on opportunities as they arise.
In many ways, the most important success factor in whether African countries succeed in climbing value chains will be the extent to which policy makers invest resources in enhancing their understanding of global trade and production patterns. Increasing analytical capabilities on global trade and production patterns would enable African policymakers to identify niche markets they could tap into and industries that they could attract in a relatively near future. Failing to do so will almost surely lead to poor policy interventions and inefficient resources utilization.
About the author:
Jean-Guy is an international trade and regional integration expert with close to 10 years of professional experience.
He currently works for the African Development Bank (AfDB) where he manages the Africa Trade Fund, a trade-related, technical assistance fund with the objective to improve the trade performance of African countries. Before joining the AfDB, Jean-Guy held various positions at the East African Community (EAC) and the Rwanda Investment & Export Promotion Agency.
The Valletta summit on migration brought together European and African Heads of State and Government in an effort to strengthen cooperation and address the current challenges but also the opportunities of migration.
Highlights of the press conference following the Valletta Summit on migration
It recognised that migration is a shared responsibility of countries of origin, transit and destination. EU and Africa worked in a spirit of partnership to find common solutions to challenges of mutual interest.
Leaders participating in the summit adopted a political declaration and an action plan designed to:
address the root causes of irregular migration and forced displacement
enhance cooperation on legal migration and mobility
reinforce the protection of migrants and asylum seekers
prevent and fight irregular migration, migrant smuggling and trafficking in human beings
work more closely to improve cooperation on return, readmission and reintegration
They also agreed a list of 16 concrete actions to be implemented by the end of 2016.
The existing mechanisms of the Rabat Process, the Khartoum Process and the Joint EU-Africa strategy will be used to monitor the implementation of the action plan.
Signing ceremony of the EU Emergency Trust Fund for Africa during the Valletta Summit on migration
Emergency Trust Fund for Africa
The EU Emergency Trust Fund for stability and addressing root causes of irregular migration and displaced persons in Africa was also formally launched at the occasion of the Valletta summit.
It will provide additional funding to support the implementation of the action plan.
Source: Consilium.europa.eu
Hits: 20466
The US- Africa Summit; A direct policy response to the Sino-African relations or a genuine new chapter in the U.S-Africa relations?
By Eric Acha
28 July 2014
It is fair to assert that it has taken America decades to realise the true potentials of an emerging Africa, and that she is only doing so on the heels of growing Chinese influence on the continent. This assertion has led many experts to believe that the well-publicised upcoming US-Africa summit in August is another opportunity for the US to re-strategize and come up with policies that will counter and contain the growing Chinese presence and influence on the continent. Truth be told; there’s growing concern within the corridors of power in most western nations notably; France and the United States that, giving the speed at which China is penetrating Africa, China could soon start enjoying the level of political influence in Africa that was historically held by France and the United States. With this in mind, both countries have had to go back to the drawing board and drastically redesign their African policies, with each one of them emerging with different strategies and policy options to contain the Chinese expansion and grip on the continent. The forthcoming US-Africa summit could be seen as yet another opportunity to re-engage with Africa. However, for this to yield any fruits, many looming questions must be sincerely scrutinised and answered.
Is America stepping in late? Can the Americans match the Chinese success in curbing and nurturing Africa at the same time? Can they move in with full packages like the Chinese do? Have they got the extra money to spend like China? Can the Americans establish relationships based on friendship and mutual understanding rather than the tutor-student relationship that is being perceived by many Africans? Can the Americans compromise on their values for democracy and human rights in favour of a “cordial and friendly relationship”? What of the non-interference policy being advocated and practised by China? A well-known and highly adorable sweetener in the Sino-African relations has no match, especially with proponents and advocates of democracy and the respect of Human rights. With a capitalist system in place, how will America create and bank role state owned corporations to take on big and visible projects in Africa in return for natural resources?
To be able to answer the above questions, one will need a full understanding of the foundations on which these relationships with Africa are established and how they have evolved over time.
Looking at all the barrel of questions, it is evident that China’s huge and expanding presence and success in Africa is not by chance or luck. It has been a well thought and worked out strategy in the making for many years. A Chinese foreign minister Li Zhaoxing once stated that “today’s Sino-Africa relationship is viewed by both sides as deep-rooted and forged in years of mutual support “. Well, that is the Chinese narrative, and what they do not also tell the world is that it is an unbalanced relationship in which one out-powers the other in everything, leaving the weaker with little or no bargaining power or a better alternative.
Early foreign policy reforms embarked on in the early 90s by the Chinese government regarding Africa can be credited for the country’s success on the continent. As early on as 1995, the commerce ministry, on orders from the Chinese state council was instructed to reform its Africa policies, prioritising any link between aid and trade. Creating the Forum on China–Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) in 2000 was a clear indication that there was a true commitment within the highest level of Chinese government to foster bilateral trade and relations with Africa. The cornerstone of this commitment was the Chinese believe in the continent and willingness to take risk while the rest of the world’s investment community watched from a safety distance. Note, FOCAC was launched in October 2000; five months after the US congress had approved the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA).
Via partnership programs with host countries, the Chinese government has help fund multimillion dollar projects across the continent, most in infrastructure ranging from road construction, power plants to rail ways. To many Africans, this is the kind of investment and development aid the continent has been yearning for and not development aid in the form of wheat and flour or digging wells. Even if the oil and other natural resources are being siphoned to China, they are at least leaving behind visible investments.
So far Africa seems quite comfortable with that relationship with China, but not to the satisfaction of the US, who sees China’s presence in Africa as being exploitative and on many occasions has had to voice these concerns openly. In 2012, Hillary Clinton, the then US secretary of state while on an African tour warned Africans against unnamed “outsiders” coming to “extract the wealth of Africa for themselves, leaving nothing or very little behind.” It was obvious who the unnamed outsider was. China feeling guilty, quickly responded by accusing the United States of seeking to sow discord between China and Africa while keen to reap benefits for itself from the booming continent. It is indeed a battle between two elephants.
America and other proponents of democracy believe China has no plans to halt its expansion on the continent even when democracy and humans rights are at risk. But fairly speaking, if one was to do a survey in many African countries on what they will choose between visible development and democracy, we all can guess the outcome. Very few will want to compromise any development initiative or project (even with known long term exploitative objectives) for democracy. That is not to say democracy does not have its place. Both should go hand in hand. America seems trapped in a dilemma, given that on one hand they do over emphasised democracy; while on the hand continue to support some autocratic and in some cases military regimes on the continent. These mixed messages have not been doing America any good.
The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) approved by the US congress and passed into law in 2000 was a golden opportunity for the United States to re-engage Africa and take over the front seat in piloting the continent’s growth. However, the lack of commitment and the limitations with AGOA explains why 14 years down the line; the US is still trying to catch up. First and foremost AGOA which granted preferential duty-free and largely quota-free access to the U.S. market for some 1,800 products from 41 sub-Saharan African countries was a bold and a major step taken by the US to engage with Africa on the trade front, however the details of the program lacked the ingredients required to enhance and kick start growth on the continent. Secondly AGOA highly publicised as a program aimed at encouraging exports from Africa, failed woefully in encouraging new product lines being exploited and exported to America. There was hardly any investment in infrastructures to boost new productivity, whether be it in the garment industry or basket weaving.
The program ended up only facilitating exports in products that would have been exported with or without AGOA. For example, 2008 figures show that African countries exported over $66 billion worth of products to the United States, an increase of almost 30% from 2007. But more than $62 billion, or 94%, came from oil and gas and minerals, products that would have been exported with or without trade preferences. Similar in 2013, oil and petroleum products accounted for over 80% of the exports to the United States from African countries. Hopefully, the shortcomings of the AGOA program that is expected to come to an end in 2015 will be used as a yard stick and learning curve for future engagements with Africa. America had the opportunity in Africa, but lost it to China.
Another bone of contention between the US-Africa relationship is the perception held by many Africans with regards to the Washington consensus. For close to three decades today, the market fundamentalism or neoliberalism (Washington consensus) being implemented by the World Bank, and her sister institution the International Monetary Fund has had very little noticeable impact in developing the African continent and alleviating poverty via economic growth. It is again fair to assert that both institutions failed to jump start the continent’s economy. Many [1]studies have concluded that the strings and conditions attached to most development aid under the Washington Consensus were dampening rather than encouraging economic growth on the African continent. Even still in cases where lesser strings and conditions were attached, the implementation mechanism of policies designed in Washington had very little impact, since they often failed to directly address the problems and challenges facing the struggling masses.
The Washington consensus on a grand scale agreed and encouraged developing countries to export more of their natural resources including cash crops to international markets, so as to raise funds for servicing debts. Countries implementing the Washington Consensus (structural adjustment and stabilisation programs) were often forced to cut spending on vital sectors such as health, education and development so as to meet up with debt repayment plans.
This left many impoverished African countries with no glimpse of hope to ever industrialise and diversify their economies.
Many impoverished countries were often encouraged to concentrate on the production of cash crops similar to other developing countries, which obviously resulted to a surplus in the market and hence leading to a drastic fall in prices on those products and commodities, this to the benefit of the richer and developed nations. Fairly speaking, the Washington Consensus, from its inception was never designed to enhance development, economic growth and fully alleviate poverty in the developing countries. In a real world, it was/is a well-crafted debt creation and collection tool. The only thing the Washington Consensus succeeded in doing was widening the gap between the rich and poor, and creating new oligarchs in countries that were implementing privatisation programs.
Twisting the arms of developing countries to carry out recommended structural reforms at the expense of key functions of the state was never going to be growth enhancing. This may be explains why for over a quarter of a century, the World Bank and the IMF despite spending a chunk of cash, have failed to deliver tangible results in Africa.
Contrary to these conditional and strings development aid, the Chinese aid comes with no strings or conditions attached to it. However encoded within the aid packages are pseudo long term exploitative objectives whose adverse impacts are often too blur to see. The perception being portrait by China is that, they have agreed to deal with African countries as partners in development rather than the master-servant relationship practiced by the western nations in Africa. As per the Chinese narrative, it is a give and take kind of relationship.
The coming of the Chinese with their new model, aka the Chinese full package (Money, Technical expertise and protection from international sanctions) changed the balance. The complete package, from the sound of it is always too good to not tempt many African leaders, especially those with murky human right records. But the big question is, to what extend can these countries rely on China for protection in the event of a unilateral action, say from one of the super powers? For now, and lessons from recent events have shown that the probability of China stepping in and preventing a military action with the use of counter force is close to, if not zero per cent. In that full package, their guaranteed protection ends at blocking UN Security Council resolutions against countries in which their interest is at stake. But as soon as the Security Council is by passed, China has proven not to have the guts to stand in the way. Sadly in some instances, they have quickly switched sides to get closer to the winning group so as to secure their interest when the new group takes over.
Possible policy options if the US-Africa summit fails to achieve its goals
If the summit fails to achieve its defined goals, the US will be left with no option but to concentrate on hotspots where there are conflicts, since it is evident that China often shies away from mingling in internal conflicts. With its military strength, which is also its biggest asset and export, the US will stand to benefit by increasing the exportation of this asset to countries rich in natural resources.
One way to achieve this will be to promote and expand the war on terrorism, so as to militarily engage those countries.
To a lesser extent, encourage espionage to foment new conflicts on the continent, so to have a reason for intervention in favour of a regime that will be pro-American.
Form new alliances and strengthen existing ones with other disgruntled stakeholders such as France who are losing grounds on the continent, for a joint resistance against the Chinese expansion on the continent.
What America should do
It is not yet too late. There is still a void in the industrialisation sector across Africa and the US has another chance to fill that gap. If the Americans will want to remain relevant in Africa for a foreseeable future, then they will have to deviate or shift their strategy from the heavy military oriented interest to a rather economic interest.
Cut down its military assistance to the continent and redirect the resources to visible growth enhancing infrastructure projects. It is pointless to carry on providing military assistance and training regimes that in most cases are the very ones creating the greatest problems. Not cutting down on this will imply that, the US will carry on expanding its military presence on the continent via the Africa Command Centre (AFRICOM), while China on the other hand will carry on expanding its economic presence. It is obvious which one will pay off in the long term.
Rather than embarked on exaggerating the security risk of the continent and scaring off potential American investors, the US should promote and encourage investors to move into the continent and invest in the continents’ infrastructure, so as to turn Africa into the new factory of the World. There is enough cheap and available labour to run that new factory. Infrastructure should be built to take on the production that is currently being outsourced to Asia, in particular China. It will be beneficial for America to have an alternative, and hence reduce the heavy reliance on China who is at the same time a real rival.
With over 200 million people aged between 15 and 24 (the youth bracket), Africa has the youngest population in the world, an asset which the US can exploit for its consumer based economy. With that youth population size, it is evident that cheap and sustainable labour can be sourced from the continent.
After this summit, Obama should multiply the number of trade visits to Africa during his remaining years in the Whitehouse, taking along with him large delegations of potential investors. The era of the “BIG America” perception is fading out, so it will be a miscalculation to seat back and send low level government officials on behalf of the president and expect much in return from the African head of states. Taking the lead and championing such trips will delineate a new level of commitment and readiness to do business. A Long term commitment to invest in key sectors of the economies will be key to the success of this summit.
The US must stop leaning on the risk factor in Africa, because others are taking the risk and succeeding. One of the reasons why security is an issue is because of the huge youth unemployment. Dangerous sects and extremist are exploiting this high rate of unemployment to their benefit. A case in hand is the dangerous extremist sect Boko Haram originating from North Nigeria. The shrinking of the major garment in industry in that part of the country left many youth unemployed and hence vulnerable to Boko Haram recruiters. Therefore seating back and relying on a military response is not an option.
From a Pan Africanist perspective
Africa has a lot to offer and has complete packages as well, which are; expanding markets, cheap labour, and natural resources. They deserve the full attention and respect from their counterparts.It is obvious today that the opportunities in Africa and its potentials far outweigh any challenges the continent might be facing. Now the fastest growing continent in the world with growth estimated at 7 to 10 per cent and home to 7 of the 10 fastest growing economies in the world; Africa really has a lot to offer. The continent must stop portraying itself as a victim and the weakest link during negotiations. To carry on wearing the victims’ hat at the negotiation table is self-defeating.
The continent has what it takes to be in control now and to define the rules of the game on the continent. External actors should not be the ones setting the rules of the game being played on the continent. Despite all the odds and criticism, the coming of the Chinese gave the continent an alternative and a backup to cut loose of the conditionality regime that had governed the continent for many years. It has repositioned Africa and given the continent some leverage over its bargaining power. However, China should not be blindly embraced. Africa must plan now for the long term and its leaders must be conscious of the fact that whatever arrangements they make today, their impacts will determine the future of the continent. Externalising our economic growth and surrendering it to external actors to design and control the pace of that growth is not healthy for the continent and that format is not sustainable.
Africa has one more chance in its history to correct the errors of the past by clinging on these new opportunities, exploiting them to its benefit and get the continent ready for the next wave. Though there is so much interest on the continent and somewhat inflated speculations about its growth potentials, the continent is at a cross road and any policy blunder now will be very costly for its’ future. The purported adoration for the continent will not carry on forever so it must act wisely. If it squanders these opportunities then it will have but itself to blame.
Addressing the high rate of youth unemployment on the continent should be given a priority. Reducing youth unemployment will tackle a majority of the security problems while at the same time creating a consumer base, which will in turn guarantee a sustainable economic growth.
And finally the need to boost intra-regional trade within Africa and speed up the process towards a single trading union is more important now than ever before.
About the Author: Eric Acha is a policy analyst and the Executive Director of the Africa Policy Forum. He can be contacted on This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., twitter @ericacha1