U.S. - Africa Summit: Issues and challenges

A few years ago, Daniel Don Nanjira, wrote that, of all continents, Africa was the most peripheral and most neglected, in addition to being the most fragmented with more than 50 sovereign states. His observations make it possible to understand why Africa has encountered difficulties in becoming a united and influential power on the international scene. Until recently, Africa's partners seemed to be satisfied with the situation. But today they want the continent to gain more weight in the management of global affairs. attracted by economic opportunities and guided by security concerns, Western and Asian countries have intensified their interactions with the continent as such - a single entity - while continuing their direct relations with the various African countries.

At several summits, African leaders were invited as a group, illustrating this development. China and the European Union have done this many times since 2000. And India, Japan, and other actors have done the same. The United States is now taking the initiative to host such a meeting, scheduled for December 13-15, 2022. The stakes on both sides are major.

A summit with hidden importance?

In January, when the summit was announced, the U.S. government minimized its potential impact, suggesting that this meeting would only be a diplomatic episode like the others - simply with more participants. The objectives stated were general and predictable: to build on past cooperation, to advance trade and business ties, to reaffirm America's commitments to trade, security, democracy, and African societies. In short, nothing exciting.'s.

According to a report, this is exactly what African leaders perceived when they became aware of the format and program of the summit: a grouped approach. And without any head-to-head between President Obama and one or more of his African counterparts. Obviously, the interest in participating in such an event is reduced. In addition, no official agreement is provided for at the end of this meeting.

These elements could indicate that the summit will be more loaded with symbols than substantial content. But in diplomacy, very often, one train can hide another, and it seems that this is the case here. Nothing prevents Washington from making significant progress at this meeting, and the format of the summit offers some clues on this subject:

1. to affirm that the United States considers Africa as a geopolitical entity of its own right, in addition to Washington's relations with each nation on the continent, with issues of interest to America and Africa can be dealt with at both levels.

2. Promote the idea, among African leaders, that the individual value of each nation and each head of state can only benefit from collaborative efforts, which themselves require broader cooperation.

3. Make it known that the United States is ready to intensify its cooperation with Africa on these bases, while maintaining its traditional bilateral relations with African countries.

First, many African nations with enormous economic potential are financially disabled and still have to put in place the conditions for good governance. Some of these countries experience social and ethnic tensions but have limited military capabilities, unsuitable to face local challenges, not to mention regional challenges.

In addition, no African country or group of countries has so far managed to establish long-term all-round cooperation on a continent - from a pan-African perspective - whether economically, politically or military. African nations differ greatly from each other, and it is not easy to find common denominators. The fragmentation of the continent even tends to accentuate these differences and complicates the establishment of sustainable cooperation, even within the framework of the African Union.

Another reality that the United States must take into account is the emergence of problems common to many African countries that transcend borders. These issues range from terrorism - linked to extremist religious groups - to ethnic violence or massive purchases of African land by foreign powers - what is locally called the phenomenon of "land grabbing". Security problems in particular are amplified by the porosity of the borders of many African countries, a porosity that facilitates the spread of unrest from one country to another.

Finally, the United States must also face the activism of its economic and military rivals in Africa, including China, but also India and the European Union. These powers are investing tirelessly, and have developed commercial links with the continent over the last 10 to 15 years. These investments will be profitable, given the growing role that Africa is acquiring in world trade, thanks to these interactions but also thanks to the population growth of the continent.

Approaching Africa as a single entity

Addressing Africa as a whole would encourage the nations of the continent to deepen their cooperation, while responding to American interests. This approach would increase the prestige of the United States with African countries and contribute to improving American competitiveness in Africa, whether in the economic or political field.

In particular, greater attention to exchanges held at the continental level could give more weight to the African framework in which these interactions occur: it would be an accelerator for pan-African organizations in general, and for the African Union in particular. The AU has faced many problems, ranging from its own financing to peacekeeping operations or development efforts. And in this context, the support given to it by the populations of many member countries has remained limited.

China financed the construction of the AU headquarters, but a new American stance towards an Africa seen as a single entity would implicitly strengthen the very purpose and influence of the organization. This approach would be an invaluable present for the AU, if it strengthens its role on the continent and makes it a better recognized interlocutor by non-African nations. From an American point of view, this perspective could cancel the deference to China, which exists within the organization in return tacitly to Beijing's generosity.

Catch up on lost time

Nevertheless, in order to assert its interests in Africa more generally, the United States must double its efforts to make up for the lead taken by its political and economic rivals, who have developed strong relations with the continent earlier and faster. China has become Africa's leading trading partner in a relatively short period of time, followed by India and the European Union. If we compare the American position, Washington gives the impression of giving Africa the weakest priority, and the upcoming summit would not be of great interest if it were not precisely the unofficial purpose of changing this perception. Since the quality of political relations is closely linked to the volume of trade relations, the meeting in early August can have consequences for all American prospecting actions on the continent.

The summit provides a framework to start changing perceptions, but the simple fact that it takes place is not enough. Many observers believe that the United States has been forced to welcome African leaders in order to consolidate its position with their respective countries, in a context where African security issues are increasingly affecting American interests. A summit that does not exceed the symbolic event stage would risk being perceived as a theatrical episode, and could even harm relations between the United States and Africa, if it disappoints the invited leaders - and American companies.

Opening a pan-African path in relations between Washington and the African continent would be the most appropriate approach to achieving substantial results - the creation of an additional framework for new economic, military and development cooperation. The United States would thus be on a different trajectory than that taken by its competitors, which would allow them to stand out and dispel the image of a power that would seek to catch up with others.

But another danger awaits Washington: the progress made at the summit may not be lasting. Specialists from the Brookings Institution who dissected other summits dedicated to African leaders point out that those organized by China, Japan or the European Union were all oriented towards deepening relations with Africa in the long term. These meetings regularly generate statements and action plans, implemented and examined over the successive summits, which are only a few years apart.

Meeting African expectations

For African leaders, the Washington Summit offers a unique opportunity to work together on continental issues of interest to the United States. If they seize this opportunity, their attitude would resonate with the growing interest that the United States expresses in Africa as a single entity. But leaders do not have much room for manoeuvre, if they want their respective nations to benefit from the summit, since its format clearly shows that the issues that interest countries taken separately from each other are not intended to be discussed.

In addition, according to Mwangi S. Kimenyi, director of the Africa Growth Initiative at the Brookings Institution, it is in the interest of African leaders to cooperate before and during the meeting. He warns: "if African leaders do not come with clear and coordinated positions, starting points for an agreement with President Obama, the summit may very well lead to nothing". He therefore urges them to develop a collective strategy, to identify those of them who will highlight the different points and to "focus their efforts on the few main topics that concern a majority of Africans", such as regional integration.

In Africa itself, the summit does not seem to generate disproportionate expectations. Partly probably out of skepticism about Washington's real intentions, hidden behind the organization of this meeting. Many observers believe that the United States only wants to catch up with its Asian and European competitors, and doubt that the summit can produce real progress for the continent, whether politically or economically.

In addition, the summit apparently offers no opportunity for African leaders to return home in charge of political or economic achievements that would specifically concern their country. This obviously reduces possible expectations. In fact, such advances will be difficult to achieve, including at the pan-African level, since the innovative nature of this type of encounter has disappeared after the many summits of the same kind that took place in other forums. The more these gatherings lurks, the less potential impact each event has, unless it is devoted to spectacular objectives - and this is not the case with this summit in the United States. Nevertheless, an observer points out that it will at least lay new and solid foundations for the future of American-African relations.

Act at the continental level

Others argue that the United States has an opportunity to increase its current commitment to development and cooperation programs. These programs are varied, but we can mention the Power africa initiative, which aims to promote the increase of economic activity in a number of African countries, by developing access to sustainable sources of electricity. But the summit, by its nature, can only deal with programs that cover all of Africa or at least a majority of countries, and not those that concern certain regions or small groups of nations. Due to the fragmentation of the continent, issues that include a majority of African countries are not commonplace.

At a minimum, fundamental trends on a global scale - whether economic, political or social -, on which the United States often acts as initiators, concern all African nations. At the same time, international problems such as terrorism, drug and human trafficking or cybercrime affect all countries on the continent. However, the United States contributes greatly to the development of answers to these questions. The summit can therefore rely on these areas of convergence to amplify existing cooperation or generate new cooperation. Conversely, the inability to find points of agreement on these subjects would reveal a failure of African leaders in the cooperative approach. If this were the result of the meeting, an amplification of the problems mentioned would be likely.

Diplomacy will determine which side the balance will tip: this summit carries significant risks, but also potential progress. The priority given to Africa rather than the different nations that compose it is undoubtedly a bet, but a bet that leaves a significant chance for a result that can only be perceived as positive by all actors. It can push every African leader to really see his country as part of a larger whole. And a change in mentalities in this direction would be an important step towards more cooperation and integration between African nations. This result would not necessarily be spectacular, and its impact could take time to reveal itself, but it would certainly be important in the long term for Africa's development.

Are you looking for a low-cost, reliable, and all-inclusive solution for supply chain management, quality manufacturing services, and product development in China?

Contact us [email protected] www.easytradeafrica.com

read more article