My Home Page

THE UNITED STATES AND THE PLIGHT OF AFRICA

by Vanessa Lofton

The United States government would have the American people believe that its involvement in African politics and its need to supply African dictators with sophisticated military weaponry and arms is in the best interest of a war-torn impoverished continent fighting communism and terrorism. However, a thorough insight into Africa's misery dealt by the hands of foreign involvement may offer another perspective. An objective endeavor to trace the origin of war and civil unrest in Africa bestowed by the hands of the United States government is courageous to say the least. Such an endeavor affords the reader an opportunity to view Africa's troubles from a different perspective, such as the involvement of the United States in the Cold War.

The primary reason the United States government supported "Cold War" efforts in Africa was strictly about finances and as a result, culminated into the usual predicament of the powerful (wealthy) dictating to the weak (poor). The United States after having poured in more than $1.5 billion in arms and military training into Africa under the guise of fighting communism and promoting stability. Examples of U.S. involvement in Africa to promote stability are Liberia, Somalia, and Zaire. All of these countries are devastated by continued civil wars that are killing hundreds of thousands of human beings each day.

If the United States was sincere in its effort to assist Africa in the upheaval of turmoil, misery, diseases, epidemics, and poverty which have overwhelmed many of her nations since the implementation of the slave trade,then the United States would donate and contribute more earnest monies into the development of sustaining life in Africa as opposed to sustaining African dictators in the name of fighting communism and providing this so-called stability. Through "earnest monies" which can be defined as good faith expenditures free of expectation and obligation, those in power in African communities and government would be availed with authority to spread the wealth within their own regions and possibly toward their own causes which may, more than likely, benefit the people of Africa rather than its powerful. If it was sincere, then in its sincerity, the United States would earnestly support life by providing the country with basic nutritious efforts to survive which do not entail survival by means of guns, weaponry and military training. The United States government is sending a clear message to Africans, that of hate and destruction.

It is ludicrous to imply that Africa's problems can be solved in one month by declaring January the "Month of Africa." It will take more than a month, however, for the current Administration to undo the damage wrought by decades of misguided U.S. policies that helped sustain several generations of African dictators and demagogues. This is a slap in the face to not only the citizens of Africa who have been victimized beyond belief, but to those Americans who have contributed through charitable organizations in an effort to lend some support, as well as to the international allies who too have made efforts to help sustain life in Africa. Where is the U.S. support for promoting peace, human development and economics on this continent?

The United States government has help promote and sustain African dictators by giving the government of Zaire more than $400 million in U.S. weaponry and training during President Mobutu SeSe Seko's 32-year reign. Mobutu vigorously repressed dissent while systematically looting his country by laundering billions of dollars in government funds to his overseas bank account. Sadly, dictators like Mobotu have contributed to the mayhem of Africa and African people. This is truly an atrocious act committed against African people by one of their own. African dictators have dealt a horrendous atrocity by their violent, greedy, ignorant and self-interest hands. Moreover, dictators like Mobutu would not have been able to rise to power without the financial support of the United States and other foreign involvement.

Many of Africa's most repressive dictators have been aided, supported, and rewarded handsomely for their loyalty to the United States. An example is Idi Amin, general of Uganda. Idi Amin brutalized his people with British and U.S. military aid, along with Israeli and CIA training of his troops. The West simply ignored Idi Amin's cruel acts. Another example of the United States misguided policies that have helped to sustain African dictators is P.W. Botha, President of South Africa. The U.S. government, despite boycotts and Congressional efforts to reduce the United States investments in South Africa, quietly supported South Africa's apartheid regime. During this period, Ronald Reagan significantly increased military expenditures in Africa. Moreover, during this period of fighting communism and providing stability to Africa, the United States ensured Africa's indebtedness to the United States for generations to come and perhaps to one day out right own Africa. The U.S. backed loans for arms, military training and advisory to African dictators has created the new economy chains of slavery.

Although it is still hard for many to see the connections between human suffering and the seemingly impersonal workings of the international economy, the U.S. has renewed the slave trade. Debt was one of the driving forces behind the deadly commerce of slavery. Trade goods supplied on credit, including guns, had to be paid for. Often the only profitable commodity accepted in return for trade goods were human beings.

The World Bank has identified thirty-three of Africa's forty-one countries as "heavily indebted poor countries". Africa's debt is so large in comparison to the continent's income that it cannot be repaid. As long as Africa's debt is not canceled, the constant pressure to pay it off is unrelenting and hinders economic development. As the United States so fervently attest to money and power, would not the true show of power be in forgiveness of Africa's current debt. During the Clinton era, the United States solidified its position as the world's leading arms merchant. The great expansion in the 1960s in connection with Africa's Independence and the dynamics of the Cold War shaped the U.S. position as a proxy superpower. Bill Clinton inherited this position as leading arms merchant, and although this ordeal was inherited it does not dismiss his administration from furthering the U.S. misguided policies to sustain African dictatorship.

The Clinton Administration is purely rhetoric towards the development of Africa. In 1994, President Clinton avoided steps that might have curbed the Rwanda genocide which resulted in the deaths of 500,000 Tutsis at the hands of Hutus. This American-led humanitarian intervention brought the United States casualties and political humiliation. The former Clinton Administration decided that the U.S. should not support large-scale military operations in Africa. Many African citizens are wary and skeptical of the ultimate intentions of the United States and its interest in their countries. History has shown that the U.S. misguided policies was simply an effort to sign up Cold War allies such as Zaire, Ethiopia and Liberia.

Former Secretary of State, Christopher Warren urged the U.S. to set up an African peacekeeping force to be used in Africa. Africans were suspicious of Mr. Christopher's proposal. They felt his proposal would only result in the further writing off of Africa with a plan for no real funding or interest in human development Instead, the Clinton Administration was willing to assemble a 10,000 member all-African crisis response force that could be drawn together and deployed on short notice. Congress earmarked $20 million for this effort and enlisted support from other western countries. The problem with this plan was America risked repeating their grave mistakes of past African peacekeeping efforts.

This effort had been tried in Liberia. In Liberia, the 10,000-man West African peacekeeping force could not get a grip on the situation. Instead, it was just enough to keep Liberia's crisis at a low boil for the last six years. The U.S. support for the West African troops has been both tepid and inconsistent.

The U.S. had no problem supplying countries like Zaire, Ethiopia, Liberia, Nigeria and Uganda with military aid. However, now that Africa finds itself embroiled in a bloody-deadly civil war, the former Clinton Administration and current Bush Administration is not willing to swoop-in and separate combatants nor shield civilians from tragedy. The United States should set ambitious goals for an increase in aid development to Africa, reduce the debt Africa has racked up during the 1970s and 1980s for the purchase of weapons, and, stop blocking and undercutting peacekeeping, human development and economic independence efforts to Africa.

The United States government was never held responsible for supporting and protecting some of the worst human rights violations in the world. At anytime that the United States government says it has a covert operation in place, American citizens should remain dubious. We must remember that in our struggle for power and glory that human rights must be adhered to and protected. Thousands of people are being killed. This is a problem that should be addressed.