Hillary Clinton’s statement to the senators at her confirmation hearing, required for appointment as the next Secretary of State in the Barack Obama presidency, gives a sneak preview at the direction that US foreign policy will take over the next four years. While the transcript sets out her overview of the global approach and is well worth reading, my focus is on her thoughts on Africa.
What becomes clear from the outset is that in respect of this continent, three trouble spots have become front and centre in the minds of the incoming administration; Zimbabwe, Democratic Republic of Congo and Somalia; cholera, rape and piracy run amok.
“Always, and especially in the crucible of these global challenges, our overriding duty is to protect and advance America’s security, interests, and values: first, we must keep our people, our nation and our allies secure. Second, we must promote economic growth and shared prosperity at home and abroad. Finally, we must strengthen America’s position of global leadership – ensuring that we remain a positive force in the world, whether in working to preserve the health of our planet or expanding dignity and opportunity for people on the margins whose progress and prosperity will add to our own.
“The president-elect and I believe that foreign policy must be based on a marriage of principles and pragmatism, not rigid ideology. On facts and evidence, not emotion or prejudice. Our security, our vitality and our ability to lead in today’s world oblige us to recognize the overwhelming fact of our interdependence.
“I believe that American leadership has been wanting, but is still wanted. We must use what has been called “smart power,” the full range of tools at our disposal — diplomatic, economic, military, political, legal and cultural — picking the right tool, or combination of tools, for each situation. With smart power, diplomacy will be the vanguard of foreign policy. This is not a radical idea. The ancient Roman poet Terence, who was born a slave and rose to become one of the great voices of his time, declared, “in every endeavor, the seemly course for wise men is to try persuasion first.” The same truth binds wise women as well.” (Hillary Clinton)
There can be no doubt in anyone’s mind that Obama plans to disengage the US from Iraq, Afghanistan and as many other military operations as circumstances allow. He will, however, be guided and limited by the geo-political realities that are confronting him even now. Just by way of example the desire to close Guantanamo Bay is being delayed while “homes” are being found within the system or attempts are made to repatriate inmates to their reluctant country of origin.
As Clinton says, diplomacy and a host of other “tools” will be employed to achieve the goal of making the USA a “smart power”, which seeks to project power in a responsible way by primarily seeking to build relationships with other countries. However, make no mistake, should attempts at “persuasion” fail, Obama will prove to be a far more formidable opponent for those with hostile intentions than the seemingly bellicose George W Bush.
” In Africa, the foreign policy objectives of the Obama administration are rooted in security, political, economic, and humanitarian interests, including: combating al Qaeda’s efforts to seek safe havens in failed states in the Horn of Africa; helping African nations to conserve their natural resources and reap fair benefits from them; stopping war in Congo; ending autocracy in Zimbabwe and human devastation in Darfur; supporting African democracies like South Africa and Ghana, which just had its second change of power in democratic elections; and working aggressively to reach the Millennium Development Goals in health, education, and economic opportunity.” (Hillary Clinton)
In terms of Zimbabwe I believe that the SADC and even the parties of that strife torn country will battle to convince the new president that there is a place for Mugabe in the new government. While they may accept that a power-sharing arrangement is desirable it will have to be sans Bob as far as they are concerned. Obama’s only official take on Mugabe has been to declare his regime illegitimate. In terms of Somalia the issue of the surge by Islamic extremists and piracy will be given priority. Calls have already gone out to replace the Ethopian troops who have just withdrawn with a UN force.
DR Congo is going to prove to be a prickly pear with the Ugandan LRA rebels stirring up trouble in the DRC, Southern Sudan, Central African Republic and of course Uganda. Throw in Rwandan support for Tutsi rebels and DRC support for Hutu rebels and you have a nightmare in the eastern half of the country. The wealth of resources has also resulted in substantial corporate involvement, which the State Department will need to bring under control if a solution is to be found.
Darfur where China has vested interests may prove sticky when the USA seeks to prosecute those involved in the recent genocide. China has already been lobbying for support in holding off on referring the matter to the International Criminal Courts. I trust the USA will point out to Russia and China that, where a humanitarian crisis such as Zimbabwe and Darfur has arisen, the right thing to do when the UN wants to pass a resolution in order to act is to abstain like they did in Gaza. Zimbabweans are still paying for the infamy of Russia, China and South Africa.
Fortunately it appears that, despite our less than glorious foreign policy, the USA considers South Africa as a democracy worthy of encouraging and establishing a long- term relationship.
“But here again, as we work to repair the damage, we can find new ways of working together. For too long we have merely talked about the need to engage emerging powers in global economic governance; the time to take action is upon us. The recent G-20 meeting was a first step, but developing patterns of sustained engagement will take hard work and careful negotiation. We know that emerging markets like China, India, Brazil, South Africa and Indonesia are feeling the effects of the current crisis. We all stand to benefit in both the short and long-term if they are part of the solution, and become partners in maintaining global economic stability.” (Hillary Clinton)
Senator Clinton goes to great lengths to confirm the important role that the USA plays in helping the countries of the world in dealing with poverty, illness and a myriad other problems. There is an acceptance that this “obligation” is something that the new administration takes very seriously. It is heartwarming to see not only her approach to Africa, but also the high regard that she has for South Africa.
Let us hope and pray that in this, the year of our own elections, we start to act like a responsible regional power and merit the credit that she has given us.
This sounds very much the same as was under Bush. American interests prevail. No word about AFCOM, the US equivalent of NATO for Africa, becoming the main channel for US AID.
The battle with China and Russia on African soil is still on and will be intensified.
As was the case under the Apartheid government, the US will keep supporting any SA ruling government. SA still has strategic value!
Mike,
You write:
“It is heartwarming to see not only her approach to Africa, but also the high regard that she has for South Africa.”
I wonder if she really has such “a high regard” for the way that SA has handled Zim. I doubt it. Clinton wants to “end autocracy” in Zim whilst The ANC are supporting it!
I am surprised that you didn’t mention just how anti-Western/American SA foreign policy has been. Will Pretoria’s line change when Obama takes over?
BL – Your point is valid.
Guys I have repeatedly looked at the government’s shocking foreign policy through the site.
Scroll back for those articles.
Time will tell if this is hot air or the strings that are attached have anchors.
Traps,
I wonder if the Obama administration will be any different to previous ones. The yanks may wish things were different in other countries but will only act if they themselves are attacked or threatened.
America only joined the first world war after the ‘Mexico letter’ was intercepted.
They only joined the 2nd WW after Pearl Harbour was attacked.
They would not have gone to war with Iraq if there was no oil in the region.
Mike.
Our governments shocking foreign policy depends upon which side of the fence you are sitting.
A lot is expected from Barack Obama and a lot of people are going to be disappointed.
American policy is foremost on his agenda and I doubt that we are going to see much of a change.
If I am wrong we may see a change in our foreign policy and just how fast our government can change horses.
I’m not sure that all of Obama’s foreign policies are streamlined. I doubt whether al-Qaeda will ‘forgive’ Obama because he isn’t Bush. Bin Laden will probably manage to push Obama into a situation where the only valid response would be hightened aggression, and destroy Obama’s credibility as an agent of change.
Joe on January 14th, 2009 at 9:56 pm writes..
“Our governments shocking foreign policy depends upon which side of the fence you are sitting.”
Yes. The ANC’s foreign policy is much more shocking if you are sitting with cholera on the Zim side of the border. Of course, if you are a govt minister sitting in “Blues” restaurant in Cape Town, the policy does not seem quite so shocking.
Senator Hillary Clinton offered few specifics as to the policies that she would pursue as the Obama administration’s secretary of state, but suggested that she would pursue the same objectives as those that have driven US military aggression over the past several years, albeit with some largely cosmetic modifications.
Perhaps the most striking feature of the confirmation hearing was the studied indifference to the most explosive ongoing international conflict—the war in Gaza.
She referred to “the tragic humanitarian cost of conflict in the Middle East,” declaring herself “pained by the suffering of Palestinian and Israeli civilians.” Under conditions in which over 1,000 Palestinians had been killed compared to three Israeli civilians, the meaning of such sentiments is clear.
Africa does not need Clinton or Obama’s approval about democratic practices. These people were silent when Bush stole the elections in 2000. They like Bush, advocate and support the overthrow of democratically elected governments, i.e. Venezuela, Bolivia, Palestine,Iran etc. An Obama administration will NOT change anything, but will continue inflicting untold misery on millions around the globe. Why do you think that Richard Armitage and Dick Cheney, Bush’s warmongering buddies, have praised Obama’s cabinate nominations? They know that Obama represents the same interest of financial oligarchs that they represented. The only difference now, is that the aggression, suppression and austerity will be carried out by a black young guy with a lot of charisma.
Pasile
The USA did not invade Iraq because of oil – but because of 7/11. If it was the right decision is another question. Not only does the USA have oil, plus a special deal with Saudi Arabia, it can also get oil from other sources – Africa, Canada etc.
Answer this question:
Thousands of people all over the world are demonstrating because 1000 people have died in Palestine.
Why did they not march for the DRC/Rwanda where 5 million have died?
Or for Zimbabwe?
Or for Sudan?
In the darkest days of apartheid I gave thanks to God that at least we only had a racial war, nor a religious one.
Lyndall Beddy on January 15th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
You really are being totally unfair asking Pasile so many questions! Why on earth are you trying to put the Israeli/Palestinian conflict into a broader context?
I got in a lot of trouble for asking Trapido loads of questions. It even got to the stage, where Mike publicly stated that he would ignore them!
Lyndall.
Your last paragraph answered your question.
I think the worst problem Africa is going to have is realising he’s actually coloured (mixed race).
At some point he has been racially insulted for having a dark skin, and probably for having a pale one.
But most importantly at one time or another he has had some Black person telling him what a stupid White person it is driving up, before telling them its his Uncle come to pick him up because his mother’s running late.
And when Black African’s realise that, they might realise why talking about “White People being Neo-Colonialist” ain’t going to go down too well when they talk about (half) his family like that.
If you really want to know about the Obama expectations, the following is a good read:
http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/features/53257
Enjoy
Thanks for the article Benzol – very interesting site.
One can only marvel at the arrogance as well as the stupidity of the Americans.
Just what on earth do they think they are going to do in or about Zimbabwe?
Mugabe is the Chinese gatekeeper of the entire region and Chinese interests, nay, Sino-Soviet interests in the region go back to the early 60′s. Literally as the African de-colonisation process had started, the Sino-Soviet alliance was rolling up it’s sleeves to step into the position occupied most specifically in Southern Africa by the former British colonialists.
What started out with the Chinese building the Tanzam Railway has now culminated in a majority Chinese shareholding in Africa’s largest, most sophisticated bank and the one that incidentally holds all the banking accounts of the ANC Government of South Africa including Revenue services, and local and national government accounts, not to mention most of big business acounts including those of American Corporations banking in SA. In this regard, essentially a Chinese parastatal Banking Institution has it’s finger right in the femoral artery of the country’s financial affairs, never mind on it’s pulse. What greater measure of understanding does one need of a country or leverage of control of a country than such an intimate knowledge of it’s financial affairs, who’s who, what’s what and where the money is coming from and going to?
The Americans are so thick that they still haven’t put two and two together to arrive at the connection 50 years ago of China building a railway from the Zambian Copper-belt to Dar Es Salaam, their involvement in Mugabe’s “Liberation Struggle” the arrival at a South African port of a Chinese ship with a load of Chinese “weep-ons” for Mugabe, Chinese military garrisons stationed strategically around Zimbabwe, Mugabe’s Korean (Chinese ally) trained and Chinese equipped and funded army, his continued, unchallenged dictatorship, the Mandela administration’s comraderie with Mugabe and the Mbeki administration’s subservience to him should tell the Yanks a whole lot of things about Southern Africa that they clearly know squat about.
Ok that is a little more than two and two, so maybe I’m being a little optimistic about the American Politik’s powers of deduction, but it all tells me and any other thinking person that Chinese vested interests in Southern Africa are of a magnitude and have been shaped over a period of time that does not suggest in any way that China is going to roll over and relinquish all that without a little resistance to a former global superpower, now flat broke, socially decomposed, culturally fragmented and about to be led by a 47 year old yapping media creation with no experience, hiding behind the skirts of a woman who couldn’t hold sway over her husbands pecker never mind an entire nation, as totaly dumbed down as it is.
Furthermore, Mugabe is no fool. In terms of pure Hitlerian evil, while Hitler may have had the backing of the Reich behind him to perpetrate the calamity that was WW II, Mugabe has the backing of a Global Megapower against which no nation on earth, especially the depleted Yanks could dare to afford a military face-off and that is most certainly what will happen if they start mucking about in Chinese interests in Chinese Southern Africa.
Obama is hopelessly out of his depth as a politician where Mugabe is concerned. Mugabe is a man that under a variety of international bans of all descriptions, has stood in the United Nations building in NY and told a succession of American adminstrations not only what clowns they are but exactly where to get off. If he were to run an election campaign against Obama in the US for the black US vote he would annihilate Obama purely on the his appeal to the anti-white sentiment of the African Americans that is routinely expressed by such as Louis Farrkhan, Jesse Jackson and co.
There can be no doubt about it, Obama and his freak show would be eaten up and spat out in little pieces by Mugabe before he even got as far as a promising threat to the Chinese in Southern Africa, which for all it would be worth, would be about as effectual as a mental image of Obama cocking his leg and weeing on one if those gaily blue, white and red wrapped Maypoles he has at his so eloquent speeches. It certainly won’t cost as many American lives as a confrontation with the Chinese juggernaut in Southern Africa but would certainly be equally as hilarious.
Africa: China’s Mythical Military Menace
by Stephen Marks,30 October 2008 in Pambazuka News
http://allafrica.com/stories/200810310729.html
Oldfox that is a very interesting piece. I would however still be concerned with their interest in Sudan and Zimbabwe.
Traps,
China needs minerals. Already, China has achieved in urban development in 3 decades what Europe achieved in 3 centuries. By around 2020 or so, 900 million Chinese will live in cities, mostly in high rise apartments. A staggering 250 million rural peasants will be trained in factory work or services for a life off the farm.
China gets lots of minerals from Australia and Canada, has joint ventures with e.g. Canadian mining companies etc.
“From Canada to Indonesia to Kazakhstan, Chinese firms are gobbling up oil, gas, coal and metals, or paying for the right to explore for them, or buying up firms that produce them. Ships are queuing off Australia’s biggest coal port, Newcastle, to load cargoes destined for China ; at one point last June the line was 79 ships long.”
CfF: A ravenous dragon, Mar 13th 2008
From The Economist print edition
Here is one article on the Anglo-Amercian Chinese clash in Zim.
http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/breaking-down-understanding-our-enemies/32366-anglo-american-chinese-interests-clash-over-zimbabwe-s-strategic-mineral-wealth.html by F. William Engdahl
Engdahl is author of A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order
The following I got from a link at Stellenbosch University’s Centre for Chinese studies.
http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/chinese-investment-africa-full.pdf
Covers several countries, incl Angola. It states that 10 000 Chinese businessmen have visited Angola. How many SA businessmen have visited Angola?
India is also working hard at getting access to Africa’s minerals. See e.g.
New Delhi rushes to catch up to Beijing in race for commodities
http://www.busrep.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=561&fArticleId=4336104
India moves to cement African partnership
http://www.busrep.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=561&fArticleId=4345338
India loosens purse strings to cultivate resource-rich Africa
http://www.busrep.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=565&fArticleId=4343928
For an academic type research article on both India and China in Africa, see
Development Centre Studies
The Rise of China and India
WHAT’S IN IT FOR AFRICA?
Get the entire book (155 pages) here
http://www.ony.unu.edu/seminars/2006/whatsinitforafrica/oecdreport.pdf
Traps,
Unfortunately, China follows the official SADC/AU stances on Zim and Sudan. If SADC and AU dropped support for ZANU PRF/Mugabe and Sudanese govt, so would China.
Excluding Tibet, China has not invaded another country in 5 000 years. India has not invaded another country in 10 000 years.
By 2035 or so, the glaciers in the Himalayas will have vanished, due to current levels of global warming. One billion people in China and India will be threatened when their major rivers – Ganges, Yellow River and Yangzte rivers dry up.
Then, I would be very very concerned about what China or India may resort to – if I’m alive then! The world will be so messed up by then, that I hope I’m not around. Unfortunately, my children will probably be around.
Oldfox Sorry I disagree in part. Direct or indirect invasion makes little difference. Like the USA and old CCCP China is able to prop up any regime it wants and the rest of the world will sit back and do nothing.
North Korea, Vietnam are prime examples without direct Chinese involvement they would not be able to cling to power.
China as has Russia and USA vetoed resolutions at the UN. What stops China from doing the same for any of its pals?
China is the biggest international investor in SA at this time, and looking to buy shares in a bank.
Do you think that if it wishes for the ANC to hold onto power that help would not be forthcoming?
Hugh,
Vietnamese govt has reformed (in economic sense) and Vietnam is one of the fastest growing economies. It is not propped up by the Chinese govt, as far as I know. Unpopular governments are propped up – Mobutu being one of the best known cases in Africa.
China is one of the countries trying to end North Korea’s nuclear programme. A nuclear armed N. Korea is definitely a threat to world peace.
As for China actively supporting/propping up North Korea, I doubt it, but will check out what’s on Internet before commenting further.
THe world has come a long way since the Cold War. Angola has close ties with both USA and China today. During the Cold War, it could be one, but never both of these countries.
Hugh,
This article by an academic
“China Raises its Stake in North Korea”
http://www.nautilus.org/fora/security/0602Lankov.html
indicates that since around 2005 or 2006, China is the main trading partner of N. Korea and Chinese trade and investment indeed is keeping the N. Korean govt from going under. Chinese two way trade was expected to reach $1.6 billion, representing 85% of K. Korea’s trade.
However, in 2003, Chinese investment was a mere $1.1M. South Korea was perhaps a much bigger supporter of N. Korea’s economy than China just a few years ago.
This article explains why it is in China’s strategic interest for N. Korea to be strong.
Back to Sudan, its not as if the AU supports the Sudanese govt. because of China’s stance – its definitely the other way around. China supports the Sudanese govt. because the AU does.
Its not only the USA and China that sometimes support brutal governments. Indonesia under Suharto was brutal on a large scale – firstly by murdering some 1-1.5 million Indonesians. Indonesia’s staunch ally when it occupied and annexed East Timor in 1975, was Australia. About 200 000 East Timorese died during the Indonesian campaign.
In Cameroon, as many as 1 million people, mostly of the Bassa and Bamileke tribes, were killed during the periods 1955-1960 and 1960-1970 respectively. Some have called this a “silent genocide”. France has been directly involved in the slaughter – e.g. French pilots using napalm on forest dwellers in the 1950s.
The 279 page Report on this genocide is viewable on-line at
http://www.postnewsline.com/2008/03/yaounde-elite-d.html
Not to forget the around 1 million Algerians who died during the struggle for independence from France in the 1950s.
Traps, Hugh, Ngodoi,
China’s support for Zim and Sudan, and its quest for minerals in Africa has totally diverted Western attention way from China’s other (i.e. non-military & and non-mineral) interests in Africa.
Among the many pledges China made at the Beijing-Africa Summit in 2006 were the following:
Further open up China’s market to Africa by increasing from 190 to over 440 the number of export items to China receiving zero-tariff treatment from the least developed countries in Africa having diplomatic ties with China.
Over the next three years, train 15,000 African professionals; send 100 senior agricultural experts to Africa; set up 10 special agricultural technology demonstration centres in Africa; build 30 hospitals in Africa and provide RMB 300 million of grant for providing artemisinin (an anti-malaria drug) and building 30 malaria prevention and treatment centres to fight malaria in Africa; dispatch 300 youth volunteers to Africa; build 100 rural schools in Africa; and increase the number of Chinese government scholarships to African students from the current 2,000 per year to 4,000 per year by 2009.
Below is an academic document written in SA, on China’s development aid to Africa. There are several case studies, including Ethiopia (a poor country with no significant mineral deposits)
How China delivers development assistance
to Africa
Centre for Chinese Studies, University of Stellenbosch, First released: February 2008
http://www.icea.co.uk/archive/china-dev-africa.pdf
Nothing you have written is untrue and is inpart support of my statement.
Your idea that China does all you list because it has an open mind and wants to help? I think not.
China cares not a jot about African potentual or its people. They hardly care a jot about their own. The Chinese people have no real recoarse against injustice in China.
So what make anyone think that China is investing in Africa and will pull out if told too by Africa?
What they may do is stop paying bribes and close down mines or “disinvest”.
While they continue to “invest” where other will not African leader will fall over with joy while it lasts.
Oldfox
If the ice melts it will run into the sea. The vast majority of the globe is sea. To get the water back means desalination: expensive but available.
However global warming means more extreme weather, including torrential rain. We are going to need more dams.
Hugh,
Chinese non military aid goes back 5 decades. Here is some info on medical assistance.
Chinese Medics in Africa
http://www.chinatoday.com.cn/English/e2006/e200612/p34.htm
“By the end of 2005, the total number of Chinese medical personnel that had visited Africa had amounted to 15,841. Between them, they had treated some 170 million African patients. Today, there are 98 Chinese medical clinics in 35 African nations.
During those years, Chinese medics have had to overcome many obstacles, like language barriers, climatic conditions and cultural differences. They have worked closely with local doctors to provide badly needed treatment to the local people. They have brought their vast clinical experience to the places it is needed most, successfully performing complicated operations such as tumor extirpations, limb replantations and cardiac operations, saving many lives. And in doing so, they have used not only modern technologies, but also traditional Chinese therapies such as acupuncture and massage, to cure various hard-to-treat cases. For the locals, their achievements are miraculous.”
http://www.thestatesmanonline.com/pages/news_detail.php?section=1&newsid=2323
“During the past 40 years, Chinese medical teams have not only treated common diseases, but have also successfully carried out heart operations, cancer surgery, and the re-attachment of severed limbs.
The people of Africa have warmly welcomed this assistance, and so far more than 600 members of Chinese medical teams have been awarded various medals in appreciation. China has also been praised as a model for multinational cooperation.”
Hugh,
Clearly, you have never been to China. If you have, you’d know that the Chinese people do care about other Chinese. A great many middle class Chinese do care about the environment, about uplifting poorer Chinese etc.
Chinese do protest about state injustice, as people do here. SA has had over 6000 protests, many violent, in the past few years – Khutsong being perhaps the area that grabbed the most attention. Proportionally, China has maybe similar numbers of protests.
Life is cheap in SA, with around 20 000 murders in one year, compared to 10 000 murders in China , with over 25 times SA’s population (excluding state executions in China, which total a few thousand per year).
Australia has lost as many miners in mining accidents in a 100 years as SA loses in one year. No one (other than the unions) gives a damn, because most miners who lose their lives are black. But when a winder cable snapped and 9 workers lost their lives last year, no one gave a damn either although 8 of them were Solidarity members, and thus likely to be white.
In China last year, 6 workers died when a tunnel for a new Beijing subway. Not the first time construction workers died in modern China. But there were unusual circumstances in this accident though, which highlighted how vulnerable labourers were, so it gripped the imagination of the nation for days while the futile rescue attempt was taking place. Later, people took flowers to the scene of the accident. Students wrote poems about the accident/dead workers and posted these at the site, or on Internet. Other students lobbied for a memorial, to honour all the poor migrant workers who are toiling (and those who already died), often under dangerous conditions, to build the modern China.
To get an idea of how Chinese (incl. its govt and army) care for other Chinese, read Shareef Blankenberg’s blog about rescue actions immediately after the Sichuan earthquake.
http://www.thoughtleader.co.za/shareefblankenberg/2008/05/30/ubuntu-made-in-china/