The Biden Africa Policy Promises, But Can It Deliver?

By Dennis Matanda

Washington, DC | As the past one hundred years have illustrated, when the United States puts its collective muscle to good use, socio-economic growth follows. Ask beneficiaries of the Marshall Aid Plan, and those that fed off the metaphorical American pipeline around the Berlin Blockade.

More recently, Kenya, Bangladesh, Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand, Honduras, Ethiopia, and China’s Taiwan have taken equitable advantage of preferential trade programs, investment drives, or significant lobbying efforts in these United States.

Here, even if there’s real foreign policy power and heft in the corridors of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers, there’s no doubt that the federal government is a consequential player when it comes to dealing with Africa.

That’s why the Biden Administration’s Strategy for Africa fell short.

The core strength of the United States lies in both its strong alliances and the by-products of capitalism. Thus, I was not surprised by the collective groan from African policymakers when the Strategy for Africa talked of (a) fostering openness and open societies, and (b) delivering democratic and security dividends. These things are already a given when working with American entities.

Hollywood movies effectively sell the benefits of open societies, and as the theory of economic regulation suggests, the mere presence of American products and services already promises a little more freedom to determine one’s future.

Ask any young African about democratic and security dividends, and they’ll probably hint at an unfettered social media feed on an un-bugged smartphone. On the other hand, any semi-or-demi-dictator is not as fearful of statements on democracy as they are of a population that has benefited from liberal democracy—a by-product of capitalism.

Therefore, by speaking of developing a “deeper bench of parties” and of “flexible architecture”, the Biden Administration suggests that the vast array of programs it has strengthened under Prosper Africa are inadequate to bolster economic recovery, sustainable growth, democratization, and governance in Africa.

Equally, by saying that the United States must “graduate from policies that inadvertently treat sub-Saharan Africa as a world-apart”, the Biden Administration suggested that it could — by the power of words — compel the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC)’s Africa-based investment advisors to find unicorns within which to infuse resources.

But America seems to forget that its rivals — the British, Chinese, Dutch, French, Japanese, and Turks — do not go into Africa with one hand tied behind their backs. Specifically, the Russians are not shy about deploying “vulture diplomacy” to achieve selfish foreign policy objectives, and the Chinese have harnessed their Guānxì-based system of reciprocity, personal ties, and mutual obligations to secure significant national interest and security in Africa.

These examples are not to suggest that the United States must lower its standards and muscle its way into Africa. Instead, simple things like Congressional amendments to allow the DFC to take equity in public entities and multilateral development finance institutions could do more for Africa’s democratization and business development efforts than infusing resources into civil society and non-governmental organizations.

____

Instead, simple things like congressional amendments to allow the DFC to take equity in public entities and multilateral development finance institutions could do more for Africa’s democratization and business development efforts than infusing resources into civil society and non-governmental organizations.    

____

Invariably, the Biden Strategy for Africa pledged to “broaden” engagements with more African states in a bid to safeguard U.S. national security interests. If its plans for the African Union and the African diaspora in the United States are central to developing “a deeper bench of partners by [deploying] higher level U.S. interlocutors to promote greater policy alignment based on shared values”, then the United States could seismically shift the dynamic with all fifty-five Member States of the African Union over the next decade.

Engaging the Eritrean and Zimbabwean diaspora as primary and secondary interlocutors for and to their “rogue” home countries should pay significant rewards. Similarly, given that the African Union is behind herculean efforts like the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), the United States must strengthen the continental body’s laudable efforts at standardizing governance throughout its Member States. The African Union could even intercede to ensure that all African leaders are included in high-level functions, including the U.S. – Africa Summit slated for December 2022 in Washington, DC.

Lastly, we must congratulate the Biden Administration for their “commitment to invest in urban renewal and infrastructure”. Whereas one must commend the Strategy’s plans for sustainable development and resilience, digital transformation, and strengthening commercial relations, Biden’s plan to replicate America’s investment in urban renewal and infrastructure in select African cities is the one everyone should get behind.

As experts will tell you, the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC)’s compact investment model is an efficient way to infuse American resources directly into African infrastructure, explicitly in urban areas where the demographic dividend and the middle class are most likely able to contribute to a country’s growth and development.

As our friends at the UN Economic Commission for Africa stipulated in its 2018 reports, there is a real stimulative effect in strengthening municipal and local governments; entities that are as close to the grassroots as possible.

At the same time, just as Africans benefitted from America’s anti-retroviral programs after 2001 under PEPFAR, the Biden Administration promises that their urban renewal expanse will impact critical sectors like energy access, climate change, adaptation, transportation, and water and waste management. Now, which African country would not welcome this sort of viable avenue to dealing with their rapid rural-to-urban migration?