Obama to increase engagement with Africa in 2011
Photo
In this July 11, 2009, file photo, President Barack Obama takes the stage as he participates in a departure ceremony at the airport in Accra, Ghana. Obama is quietly but strategically stepping up his outreach to Africa, using this year to increase his engagement with a continent that is personally meaningful to him and important to U.S. interests.
HONOLULU President Barack Obama is quietly but strategically stepping up his outreach to Africa, using this year to increase his engagement with a continent that is personally meaningful to him and important to U.S. interests.
Expectations in Africa spiked after the election of an American president with a Kenyan father. But midway through his term, Obama's agenda for Africa has taken a backseat to other foreign policy goals, such as winding down the Iraq war, fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan and resetting relations with Russia.
Obama aides believe those issues are now on more solid footing, allowing the president to expand his international agenda. He will focus in Africa on good governance and supporting nations with strong democratic institutions.
Obama delivered that message on his only trip to Africa since taking office, an overnight stop in Ghana in 2009, where he was mobbed by cheering crowds. In a blunt speech before the Ghanaian parliament, Obama said democracy is the key to Africa's long-term development.
"That is the ingredient which has been missing in far too many places, for far too long," Obama said. "That is the change that can unlock Africa's potential. And that is a responsibility that can only be met by Africans."
The White House says Obama will travel to Africa again and the political calendar means the trip will almost certainly happen this year, before Obama has to spend more time on his re-election bid. No decision has been made on which countries Obama will visit, but deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes said stops will reflect positive democratic models.
The administration is monitoring more than 30 elections expected across Africa this year, including critical contests in Nigeria and Zimbabwe.
"The U.S. is watching and we're weighing in," Rhodes said.
John Campbell, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and a former U.S. ambassador to Nigeria, said the different elections give the Obama administration the opportunity to establish clear policies.
The administration "should be less willing to cut slack when those elections are less than free, fair and credible," Campbell said.
The White House can send that message right now as it deals with the disputed election in Ivory Coast and an upcoming independence referendum in Sudan, which could split Africa's largest country in two.
Rhodes said the president has invested significant "diplomatic capital" on Sudan, mentioning the referendum in nearly all of his conversations with the presidents of Russia and China, two countries which could wield influence over that Sudan's government.
When Obama stopped in at a White House meeting last month of his national security advisers and United Nations ambassadors, the first topic he broached was Sudan, not Iran or North Korea. And as lawmakers on Capitol Hill neared the December vote on a new nuclear treaty with Russia, Obama called southern Sudan leader Salva Kiir by telephone to offer support for the referendum.
White House officials believe the postelection standoff in Ivory Coast could be the model for Obama's stepped-up engagement in Africa.
The president tried to call incumbent President Laurent Gbagbo twice last month, from Air Force One as Obama returned from Afghanistan and then a week later. Neither call reached Gbagbo; administration officials believe the Ivorian leader sought to avoid contact. So Obama wrote Gbagbo a letter, offering him an international role if he stopped clinging to power and stepped down.
But Obama also made clear that the longer Gbagbo holds on, and the more complicit he becomes in violence across the country, the more limited his options become, said a senior administration official. The official insisted on anonymity to speak about administration strategy.
Rhodes said the White House understands that U.S. involvement in African politics can be viewed as meddling. But he said Obama can speak to African leaders with a unique level of candor, reflecting his personal connection to Africa and that his father and other family members have been affected by the corruption that plagues many countries there.
Officials also see increased political stability in Africa as good for long-term U.S. interests — a way to stem the growth of terrorism in east Africa and counterbalance China's growing presence on the continent.
The U.S. was caught off guard during the 2009 climate summit in Copenhagen when several African countries voted with China and not the U.S., the administration official said. The official said the administration must persuade African nations that their interests are better served by aligning with the U.S.


Jan 4, 2011 at 8:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
'Funny when a Republican President tries to stabilize a terrorist filled region it is called "policing the world" with aggression, but when Oblunder does it, it is magic. You see how the media works'
vato...my thc enhanced memory recalls gw actually getting some props for his work in africa.
Jan 4, 2011 at 6:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
"It's also a fact that he is a President who invaded two separate countries. (I thought that's what his supporters liked about him.) If that's not aggression, what pray tell is?"
-
Was that in the story? Didn't you just complain to another for the same thing? Here was your remarks..."If you want to argue against things that the article did NOT say, well, that's your business.". I guess that is just more of the same left wing do as I say not as I do bunch.
Jan 3, 2011 at 8:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
vatoloco, I think the point is that Bush never saw a country he didn't think would be improved by sending American troops to.
.
It's also a fact that he is a President who invaded two separate countries. (I thought that's what his supporters liked about him.) If that's not aggression, what pray tell is?
Jan 3, 2011 at 8:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
" i was asking if you were advocating for president bush to cut spending else where when he was tripling the aid to africa?"
-
Kid you can rephrase your question anyway you want my answer has been and will be the same...I am not for an increase in ANY spending. Now, if and when our national debt is zero'd and taxes become reasonable for all, the countries needs are met, I may change my stance on funding increases so long as it does not lead our national budget down the same road as before.
Jan 3, 2011 at 5:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
raf...notice those little squiggly marks at the end of my sentence with dots under them. those are called question marks. they sort of signal a...well...a question. this is part of the problem with you only seeing portions of a particular comment. im not saying you did or did not do anything. i was asking if you were advocating for president bush to cut spending else where when he was tripling the aid to africa??
Jan 3, 2011 at 4:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
Kid, feel free to show where I have ever advocated for increased spending...until then.
Jan 3, 2011 at 4:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
Wait, Hawaii is in Africa?
.
This article does not even mention foreign aid, primarily discussing political reform. Even so, most people's perception of foreign aid is way out of whack with what is actually spent. In 2009 the entire continent of Africa (less Egypt) received less than $700 million (not even as much as the high speed train allocation Walker refused). In most years, Israel receives 15% of US foreign aid (most of it military assistance) and Egypt receives 10% (as a consequence of the Camp David accords). Foreign aid is only 1.5% of discretionary spending and less than 1/2 of 1% of the budget.
Jan 3, 2011 at 3:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
i know you are as far from a hypocrite mr raf, as one can get, so im confident that you spoke those same words when the last president 'tripled' the aid to africa??
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/...
Jan 3, 2011 at 3:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
If this can be done without increasing spending, by removing the same dollars from other aid, I have no problem with it.
Jan 3, 2011 at 3:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
Does Bond really think Africa is a country? Hilarity from the wing-nuts.
Jan 3, 2011 at 2:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
I agree with cynicaleye and also with Sarah. One person can only do so much. He was faced with an abundance of issues when he took office and he is whittling them down slowly. Nothing can happen overnight. America needs all the help we can get. I know there are starving people every where, but let's help our own first.
Jan 3, 2011 at 12:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
'Another way of saying more American income redistribution!'
what??
'(his real birth place)'
really??
Jan 3, 2011 at 11:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
Stepping up? Another way of saying more American income redistribution! As far as visiting Africa this year before he starts his re-election bid, why not run for Africas (his real birth place) presidency? He could probably win and stay president for life there!
Jan 3, 2011 at 11:32 a.m.
Suggest removal
Oh I'm sorry let me re-phrase that last post
Take care of our borders.
Jan 3, 2011 at 11:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
While we are at it lets do something about our southren boarder also. Take care of Americans first. I can't comment any further for I would get deleted..... but I think you get my drift.
Jan 3, 2011 at 10:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
How about "stepping up his outreach" to Americans in terms of jobs, education, ending our involvement in two wars, border security, fixing the lame excuse of a health care bill, and on and on.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.