Regardless of the US election outcome, its Africa policy will need to be different

By Tunde Olatunji

As President Biden prepares to make his highly-touted trip to Angola next month, many see this occasion–a rarity in the region these days–as a direct response to a visit by Angolan President João Lourenço to Beijing earlier this year. US officials became concerned about what these apparent overtures by China could mean for the future of American interests in the country and other strategic alliances on the continent. Measured and thoughtful arguments have been made in favor of African countries leveraging this elevated geopolitical importance, in an increasingly multipolar international arena to extract better deals for itself.

While there is certainly opportunity in this emerging dynamic, a strategy that ultimately hinges on Africa remaining in the shop window for hopefully-benevolent patrons, falls short of addressing the continent’s main obstacles in engaging with the rest of the world. Regardless of the outcome of the upcoming US elections, this moment should be seen as an opportunity for Africa to forge new dynamics around trade, investment, geopolitics and security that are fundamentally rooted in dignity and mutual respect without having to choose between hegemonic aspirants. For the US, successful engagement will require proactive relationship-building and will mean adapting to an Africa whose favor it will need to earn based on fair, good-faith policies.

US-AFRICA RELATIONS HAVE BEEN LACKLUSTER

President Biden is scheduled to make his trip to Luanda in mid-December. This visit comes just a few short months after Kenya’s President Ruto was welcomed to an official state visit and dinner at the White House during which Mr. Biden discussed the relationship between the two countries in glowing terms, referring to Kenya as a “major non-NATO ally” to the US. Prior to this upcoming trip however, the last time a US president made an official visit to the continent was when President Obama visited Ethiopia in 2015. And prior to Ruto, the last state visit by an African leader was Ghanaian President John Kufour in 2008 (Nigerian president Buhari visited The White House in 2018 at the invitation of President Trump but there was neither a state dinner nor an address to congress). By most metrics, US interest in engagement with Africa has been fairly minimal. In 2021, imports from Sub-Saharan Africa accounted for less than 1% of US foreign trade, and in 2022 nearly 90% of these imports were from just five African countries–South Africa, Nigeria, Ghana, Ethiopia and Kenya. Politically, the ties are no more notable.

However, while economic outlooks for much of the continent have been weighed down by slow, unsustained growth for some time, that certainly does not appear to have been improved by closer ties to China. In 2022, the total amount of loans in default by African countries reached a three-decade record of $149 billion. The majority of the region is also facing a worsening unemployment “youthquake” while internal trade remains woefully underdeveloped. It seems obvious that Africa needs a change-and likely one far more substantial than what is offered by simply replacing its benefactor.

A NEW, UNALIGNED ERA

There are encouraging signs that African countries not only acknowledge the need for change but are actively pursuing it. The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) and the African Union’s continued bid to join the UN Security Council strongly suggest an intention to proactively seek a different positioning within international structures. Rather than continuing to serve as simply a stage for great power competition, relegated to the most unproductive links along value chains, Africa has ambitions to be far more consequential-at the very least in its own affairs. An important aspect of appearing to play on an even field as the rest of the world would be acting accordingly. This requires African countries to employ a great deal more pragmatism in their approach to engaging with powers such as the US, understanding international relations and geopolitics to be the naked power struggles that they usually are. Notably, climate change features prominently in US-Africa policy priorities and is underpinned by some strong moral and ethical principles, but some of the most prescribed approaches to greening economies are often at odds with some of the continents more pressing development planning.

The priority then must be working to consolidate and maximize the considerable advantages that the continent will (hopefully) continue to develop. But first, African leaders must feel emboldened in the prioritization of their own national interest in engagements with the US. For the continent’s larger, more influential economies a critical step would be to decide that the principles and ideological underpinnings of other countries’ foreign policy–regardless of who they are– need not inform their own.

If seeking inspiration for successfully adopting this type of posture internationally, these countries need only look as far as Indonesia’s Joko Widido, who stepped down as President a few days ago. During his 10-year tenure he secured a whopping $286 billion of foreign direct investment (FDI) in the country and left office to wide adulation. He was able to achieve this in part by presenting his position on economic and political issues as unabashedly in his country’s self-interest, once famously remarking to reporters, “What’s the point of making friends if we are always on the losing end?”. Through his tenure he worked effectively with both sides of the world’s foremost geopolitical rivalries, side-stepping issues he didn’t believe were in his country’s best interests. Countries like Nigeria, Kenya, and South Africa that are not only regional economic powerhouses but also possess considerable influence across the continent should similarly look to throw some of this weight around and not shy away from strategic non-alignment whenever necessary.

For smaller countries with almost no ability to impact international economic or political systems, the priority should be working to increase their involvement in larger regional groupings so as to elevate their concerns to levels that they might otherwise have little access to. In a matter of years, Estonia went from being a former soviet vassal state at the mercy of its former occupiers to building a functional, resilient democracy and having direct influence on global decision-making as a member of the European Union. As noted Estonia journalist Kadri Liik remarked, “it is only by sticking together as Europe that we really have a say on issues that shape the world: questions of the rules of the game and world order.”. As these smaller countries in Africa come to feel sufficiently represented by these regional alliances, the more likely it is that they commit to joining larger, stronger, outward-facing continental blocs with which to project and advance collective interests.

EMBRACING A NEW PARADIGM

As the world’s foremost economic power, presidential elections in the US always carry a great sense of importance even outside of the country. While the world prepares for possible policy about-faces on a number of important issues, it is interesting to consider whether the US might adopt a new strategy towards Africa. Even though competition for influence with China dominates the discourse, US policymakers would do well to seriously evaluate how exactly they would like to engage in this competition. Supporting African countries in charting their own courses for development and growth without fear of setting off geopolitical landmines is not a call to forego the US’ own self-interest, but rather to understand that its current approach to Africa is not working. America stands to lose more by insisting on a cold war-era-style delineation of the world into spheres of influence rather than working to earn the favor of these countries through thoughtful, mutually-beneficial engagement.

For this incoming administration, climate financing presents a perfect opportunity to signal renewed seriousness about engaging fairly and productively with Africa. With a view to spurring reductions in carbon emissions, the US has pledged to stop the financing of fossil fuel energy projects in developing countries while continuing to invest heavily in them for their domestic needs. Ignoring the considerable hypocrisy of this policy, it is particularly harmful to African countries who are faced with costly overhauls of their energy systems at a critical and energy-intensive juncture in their development trajectories, while also getting meager support on achieving these massive transitions–Africa currently receives less than 5 percent of global energy financing. Committing to an infrastructure of climate financing that is more considerate of Africa’s complex growth needs would go a long way towards supporting just, equitable, and sustainable energy transitions on the continent without hamstringing critical development gains. Good-faith moves such as this would help spur Africa into the anticipated promise of its near future, and see the US well-placed to benefit from earned trust and goodwill.

Policy recommendations

1. The incoming President should make a point of having their first official trip be to Africa. This would signal genuine intent to refresh and enhance dealings with the continent and would go a long way toward changing the perception of Africa as an afterthought in US foreign policy.
2. Any divestment from fossil fuel energy projects in Africa should be redirected in equal measure to other critical sectors including helping to bridge the clean energy financing gap.
3. African countries should work to enhance the scale and effectiveness of the AfCFTA by committing to boost private sector performance and strengthen smaller regional economic blocs.
4. The US should work with UN permanent members to secure the representation of the African Union at the UN Security Council with the full privileges of membership including the right of veto.
5. Substantive debt relief for African nations should be made a priority of US-Africa strategy through mechanisms such as the G20’s “Common Framework” restructuring architecture, as well as significant structural reforms to the current international financial systems.
6. The US should refrain from tying critical engagement with African countries to their cooperation in serving as proxies in geopolitical confrontations with rivals.

Tunde Olatunji is the Associate Director of Policy at The Africa Center.

Editor: Temi Ibirogba

This article is part of The Africa Center’s Policy Positions series, the recurring publications will offer thoughtful engagement with contemporary policy and governance issues related to the African continent. Policy Positions are submitted by members of The Africa Center’s community of thought leaders from across Africa and the African Diaspora. Follow @theafricacenter on Twitter, Instagram and LinkedIn to stay informed of new posts, and reach out to the editor to submit an idea for consideration.