United States Interests and Policies in Africa: Transition to a New Era

206 Pages·2000·19.532 MB·English

by  Karl P. Magyar (eds.)

United States Interests and Policies in Africa
Also by Karl P. Magyar
CHALLENGE AND RESPONSE: Anticipating US Military Security Concerns
(editor)
CONFLICT, CULTURE AND HISTORY: Regional Dimensions (co-editor)
GLOBAL SECURITY CONCERNS: Anticipating the Twenty-First Century
(editor)
THE INDIAN SOUTH AFRICANS: A Contemporary Profile (co-editor)
* PEACEKEEPING IN AFRICA (editor with Earl Conteh-Morgan)
PROLONGED WARS: The Post-Nuclear Challenge (co-editor)
* From the same publishers
United States Interests and
Policies in Africa
Transition to a New Era
Edited by
Karl P. Magyar
Professor of National Security Affairs
United States Air Command and Staff College
Alabama
rnacrnilhn
* Selection, editorial matter, Preface, Introduction, Chapter 5 and Conclusion
© Karl P. Magyar 2000
Chapters 1-4 © Macmillan Press Ltd 2000
Softcover reprinto f the hardcover 1st edition 2000 978-0-312-22388-5
All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of
this publication may be made without written permission.
No paragraph of this publication may be reproduced, copied or
transmitted save with written permission or in accordance with
the provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988,
or under the terms of any licence permitting limited copying
issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency, 90 Tottenham Court
Road, London W1T 4LP.
Any person who does any unauthorised act in relation to this
publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil
claims for damages.
The authors have asserted their rights to be identified as the authors of
this work in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
Published by PALGRAVE MACMILLAN
Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 6XS and
175 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10010
Companies and representatives throughout the world
PALGRAVE MACMILLAN is the global academic imprint of the Palgrave
Macmillan division of St. Martin's Press, LLC and of Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.
Macmillan® is a registered trademark in the United States, United Kingdom
and other countries. Palgrave is a registered trademark in the European
Union and other countries.
Outside North America
ISBN 978-0-333-69447-3
In North America
ISBN 978-1-349-62318-1 ISBN 978-1-349-62316-7 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-1-349-62316-7
This book is printed on paper suitable for recycling and
made from fully managed and sustained forest sources.
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 99-15387
Transferred to digital printing 2002
Contents
Preface vii
Notes on the Contributors x
List ofA bbreviations xii
Introduction: Africa's Transitional Role in America's Post-Cold
War Era Diplomacy 1
Karl P. Magyar
1 The United States and North Africa: Sustained Strategic
Interests 15
Mohamad Z. Yakan
2 Post-Cold War Era West Africa: Implications for US Foreign
Policy 45
Earl Conteh-Morgan
3 Central Africa: Initiatives Deferred 71
Raymond W. Copson
4 US Policy Towards East Africa: Crisis Response amid Limited
Interests 99
James E. Winkates
5 Southern Africa: US Relations in Transition 139
Karl P. Magyar
Conclusion: Africa's Political and Strategic Marginalization 167
Karl P. Magyar
Index 189
v

Preface
As each historical era collapses and before the character of a new one is
identified, global relations among states, nations, cultures, and civiliza
tions enter a period of intense transition. In the absence of a grand
architect who would design and erect such an era single handedly, a
vast global army of history scholars and analysts are yet again seeking
to understand the various highly intricate dimensions of the defunct era.
Recently our combined analytic efforts evidently failed once again to
grasp the major underlying currents of change responsible for the demise
of the Cold War era. The speed with which the Soviet Union collapsed
ought to be of serious concern to professional analysts. Historians will
examine the lacunae for any evidence that should have served as beacons
for major, revolutionary changes that occurred. Why was this not per
ceived? Other analytic specialists will scramble to grasp the nature of the
newly emerging system. Will it be the great Marxist dialectical synthesis?
A religious 'Kingdom of God on earth'? A global Pax Americana? The end
of history? I have confidence that history will yet again demonstrate its
independent power by dictating events to which the humble, but wise,
will respond, and not aspire to engineer a revolutionary, handcrafted,
human utopia-in pursuit of universal justice.
There is irony in this situation. The Marxists had envisaged the pro
letarian revolution as the medium through which the workers' van
guard begins the task of cleansing the capitalist sources of men's
historical abuses. For Marxists, man has the power to make the revolu
tion that in turn allows the socialist man to design his own eschato
logical destiny. The gods were not necessary for this and, indeed, they
were also ranked among the counter-revolutionaries because the gods
were perceived as allies of the entrenched capitalists who enslaved the
alienated workers whose only existential purpose was to serve the
degenerate and acquisitive owners of the means of production and
their political running dogs. Hence the positive attitude towards the
proletarian revolution. The irony emerges in the form of the western
penchant for social revolutions, and in the United States for the highly
regarded attitudes evinced in our management culture towards problem
solvers, can-do producers, and creators of huge political and economic
enterprises - all skills that are attributed rather serenely to manage
ment education. However, when our managers fail, public relations
vii
viii Preface
campaigns are invoked to undo cosmetically at least the visible damage.
The damage only is addressed; rarely the cause. For the Marxists, the
waning capitalists could be blamed for failures, but certainly not those
in the vanguard of the proletarian revolution. In this sense, the paragon
of exploitative capitalists could be considered to be methodological
allies of Marxist revolutionaries in that both validated man's (society's)
ability to chart its own course and destiny by the implementation of
pseudo-scientific analytic devices, knowable to man. Marxists and mod
ern capitalist managers were true ideological optimists. And both have
been, and remain perplexed with Africa.
This book concerns changing United States relations with Africa. As
with many other academic topics undergoing examination for change
in the present transitional period, the perceived gravity of change, if
any, remains largely a judgmental exercise in subjectivity due to the
inherently social nature of the inquiry. Weighing the positive against
the negative factors to be judged might, presumably, be preceded by a
joint methodological exercise among all participants involved in this
analytic effort, yet it would not necessarily accrue objectivity to the
reader. Hence my choice was to allow for individual interpretations of
each of the five regions of Africa that we examined. Even the identifica
tion and inclusion of states within a region posed dilemmas no doubt
familiar to all Africa analysts. Does Sudan properly belong to North or
East Africa? Should Mauritania be classified as a part of North or West
Africa? Where do Rwanda and Burundi belong? And, does Southern
Africa have 10, 11, or 13 members - as postulated by various analyses?
As Editor, I provided loose guidance but I did not dictate compliance.
Indeed, in this example alone, changes taking place in Africa in the
post-Cold War era might soon influence arguments for new sub-regional
alignments or analytic paradigms. Should Sudan undergo political and
territorial fragmentation, the placement of the segments might facilitate
the decision concerning their proper regional identities.
Ours' are assessments based on individual evaluations, hence as Editor
I did not require a common view concerning the degree of change, nor
the nature of it. The participants in this analytic project are well-estab
lished Africa specialists and therefore their individual attitude towards
change will emerge in their presentations. We had the good fortune of
convening at several professional conferences but, again, we adopted
no common attitude towards the main subject of our inquiry. An
imposed common framework might have encouraged great distortions
in the estimate of the relevance of the five regions to the United States.
We accept that we are supplying early, broad, chapter-length agendas
Preface ix
that present the minimal relevant factors of each region to be consid
ered perhaps for longer elaborations in the future. But identifying such
major factors cannot be an objective exercise.
Those who are professionally concerned with the study of Africa's
affairs are well familiar with the role of perceptions which has spawned
the dichotomy of 'Afro-optimists' and 'Afro-pessimists'. We expect the
reader will make judgments regarding our individual presentations
accordingly. Anyone examining African affairs cannot escape the 'good
news, bad news' dilemma. An example of this phenomenon was illus
trated by President Clinton's 1998 12-day tour through Africa during
which he enthused about a present-day Africa undergoing a 'renais
sance', replete with high economic growth rates, stabilization, and
democratization. However, shortly after that unprecedented official
visit, US Commerce Secretary William Daley soberly noted that only
one percent of America's exports go to Africa, and that in the last 40
years, Africa's share of world trade fell by half. Not long after Clinton's
brief stop in Rwanda, mass killings started again; Ethiopia, whose Prime
Minister attended the regional forum in Uganda that met with Clinton
and signed measures to work towards peace, engaged in bombing several
disputed positions in Eritrea a few months after that meeting; Senegal
had recently been identified as resorting to torture and killings in the
attempt to keep control over its secessionist province of Casamance; and
most of the heads of state with which Clinton met, had been in power
for a very long time, or had come to power by military take over.
Ironically, it was in the notorious apartheid South Africa, in which
Nelson Mandela came to power legitimately. Such are the evaluative
dilemmas faced routinely by analysts of Africa's affairs. Therein lies the
caution leveled at the reader not familiar with that otherwise fabulous
continent. Grand judgments concerning Africa had best be avoided.
As Drs Winkates, Copson, and Magyar are employed by US Govern
ment agencies, we emphasize that the views presented in this volume
are the private views of the authors and do not necessarily represent the
official positions of our specific, or any, US Government agencies. The
Editor is pleased to express his gratitude to Ms Gwen Story, Supervising
Writer-Editor, and her staff, Ms Yuna Braswell, Ms Becky Bryant, and Ms
Julie Hall, Editorial Assistants at Air University's Air Command and Staff
College. I will forever thank Ms Annabelle Buckley, Senior Commission
ing Editor at Macmillan, for her efforts on our behalf and also for her
admirable patience.
KARL P. MAGYAR