Africa Action: Activism for Africa Since 1953
Africa doesn't need strongmen, it needs strong institutions
Gerald LeMelle
The election of President Barack Obama brought jubilation to the streets of Nigeria. However, hopes of a new U.S. engagement with Africa under an Obama Administration are dimming. Nigerians are rankled by 2 high profile events which serve to illustrate that U.S. foreign policy still ignores the opinions and perceptions of African people. Former President George W. Bush joined his Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice for the 15th annual THISDAY Awards, commemorating Nigeria’s golden jubilee anniversary as an independent nation. While one would expect George W. Bush to fete Nigerian military dictator Muhammadu Buhari and other Nigerian oil elites as he did on February 24, 2010, a short distance away, President Obama's Assistant Secretary for African Affairs Johnnie Carson and U.S. Ambassador Robin Sanders traveled to discredited former president General Ibrahim Babangida’s Minna estate for a “secret” unscheduled meeting. These high profile photo ops are disappointing for those that anticipated a more just and transparent Africa policy.
Former Military dictator Babangida left a legacy of brutality and corruption that is etched in the minds of most Nigerians, and they fear that the U.S. may support, or worse, seek his return to power. With the advent of AFRICOM signaling the further militarization of U.S. - Africa policy, and the growing U.S. military presence in Africa, many Africans are paying close attention to U.S. relationships with former and current dictators. Indeed, the U.S. has a history rife with support for ruthless dictators, many of whom are responsible for much of the poverty, misery and conflict on the continent today. The State Department has yet to acknowledge the visit, but if they feel the strong negative reaction from Nigerian civil society is an overreaction, they have either underestimated the potential fallout or simply do not care about responses from Nigerian people. It baffles the mind that foreign policy would be conducted this way in the age of Obama, particularly considering the speech in Ghana he gave in July of last year, where he said “…Make no mistake: history is on the side of these brave Africans, and not with those who use coups or change Constitutions to stay in power. Africa doesn't need strongmen, it needs strong institutions.”
Having a meeting with Babangida is not at the heart of the issue. Clearly, the U.S. would conclude that the former president would be instrumental in resolving the country’s current political woes, a fact that the U.S. has legitimately recognized. Meeting with himdoes not necessarily signal U.S. support for a return to power by Babangida. The U.S. could be simply informing the established political players of its support for the new President, Goodluck Jonathan. However the careless manner in which this was handled has created suspicion and anger.
Nigeria is the 3rd largest petroleum exporter to the United States and its political stability is vital to our own economic welfare. With President Yar’Adua’s illness and apparent incapacitation, the U.S. must engage actors within Nigeria who are capable of both supporting and endangering its interest. Leaders of powerful factions within Nigeria, some of whom are capable of ensuring a turbulent reign for President Jonathan, may all receive such visits soon. While oil has always been a crucial issue for American interests, the current recession has exacerbated its importance. Higher oil prices have often followed Niger Delta conflicts—known as the “fear premium”. Naturally, the U.S. will support whatever power arrangement is most likely to bring calm to the oil rich region of the Niger Delta, as evidenced by “Unified Quest 2008,” in which the U.S. Army simulates how it would respond to a collapsed Nigeria set in the year 2013.
Since the U.S. government didn't bother to assess how Nigerians might feel about this, here are the questions Nigerians must be asking themselves: Why would the two most important U.S. diplomats to Nigeria pay a house visit to a former dictator? And why would such a visit not be made public to the Nigerian people and its media? In Nigeria, corruption walks on four legs in daylight. Transparency has been the prescription touted by developed countries for decades, especially the United States. The “secret” visit, even for purposes other than those outlined above, affiliates Obama’s administration with a cancerous cell in Nigerian politics. How are Nigerians, especially those from the Niger Delta who were victims of Babangida’s reign, to view this development? How would you if you were in their shoes?
Gerald LeMelle is the Executive Director of Africa Action and a contributor to Foreign Policy In Focus.
The election of President Barack Obama brought jubilation to the streets of Nigeria. However, hopes of a new U.S. engagement with Africa under an Obama Administration are dimming. Nigerians are rankled by 2 high profile events which serve to illustrate that U.S. foreign policy still ignores the opinions and perceptions of African people. Former President George W. Bush joined his Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice for the 15th annual THISDAY Awards, commemorating Nigeria’s golden jubilee anniversary as an independent nation. While one would expect George W. Bush to fete Nigerian military dictator Muhammadu Buhari and other Nigerian oil elites as he did on February 24, 2010, a short distance away, President Obama's Assistant Secretary for African Affairs Johnnie Carson and U.S. Ambassador Robin Sanders traveled to discredited former president General Ibrahim Babangida’s Minna estate for a “secret” unscheduled meeting. These high profile photo ops are disappointing for those that anticipated a more just and transparent Africa policy.
Former Military dictator Babangida left a legacy of brutality and corruption that is etched in the minds of most Nigerians, and they fear that the U.S. may support, or worse, seek his return to power. With the advent of AFRICOM signaling the further militarization of U.S. - Africa policy, and the growing U.S. military presence in Africa, many Africans are paying close attention to U.S. relationships with former and current dictators. Indeed, the U.S. has a history rife with support for ruthless dictators, many of whom are responsible for much of the poverty, misery and conflict on the continent today. The State Department has yet to acknowledge the visit, but if they feel the strong negative reaction from Nigerian civil society is an overreaction, they have either underestimated the potential fallout or simply do not care about responses from Nigerian people. It baffles the mind that foreign policy would be conducted this way in the age of Obama, particularly considering the speech in Ghana he gave in July of last year, where he said “…Make no mistake: history is on the side of these brave Africans, and not with those who use coups or change Constitutions to stay in power. Africa doesn't need strongmen, it needs strong institutions.”
Having a meeting with Babangida is not at the heart of the issue. Clearly, the U.S. would conclude that the former president would be instrumental in resolving the country’s current political woes, a fact that the U.S. has legitimately recognized. Meeting with himdoes not necessarily signal U.S. support for a return to power by Babangida. The U.S. could be simply informing the established political players of its support for the new President, Goodluck Jonathan. However the careless manner in which this was handled has created suspicion and anger.
Nigeria is the 3rd largest petroleum exporter to the United States and its political stability is vital to our own economic welfare. With President Yar’Adua’s illness and apparent incapacitation, the U.S. must engage actors within Nigeria who are capable of both supporting and endangering its interest. Leaders of powerful factions within Nigeria, some of whom are capable of ensuring a turbulent reign for President Jonathan, may all receive such visits soon. While oil has always been a crucial issue for American interests, the current recession has exacerbated its importance. Higher oil prices have often followed Niger Delta conflicts—known as the “fear premium”. Naturally, the U.S. will support whatever power arrangement is most likely to bring calm to the oil rich region of the Niger Delta, as evidenced by “Unified Quest 2008,” in which the U.S. Army simulates how it would respond to a collapsed Nigeria set in the year 2013.
Since the U.S. government didn't bother to assess how Nigerians might feel about this, here are the questions Nigerians must be asking themselves: Why would the two most important U.S. diplomats to Nigeria pay a house visit to a former dictator? And why would such a visit not be made public to the Nigerian people and its media? In Nigeria, corruption walks on four legs in daylight. Transparency has been the prescription touted by developed countries for decades, especially the United States. The “secret” visit, even for purposes other than those outlined above, affiliates Obama’s administration with a cancerous cell in Nigerian politics. How are Nigerians, especially those from the Niger Delta who were victims of Babangida’s reign, to view this development? How would you if you were in their shoes?
Gerald LeMelle is the Executive Director of Africa Action and a contributor to Foreign Policy In Focus.
