CONTENTS
Executive Summary
Introduction
Africa's Health Crisis
Human Development
Economic Development
War and Peace
Democracy and Human Rights

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. Africa and the U.S. in the 21st Century

The unprecedented challenges facing Africa and the U.S. at this moment are emblematic of the state of the world. The U.S. is the richest country in human history, while Africa is the poorest region containing the majority of the world's poorest countries. The relationship of the U.S. to Africa graphically illustrates some of the central questions of the present era How much inequality is the world prepared to accept, and at what cost? How should the U.S. address the historic injustices that were the cornerstones of contemporary western wealth and power, and that now continue to define the pattern of global inequality? What are the obligations and motivations that determine international priorities? In short, what should the U.S. relationship to Africa be? Africa is now the epicenter of the greatest catastrophe in recorded human history the HIV/AIDS pandemic. The continent's impoverishment means Africa cannot overcome this challenge on its own. Nor should it have to. But Africans do face the challenge of mobilizing the international community to join their struggle to defeat this global public health crisis. This requires beating the disease itself, as well as the poverty and structural inequalities that help fuel its spread.

The United States is now the sole and unchallenged superpower in the world. It has unmatched military and economic power. The U.S. faces the challenge of determining how to use its power not only to safeguard its own future security and prosperity, but to promote the human security and international stability upon which America's own prospects depend. In addition, the people of this country seek to understand their role in the world in moral terms, and the government professes to do the same.

The policies of the United States toward Africa should be understood as a clear manifestation of Washington's world view and global objectives. They are sure indicators of the international intentions of the U.S. more broadly. Historically, the U.S. has segregated Africa within foreign policy, relegating it to a second-class status and depriving it of resources and attention. Now, Washington must move African concerns from the margins of U.S. foreign policy to the center, if it is to sharpen its focus on the most destabilizing international threats and the most urgent global priorities. The relationship between the richest and the poorest in the world today will become the measure for determining the direction and pace of international progress in the decades ahead.

This document defines an agenda for U.S. Africa policy for a new era. It provides an overview of current challenges and offers recommendations for U.S. policy on priority issues and areas. It affirms Africa's importance to the U.S. and outlines what is required of the U.S. to engage collaboratively and effectively with its African partners.

2. What Should the U.S. Do?

Lead the War on HIV/AIDS

The HIV/AIDS pandemic is the single greatest global threat to human security today. It is a far more deadly threat than terrorism, or the alleged existence of Iraqi weapons. AIDS has already taken the lives of more than 25 million people globally, three-quarters of these in sub- Saharan Africa. The HIV/AIDS crisis is the most urgent issue facing the African continent, and the international community more broadly, and this should be the top foreign policy priority of the U.S.

The war on AIDS can be won, but an effective global response will require a major shift in U.S. policy priorities, and a significant increase in resources. Africa's future depends on victory in this fight, as over time will that of many other countries and regions. African efforts to defeat HIV/AIDS are hindered by international obstacles, such as illegitimate debt and inadequate access to essential anti-AIDS drugs, which U.S. policies can and should address. U.S. financial support is also essential. The Global Fund to fight HIV/AIDS is a new vehicle that can lead to the defeat of the HIV/AIDS pandemic. The U.S. must provide at least $3.5 billion per year to support the work of the Global Fund. This is most important and inexpensive investment the U.S. can make in the future of the world.

Invest in Development

Despite its unparalleled prosperity, the U.S. government fails to fully understand either its obligation or self-interest in increasing development assistance to the poorest countries in the world, from which much of the U.S.' wealth originated. U.S. aid to Africa has been declining precisely as the continent's needs have been growing, and aid from all rich countries to sub- Saharan Africa has dropped by nearly half in the past decade. To fight poverty and promote sustainable development, the U.S. must be willing to increase its investment in Africa's future.

A well thought-out U.S. response to Africa's challenge will require not only more aid, but better aid, that will promote human development. Money required to assist Africa to reach agreed development goals, such as health and education, should be considered an international public investment rather than "aid". The U.S. has an obligation to pay its fair share based on its privileged place in the world economy. The U.S. must increase its development assistance to 0.7% of GNP, a target that rich countries have repeatedly set for themselves since the 1970s. Such international investment in human development is the surest way to promote stability and long-term economic and social progress in Africa. Increasing the U.S. commitment to development assistance to 0.7% of GNP would result in a $70 billion total. Half of this amount $35 billion should go to Africa.

Cancel Africa's External Debt

Africa's burden of illegitimate and unpayable debt reveals a major failing of the current global economic system. It also represents a key source of global inequality. Each year, the poorest countries in Africa are required to pay more than $15 billion to rich country creditors and the international financial institutions, the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF). This is more money than these countries receive in new aid, or loans, or investment. Debt repayments by most African countries amount to more than expenditures on health or education. Meanwhile, the debt that the U.S. and other rich countries owe Africa for centuries of injustice and exploitation remains outstanding.

Africa's external debt is the largest obstacle to the continent's economic development and a major obstacle in the fight against HIV/AIDS. The current debt relief framework, the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative, has failed to resolve the debt crisis. The economic imbalance caused by Africa's massive illegitimate debt is unsustainable and ultimately destabilizing, both morally and in terms of human security. The U.S. should support the outright cancellation of Africa's debts. It should use its influence at the World Bank and IMF, the two leading creditors, to press for immediate and unconditional debt cancellation for African countries.

Promote Fair Trade

Africa is a far more significant trading partner for the U.S. than is widely realized. However, restrictions on African access to U.S. markets and Washington's lavish agricultural subsidies to U.S. agribusinesses combine to constrict Africa's trade-related development. The U.S. has continued to push the agenda of transnational corporations, seeking to further open African markets to American exports. The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) exemplifies current U.S. trade policy, reinforcing the imposition of a free market agenda in return for a very minor increase in access to U.S. markets for a very few African countries. The U.S. has also become the major obstacle to African efforts within the World Trade Organization (WTO) to guarantee access to essential medicines. U.S. policies continue to place higher priority on protecting the profits of the pharmaceutical industry than on saving African lives.

The potential for an enhanced economic partnership between the U.S. and African countries is great. While U.S. trade with Africa remains largely dependent upon oil imports from a handful of key countries, Africa holds abundant human and natural resources and contains large markets for U.S. products. However, the U.S. must commit to expanding market access for African goods, and ending the double standard in international trade rules. This will require addressing trade barriers and agricultural subsidies that hinder African exports and that continue to preclude an equitable trading relationship that can benefit the U.S. and African countries both.

Support African Efforts to End War & Promote Peace

While important progress has been made toward ending some of Africa's most deadly conflicts, insecurity continues to affect millions of people, disrupting economic growth and threatening regional stability. For each of Africa's ongoing wars, a peace process already exists; what is often lacking is the international support to ensure its success. The U.S. has an important role to play in bolstering African peace-making initiatives. A sustained financial and diplomatic commitment from the U.S. to conflict resolution in Africa is crucial to regional and international security. The historic role that the U.S. played in destabilizing many of the African countries currently at war gives the U.S. a unique responsibility to engage with African efforts to achieve peace and stability.

The U.S. should make it a top priority to end the devastating wars in Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). These conflicts in two of Africa's largest countries represent serious humanitarian crises and major destabilizing forces in their regions. Elsewhere in Africa, in countries recovering from war and countries currently experiencing instability, the U.S. must make a commitment to supporting African peace-making initiatives. The recent reversion in U.S. policy to prioritizing African countries according to their geo-strategic importance is a dangerous development. Security cooperation with Africa must not be circumscribed within the framework of the U.S.-defined "war on terrorism." If the U.S. expects African cooperation on its priorities, it must make a commitment to addressing Africa's own security concerns, from HIV/AIDS to conflict resolution and peace-building.

Help Advance Democracy & Human Rights

U.S. support for democracy and human rights in Africa is one of the most important expressions of U.S. partnership with Africa's people. African victories in recent decades in overcoming colonial rule, apartheid, and other forms of dictatorship, have marked important progress and done much to empower the people of Africa. Ongoing struggles for constitutional reform, for women's rights and human rights, and for government accountability must be supported by the U.S. and other international partners. A positive U.S. contribution to promoting democracy and the full spectrum of human rights in Africa can do much to encourage economic and social progress, and enhance international stability.

Nigeria, Africa's most populous nation and America's major trading partner in Africa, faces important elections this year. U.S. support will be important in ensuring that the elections are free, fair and peaceful, and that Nigeria can achieve stability and democratic accountability in the years ahead. In Kenya, the recent elections have increased optimism about the future, but international support will be crucial as the new government begins to address the massive challenges the country faces. Across the continent, from Zimbabwe to Côte d'Ivoire, threats to democracy and human rights should be a cause of great concern for the U.S. and international partners. The U.S. should seek ways to support African governmental institutions and regional bodies that are accountable to civil society and that protect the human rights of Africa's people. .

INTRODUCTION

Why Africa should be at the center of U.S. foreign policy

Africa's importance to the U.S. has long been denied. Despite historical ties and important economic and political interests, the continent has generally been considered to fall outside the scope of U.S. concerns. President Bush's recent cancellation of his first scheduled trip to Africa is consistent with this tradition.

Africa's constituencies in the U.S. have sought to encourage greater U.S. engagement and partnership, but, with rare exceptions, Africa has received only sporadic and marginal attention from policymakers. U.S. officials and the broader American public continue to remain ignorant of African realities and Africa's importance to the U.S. This ignorance, and the racism it often abides, is an historical factor that continues to circumscribe perceptions of U.S. interests in Africa and the potential for a different relationship.

The events of September 11, 2001, however, have caused many Americans to focus more on the U.S. role in the world and on global threats to human security. In this changed international context, Africa has assumed new importance to the United States. In an increasingly interdependent world, the U.S. can no longer afford to ignore Africa's challenges, or disregard its potential. Today's most urgent global threats, from the HIV/AIDS pandemic to extreme poverty, from environmental degradation to international terrorism, have their most immediate and devastating consequences in Africa. These challenges must be addressed in Africa, in partnership with Africans, if they are not to overwhelm the world.

For these reasons alone, Africa should now be at the center of U.S. foreign policy. That it is not accorded a higher level of attention is an indicator of distorted international priorities. It is also a testament to the collective failure of Americans to accept Africa as an important part of the world and of their own country's future.

There are still other compelling reasons why Africa should figure most prominently on the U.S. foreign policy agenda:

The United States has a special historical relationship with Africa. The U.S. is a country of African descent, just as much as it is of any other geographic and cultural community. Dating back four centuries to the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade, the fate of the U.S. has been linked with that of Africa. The U.S. was built on, and enriched by, Africa's human and natural resources. Cultural, political and economic ties have been forged and strengthened over centuries. One out of every eight Americans trace their ancestry directly to Africans enslaved and carried to America. As was acknowledged during the World Conference Against Racism in South Africa in 2001, the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade and the institution of slavery were crimes against humanity. America's identity has been forever bound to this history and to the subjects of racism and human rights. Now America's destiny is tied to how the country addresses them globally. The U.S. also has more recent obligations towards Africa. The U.S. clearly exploited Africa's resources and frequently manipulated African countries' political and economic systems during the Cold War years. This period coincided with the first decades of independence for most African countries. As a result of U.S. intervention, many African countries were destabilized and impoverished, and therefore given a false start at independence. Some of the more prominent examples include Angola, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Somalia and Liberia. The U.S. has an obligation to redress the impact of past policies on these African countries. Beyond these historic responsibilities, Africa's present challenges are of great importance to the United States' self-interest. The global threats of today underscore the indivisible nature of human security. Supporting Africa's priorities of fighting disease, eradicating poverty and promoting sustainable development will not only promote global prosperity, but will also specifically advance global security. The success of the U.S.-led "war on terrorism" cannot be assured by treating Africa as geo-strategic real estate and ignoring the priorities and challenges of African partners.

Africa's economic potential is also important to the U.S. economy. A more equitable trading relationship between the U.S. and African countries can lead to greater trade ties, and increased growth and job creation on both sides. However, the U.S. must commit to addressing the obstacles that African countries currently face in the global economy. Africa will continue to be an important source of strategic minerals and other natural resources, and African countries are already important suppliers of oil to the U.S. (18% of current oil imports, projected to increase to 25% by 2015). But Africa's real economic power and potential lies in its human resources, and U.S. economic policies toward Africa should accordingly prioritize human development, first and foremost.

Africa is home to one-tenth of the world's population. Its fate therefore has obvious implications for the international community and the U.S. in particular. African cooperation on U.S. priorities must be reciprocated with a U.S. commitment to addressing Africa's priorities. Africa and the U.S. share a long history and a unique relationship; the challenges they face today must be addressed together in a new partnership that can respond to their mutual concerns and further their common interests.

1. AFRICA'S HEALTH CRISIS

Overview

The HIV/AIDS pandemic, and the wider health crisis that it represents, threatens Africa's very survival. HIV/AIDS is also the greatest global threat to human security that exists today. The global fight against the scourge of HIV/AIDS will not be won unless there is a successful effort to respond to the crisis first and foremost in Africa, the epicenter of the pandemic.

Since its first discovery two decades ago, more than 18 million Africans have died of AIDS, out of 25 million AIDS deaths worldwide. Almost 30 million Africans are now living with HIV/AIDS, out of more than 40 million globally. Sub-Saharan Africa is home to just over 10% of the world's population, but more than 75% of the world's HIV/AIDS cases. 90% of the world's AIDS orphans are African 12 million children, out of a global total of 13 million. In some southern African countries, up to one-third of the population is now living with HIV/AIDS.

African countries succeeded in improving their health care systems in the first decades after independence. Investments in health care by African governments in the 1960s and 1970s achieved improvements in key health indicators, such as increased life expectancy. However health indicators throughout Africa have fallen dramatically over the past two decades as a result of the HIV/AIDS crisis and other poverty-related diseases. Africa's health care systems have themselves been unable to cope with the crisis because of economic policies imposed on African countries by the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF). These policies have forced cutbacks in public health and reduced access to basic services. The result has been that much of the progress made in Africa's early post-independence years has been undone. Average life expectancy in Africa has fallen by 15 years in just the past two decades.

The HIV/AIDS pandemic in sub-Saharan Africa represents and interacts with a broader health crisis, that is intensified by the poverty of Africa's people, and their inadequate access to health care services. Africa's deepening poverty has created fertile ground for the spread of infectious diseases. In Africa today, almost half of the population lacks access to safe water and adequate sanitation services. Malnutrition has weakened the capacity of Africa's people to cope with illness, especially African children. It is estimated that one in every three children in Africa is underweight, and between one-quarter and one-third of Africa's people are chronically malnourished. As immune systems have become weakened, the susceptibility of Africa's people to infectious diseases has greatly increased. Each year, several million Africans die of malaria and tuberculosis (TB), both easily treatable diseases. Up to half a million African children die of malaria every year.

The social and economic effects of the current health crisis are devastating African countries. Schools are losing teachers faster than they can train new ones. The loss of millions of farmers is increasing food insecurity. Economic growth is declining, reversing all previous gains. The HIV/AIDS crisis is exacerbating Africa's underdevelopment and reinforcing the continent's vulnerability.

Recent predictions from the United Nations and from the U.S. National Intelligence Council emphasize that the global HIV/AIDS pandemic is still in its infancy. It is now estimated that over 100 million people will be living with HIV/AIDS by 2010. The U.S. National Intelligence Council recently identified five countries that would be hardest hit by the "next wave" of the HIV/AIDS pandemic, two of which are in Africa: Nigeria and Ethiopia. These are Africa's most populous countries, and their growing health crisis will have a devastating social and economic impact, with implications for regional stability.

The absence of U.S. leadership remains the greatest obstacle to a successful effort to defeat HIV/AIDS in Africa, and globally. While the U.S. has launched new initiatives to respond to AIDS in Africa, the response remains wholly inadequate. Because HIV/AIDS has been most serious in Africa, intervention on the scale now required has not been considered urgent. The devastation caused by the pandemic in Africa is tolerated because of the perceived absence of U.S. interests there and the denigration of the value of African lives. If this were not the case, politicians would loudly acknowledge the obvious fact that the war on AIDS is more important than the war on terrorism. The war on AIDS can also be won, but the U.S. must commit increased funding to bilateral and multilateral efforts to turn the tide of the pandemic. The Global Fund to fight HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, created in 2001 at the initiative of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, is a crucial new vehicle that can lead to the defeat of the pandemic. The Fund needs at least $10 billion per year in order to finance an effective response to HIV/AIDS in the world's poorest countries, expanding both prevention programs and treatment and care for people living with AIDS. This is a modest sum in comparison with the budget and economy of the U.S. and other rich countries. But the U.S. government has refused to make the necessary investment to ensure the Fund's success. An appropriate annual U.S. contribution to the Global Fund would be $3.5 billion. This is based upon an "equitable contributions framework", where the 48 richest countries pay 90% of the total required (based upon each country's proportionate share of the global economy). The private sector contributes the remaining balance to realize the global target of $10 billion annually.

In addition to increased funding, treatment must be a top priority. At present, less than 1% of Africans living with HIV/AIDS have access to the life-saving drugs that have cut death rates so dramatically in the U.S. and other rich countries, as well as developing countries such as Brazil that have made them available. Ensuring access to essential medicines and care for all those living with HIV/AIDS is a global obligation. Treatment is a basic right, and it is an essential part of the strategy to defeat the HIV/AIDS pandemic. It is crucial to strengthening prevention efforts and to improving overall delivery of care and support. Treatment allows people living with HIV/AIDS to protect their health, raise their children, and continue to live productive lives. The availability of treatment is also an important incentive for HIV testing.

In recent years, the prohibitive cost of HIV/AIDS treatment, and the restrictive trade rules that have kept these drugs out of reach for African nations, have come under challenge. The World Trade Organization (WTO) meeting in 2001 affirmed that public health should take priority over rigid patent protections on AIDS drug treatments. U.S. policies must not restrict the ability of African nations to acquire affordable medicines for their people using existing international trade provisions. Such provisions include compulsory licensing and parallel imports. Recent efforts by the U.S. Trade Representative at WTO talks to restrict poor country use of these provisions were rejected by African officials.

A comprehensive approach to addressing Africa's HIV/AIDS pandemic must include measures to prevent the transmission of the disease from mothers to their babies. It must also respond to the AIDS orphans crisis, by supporting care for these children and by providing AIDS treatment to their mothers and families. Defeating HIV/AIDS in Africa requires major investment in health care delivery systems and infrastructure. In particular, the U.S. should support efforts to improve the capacity of public health services in African countries. U.S. policies should oppose the privatization of health care and the introduction of "user fees" for basic health care services. The imposition of these measures by the World Bank and IMF has been shown to decrease access to health care services for Africa's poor majority. The U.S. should support efforts to combat other infectious diseases, such as malaria and tuberculosis, which also cost millions of African lives each year. Making an appropriate contribution to the Global Fund to Fight HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria is the best place to start.

Finally, steps must be taken to remove the obstacles to African governments' own efforts to respond to the health crisis. Foremost among these, the cancellation of sub-Saharan Africa's illegitimate foreign debts is crucial to halting the diversion of resources from health care and social services. The servicing of these debts hinders the efforts of African governments to respond to the HIV/AIDS crisis and to provide adequate health care for their populations. Across Africa, debt repayments compete directly with spending on Africa's health care services. African governments are sending roughly $15 billion a year in debt service payments to western capitals, which is more than they are able to spend on health care or education for their citizens.

The U.S. has a moral obligation, an historical responsibility and a national interest in helping to defeat the HIV/AIDS pandemic in Africa. As the wealthiest country of all time, the U.S. can afford to do much more. It can mobilize billions of dollars in domestic resources, which would leverage twice as much from other donors. It can also use its influence in the international financial institutions to cancel debts and to dismantle the obstacles that impede African access to affordable medicines. The U.S. can still change the course of the global HIV/AIDS pandemic. This should be a top priority of the U.S. government.

Policy Recommendations

1. Congress should authorize and appropriate new funding of at least $3.5 billion per year for the Global Fund to fight HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. This increase should not come at the expense of U.S. funding for other bilateral and global health and development programs.

2. It should be U.S. policy that 50% of its funding be devoted to providing treatment to all those living with HIV/AIDS.

3. . U.S. policies should support the employment of all mechanisms to make treatment available to those living with HIV/AIDS. This must include support for African access to generic drugs, as well as use of compulsory licensing and parallel imports. As agreed in the Doha Declaration in 2001, U.S. policies should uphold the principle that public health takes precedence over patents.

4. . The privatization of health care services, and the introduction of "user fees" and other cost recovery measures imposed by the international financial institutions (the World Bank and IMF), should be opposed. U.S. funding for these institutions should be conditioned upon the cessation of these policies.

5. . The U.S. should increase investments in rebuilding public health care infrastructure in African countries. U.S. policies should help develop the capacity of African governments to deliver public health care services to their people. This would reduce infant and maternal mortality, roll back malaria, and counter the HIV/AIDS pandemic.

2. HUMAN DEVELOPMENT

Overview

Africa's human development challenges are immense. This is not surprising, given the continent's history and geography, and its place in the global political economy today. Nor is this cause for despair. African struggles to meet these challenges can be successful, and international support in this area can make a real difference to the continent's future.

Across much of Africa, human conditions are deteriorating, driven by the health crisis and by persistent poverty. More than 300 million people in sub-Saharan Africa survive on under $1 per day. Almost half of the continent does not have access to safe water sources. Life expectancy in sub-Saharan Africa is the lowest of any region in the world, and is falling dramatically as a result of the HIV/AIDS crisis. Infant and child mortality rates remain high, and access to health care and education is shrinking in many countries. Food insecurity is growing, most seriously in southern Africa and in the Horn of Africa.

Addressing these human development challenges must be a priority of U.S. and international cooperation with Africa, as these are Africa's priorities. The success of development efforts should be measured not by impersonal economic growth indicators but by poverty reduction and social progress. The achievement of sustainable development depends, above all, on Africa's greatest resource her people. Yet it is precisely this resource that is currently being devastated.

The achievement of good health and education, and the attainment of a decent standard of living and well-being for Africa's people, are essential for the continent's future. Greater investment in people is proven to reduce poverty and promote economic growth. This is also in the U.S.' own self-interest, for it promotes international stability and enhances Africa's economic potential. The efforts of African governments to meet the basic needs of their people and to ensure access to essential services are hindered by a lack of adequate resources. The heavy indebtedness of African governments to rich country creditors drains money away from basic social services, such as health care and education. Economic policies imposed on African countries by these creditors, and by the World Bank and IMF in particular, have not only undermined African sovereignty, but have worsened poverty and decreased access to basic services for Africa's people. The result has been a decline in human development indicators over the past two decades.

The Millennium Development Goals adopted in September 2000 by most governments, including the U.S. provide the framework for mutually reinforcing steps to achieve global human development. These goals have been established as the benchmarks for monitoring and measuring development progress. They seek to improve health, education and the environment across the world, with the overarching aim of reducing by half the number of people living in extreme poverty by 2015. Achieving this ambitious target will require a new global partnership committed to human development. It will also require a massive increase in resources. The UN estimates that meeting the Millennium Development Goals will require a doubling of official development assistance worldwide, to at least $100 billion annually. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has repeatedly emphasized that African countries will be unable meet the Millennium Development Goals without such additional support from rich countries.

However, levels of development assistance have fallen in a consistent downward trend in the past decade. U.S. spending on foreign aid has declined, relative both to the size of the U.S. economy and to the federal budget. Despite repeated promises from rich countries to provide 0.7 % of their Gross National Product (GNP) for official development assistance for poorer countries, not one of the G-7 richest countries reaches even half that figure. The U.S. ranks at the bottom of all donor countries, with only 0.1% of GNP, or just over $10 billion, going to foreign aid worldwide. Only 1/100th of 1% of the U.S. budget around $1 billion is currently spent on aid to sub-Saharan Africa, although Africa's need for such support is currently greater than ever. There has been a nearly 50% drop in official development assistance to Africa during the past decade from all donors combined. Aid to sub-Saharan Africa over the past four years has been lower than any year since 1984.

The U.S. has consistently failed to devote bilateral aid that is commensurate either with its interests and obligations or with poor countries' needs. For the U.S. to reach the target of 0.7% of GNP, it must increase its development assistance to $70 billion per year. At least half of this, or $35 billion per year, should be committed to African countries. At present, however, the lion's share $5 billion of the foreign aid provided by the U.S. goes to two strategic allies in the Middle East (Egypt and Israel), not to fight poverty or to promote development.

Increasing U.S. development assistance to Africa to $35 billion annually may sound like a lot of money. But this is less than 10% of the $355 billion budget for the Pentagon this year. It is also less than the increase in the Defense Department's budget over last year ($37 billion). The $35 billion that should go to Africa is also less than the annual budget for New York City. This is a tiny fraction of the U.S. economy, and it can be afforded. However, the Bush Administration's proposed increases in foreign aid still fall far short of what the U.S. can, and should, provide.

The Millennium Challenge Account (MCA), announced by President Bush in 2002, promises to reverse the decline in total aid figures from Washington to a shortlist of developing countries, starting in 2004. Pending Congressional approval, an additional $10 billion in aid over three years will be disbursed through a new corporation and directed to a handful of countries that meet certain economic and political criteria, defined by Washington. The Millennium Challenge Account proposes a far smaller increase in foreign aid than what the U.S. should give to the world's poorest countries. Moreover, economic policy prescriptions and governance conditions dictated by the U.S. in the MCA only reinforce an imperialist relationship between the U.S. and poor countries.

A well thought-out U.S. response to Africa's human development challenge must include not only much more aid, but also better aid. Money required to support African efforts to reach agreed development goals, like health and education, should be conceived of as "international public investment" rather than "aid". The idea of "aid" should be replaced by a sense of common obligation to finance public investments for common needs. Funding from international or national agencies responsible for managing "international public investments" should not be dependent as is now the case upon "voluntary" donor contributions. Transfers from rich to poor should be institutionalized within a redistributive tax system that functions across national boundaries, not unlike payments within the European Union. The U.S.' contribution would be relative to its privileged place in the global economy.

New programs for delivering such investments are also needed. These would pool contributions from wealthy countries and end the overlapping, and often competing, practices of highly politicized bilateral aid. The Global Fund to fight HIV/AIDS is one such model that promotes cooperation and transparency. In order for such international public investments to be most effective, recipient countries should also be required to channel their resources to the most urgent priorities. However, the criteria and the monitoring mechanisms should be independent, and not unilaterally imposed by donors.

In addition to increased U.S. support for African efforts to address the continent's massive human development challenges, the U.S. should oppose economic policies that aggravate poverty in Africa. As noted earlier, such policies include the privatization of water, health care, and other essential services, which reduce access to basic social services intended to meet human needs in African countries. The U.S. should similarly oppose the introduction of "user fees" for such services by the World Bank and IMF. These policies have been found to reduce access to basic services, and they are therefore antithetical to the goal of human development.

If the U.S. and other wealthy countries are serious about promoting sustainable social and economic development in Africa, they must dramatically increase the levels of development assistance they provide in order to ensure the Millennium Development Goals are attained. They must also provide new assistance in the form of grants rather than loans that can only exacerbate Africa's debt crisis.

The widening gap between rich and poor is a globally destabilizing phenomenon that U.S. policies should seek to address. As the richest country in human history, the U.S. has the obligation, and the means, to help improve the lives of the poor and to provide decisive support to African efforts toward sustainable development.

Policy Recommendations

1. . The U.S. should increase its development assistance to at least 0.7% of GNP, or $70 billion per year. Half of this amount, $35 billion per year, should go to African countries. This investment is essential to the realization of the Millennium Development Goals, to which the U.S. has committed its support.

2. The U.S. should provide leadership in developing a new system for generating international public investment in global health, education and human development. Contributions from rich countries should be based on their privileged place in the global economy, and should be mandatory. This new system would replace the concept of "aid" with a sense of shared responsibility for common needs.

3. The U.S. should move away from bilateral aid, and the unilateral imposition of conditions, and move toward pooling donor investments in global development. U.S. leadership in establishing transparent funding mechanisms, accountable to donors and recipients alike, is required.

4. In its bilateral and multilateral policies, the U.S. should ensure that Africans' access to basic services is not restricted by privatization or other measures. U.S. policies should promote health care, education, and water services as public goods, essential to human well-being and sustainable development.

5. The U.S. should use its voice and vote at the World Bank and IMF to press for the provision of development assistance to African countries in the form of grants rather than loans.

3. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Overview

The persistent underdevelopment of Africa's economies demands a new approach to U.S. economic cooperation with Africa. The chronic poverty and vulnerability of the continent is related to complex dynamics of the global economy that current U.S. policies fail to address. As the impact of the global recession further shrinks Africa's economic growth rate, it is necessary for the U.S. to engage in new forms of economic partnership with Africa. These should seek to promote just economic relationships, which benefit Africa and the U.S. both.

In addition to development assistance, there are several key elements to U.S. economic relations with Africa: trade, investment, and debt management. Two-way trade can boost growth and job creation for both sides, providing the trading relationship is based on equitable terms. Investment can form another important element of U.S. economic relations with Africa, and can also help stimulate growth. However, Africa's economic potential cannot be realized so long as the continent remains burdened with a massive accumulation of illegitimate external debts. These debts drain more money out of Africa each year than flows in from trade or investment or even from new loans. Debt is also a disincentive for attracting foreign investment. A successful U.S. policy approach to economic partnership with Africa must address each of these elements if it is to maximize the benefits of cooperation for both sides. For the past decade, trade has generally been considered the main vehicle for promoting U.S. economic ties with Africa. In fact, Africa is a far more significant trading partner for the U.S. than is widely realized. The continent holds abundant human and natural resources, as well as large markets for U.S. products. In 2001, U.S. exports to Africa reached a record high, surging 17.5% to almost $7 billion. U.S. exports to sub-Saharan Africa were more than twice those to Eastern Europe. They were more than 80% greater than exports to the former Soviet Union.

Heightened U.S. interest in Africa's oil supply has increased the continent's strategic importance to the U.S. and its future energy policies. Countries like Nigeria, Angola and Gabon are increasingly significant sources of oil for the U.S. In 2001, sub-Saharan Africa supplied 18% of U.S. crude oil imports. This is almost as much as Saudi Arabia. The U.S. National Intelligence Council projects U.S. oil supplies from West Africa will increase to 25% by 2015. This would surpass U.S. oil imports from the entire Persian Gulf. Nigeria already accounts for more than one-tenth of total U.S. oil imports, and is the U.S.' 5th largest supplier.

However, an enhanced economic partnership between the U.S. and African countries requires more than expanded trade. Restrictions on African access to U.S. markets, as well as agricultural subsidies to U.S. agribusinesses, continue to constrict Africa's trade-related development. Existing U.S. trade policies, exemplified by the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), have benefitted few African countries and have failed to promote sustainable economic development. They have, instead, perpetuated the continent's role as a source of raw materials and cheap labor.

Trade liberalization may have increased the importance of international trade for Africa, but it has also increased the continent's marginalization in the global economy. Over the last decade, while world trade has expanded by 85%, sub-Saharan Africa's trade has only grown by 38%. Africa's share of total world trade has declined to less than half of what it was in 1980, and now rests at only 1%. African countries remain over-dependent on primary commodities and are extremely vulnerable to swings in market prices.

In order for trade to boost African growth, the U.S. and other rich countries must commit to simplifying expanded market access for African goods and ending the double standard in international trade rules. This will require dismantling the trade barriers imposed by rich countries, which severely restrict access for African products to foreign markets. It will also require reducing subsidies that hinder African exports, especially in the agricultural sector.

Agricultural development is crucial to Africa's sustainable development. It is the sector that employs most of Africa's people and upon which the continent depends for food security. According to the World Trade Organization, rich countries now spend up to $1 billion per day subsidizing their agricultural sectors. Because of these subsidies, African producers find it very difficult to compete with rich country agribusinesses, whose production costs are much lower. The UN estimates that the total cost to poor countries of such trade barriers is more than $100 billion per year in lost revenues. Dismantling these barriers and phasing out subsidies would significantly increase income and assist poverty reduction and economic growth in Africa. Support for agricultural development in Africa must also involve upholding the rights of African farmers to protect their biodiversity and traditional knowledge.

The insistence of the U.S. on free trade and free market solutions to Africa's development challenges fails to address the structural sources of the continent's poverty. While trade is certainly one important pillar within the framework of U.S. economic cooperation with Africa, it is not sufficient to bring about economic development.

The growth of investment between the U.S. and Africa can support growth and expand African competitiveness. However, while foreign direct investment globally is reaching record levels, Africa is attracting less than 1%. The New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) is a new African initiative to help boost the continent's economic growth by encouraging greater foreign investment. However, for investment to generate sustainable growth, it must support African initiatives and increase employment opportunities for African workers. African governments' efforts to attract greater investment and reduce the cost of doing business must not come at the expense of labor rights and environmental protection. Private sector investment is one important aspect of Africa's economic development; however, it cannot substitute for public investment by African countries and the international community, or for debt cancellation. Sub-Saharan Africa's massive external debt is the single largest obstacle to the continent's economic development. Each year, African countries are required to pay almost $15 billion to the international financial institutions and to foreign creditor governments, including the U.S. This represents a crippling and unsustainable burden that fundamentally undermines economic growth. Over the past two decades, African governments have paid out more in debt service than they have received in development assistance or in new loans.

Debt repayments divert money directly from spending on basic social needs, including the response to the HIV/AIDS crisis. They trap African countries in a cycle of underdevelopment and dependency. Moreover, much of Africa's foreign debt is illegitimate in nature, having been incurred by unrepresentative and despotic regimes during the era of Cold War patronage.

The current international debt relief framework, the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative, has failed to provide a solution to the debt crisis. Designed by creditors, it seeks to extract the maximum in debt repayments from poor countries. It has failed to reduce Africa's debt burden to a sustainable level, which is its stated objective. Recent World Bank and IMF reports concede that the HIPC Initiative is not working. Meanwhile, an independent audit of these two institutions by two British accounting firms has revealed that they can afford to write off Africa's debt completely, without negatively impacting their lending ability or their credit rating.

The cancellation of Africa's illegitimate debt is essential to the continent's economic development. It is also crucial to African efforts to fight HIV/AIDS and to address poverty. While the U.S. is a relatively minor bilateral creditor of African countries, it is the single largest shareholder in the World Bank and the IMF, to whom most of Africa's debt is owed. As such, it holds major influence over the international response to Africa's debt crisis.

The U.S. should support immediate and complete debt cancellation for African countries. This should not be tied to structural adjustment programs or other such policies imposed by the World Bank and IMF. These policies have led to a decline in average incomes, and worsening conditions of poverty and underdevelopment. They have also fueled the spread of the HIV/AIDS pandemic. Promoting economic development and poverty reduction in Africa requires a paradigm shift away from rich country creditors dictating economic policies to poor countries. The U.S. should support the economic policies and priorities defined by African countries. A more equitable economic relationship is essential to tackling the roots of Africa's economic crisis.

Policy Recommendations

1. The U.S. should expand and simplify access to markets in the U.S. for African exports, especially for agricultural products, but also for manufactured goods (including but not limited to textiles).

2. The U.S. should support immediate and unconditional debt cancellation for African countries. The U.S. representatives at the World Bank and IMF should use their considerable influence in these institutions to press for the full cancellation of the debts owed by African countries to these institutions, from within their own reserves.

3. The U.S. should amend the provisions of the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) to include a wider range of African products and to eliminate eligibility criteria that impose economic policies on African countries.

4. The U.S. should commit to accelerating the phase out of agricultural subsidies and other forms of trade-distorting domestic support, as agreed at the WTO meeting in Doha, and subsequent multilateral talks.

5. The U.S. should support African community and farmer rights to protect their biodiversity and traditional knowledge. The U.S. should support the "African Model Law for the Protection of the Rights of Local Communities, Farmers and Breeders, and for the Regulation of Access to Biological Resources." This would establish those rights under international law and prohibit patenting of living organisms or their components.

4. WAR AND PEACE

Overview

In the decade from 1990 to 2000, sub-Saharan Africa experienced more than twice the number of casualties from conflict of any other region in the world. While important progress has been made toward ending some of the continent's most deadly conflicts, continued insecurity affects millions of people. The social and economic disruption wrought by ongoing conflicts remains a real source of instability in Africa, with implications for global security.

It is important to note that most of Africa is not at war. However, where conflicts do exist, they affect not only the stability of the countries involved, but also their neighbors, and entire sub- regions. For each of the major conflicts ongoing in Africa there exists a peace process, often a settlement plan, and an African body to guide a peace process. What is crucially missing, in many cases, is the international support needed to ensure peace and stability.

The U.S. has an important role to play in supporting African peace-making initiatives. Sustained financial and diplomatic commitment from the U.S. to the resolution of African conflicts is essential to both regional and global stability. It is, therefore, in the U.S.' national interest. The achievement of peace and security is also a prerequisite for sustainable social and economic development, and for democratic progress.

The U.S. also has a particular historic responsibility for many of Africa's current conflicts. During the Cold War, the U.S. provided more than $1.5 billion worth of arms to African countries that were considered geo-strategic allies. The U.S. also bankrolled dictators in African states, such as Mobuto Sese Seko in the former Zaire, and Siad Barre in Somalia, to name but a few. It is many of these African countries that had "special" Cold War relationships with the U.S. that fell into political turmoil and violence in the 1990s and are often referred to as "failed states" (e.g. Liberia and Somalia). The U.S. must now take responsibility for the destabilizing effect of its intervention in these countries.

As a matter of priority, the U.S. should engage in renewed efforts to resolve the devastating wars in Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Both represent serious humanitarian emergencies and threats to regional stability. In both cases, a peace framework has already been negotiated. However, successful implementation will require significantly greater political will and pressure from outside mediators, as well as from the contending parties. The U.S. should also prioritize support for Angola as it strives to recover from decades of regional and internal war. A strong U.S. commitment to the successful resolution of these conflicts must form a central part of U.S. bilateral and multilateral policies.

Sudan's civil war is perhaps the most devastating and intractable of Africa's conflicts. Before 9/11, Secretary of State Colin Powell referred to it as the greatest tragedy in the world today. At its heart is the decades-long struggle of the southern Sudanese for justice, equality and self- determination, joined by northern pro-democracy efforts opposed to the authoritarian minority government in Khartoum. This conflict in Africa's largest country has raged for 36 of the past 46 years. It has cost more than 2 million lives, and has displaced more than 4 million people.

The new framework agreement reached in July 2002 between the two sides offers an important new opportunity for peace. The Machakos Protocol, reached through the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) peace process, states that a referendum on southern secession will be held after six years, to resolve the dispute over sovereignty. However, key issues, such as decisions on power-sharing, the division of the country's vast oil wealth, and the mechanics of a cease-fire, remain unresolved.

While U.S. engagement was instrumental in encouraging this latest peace initiative, continued support by the U.S. is essential to guaranteeing its success. The U.S. Special Envoy to Sudan has recommended a long-term U.S. engagement with the peace process. This must include sustained diplomatic, as well as material, support. The U.S. must remain committed to a just settlement in Sudan. Shifting geo-strategic calculations in the region must not lead to an embrace of the government in Khartoum and its brutal counterinsurgency campaign against southern civilians.

The conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) is a highly complicated and destabilizing crisis in the heart of Africa. The war began in 1998, when Rwanda and Uganda, along with Congolese rebels, launched a campaign to oust then-President Laurent Kabila. Zimbabwe, Angola and Namibia stepped in to support the government, and the country dissolved in factional fighting. Since then, an estimated 2 million people have died, most the victims of hunger and disease, and at least another 2 million have been displaced. The country's economy and infrastructure have been devastated.

Kabila's assassination in 2001, and his replacement by his son Joseph, created a new opportunity for peace negotiations. African peace-making efforts have succeeded in obtaining the withdrawal of most foreign forces, and there have been several rounds of political negotiations over the past year. A peace agreement signed in December 2002 represented significant progress in ending Congo's war. This accord marked the first time that the government, opposition parties and rebel groups agreed on a power-sharing arrangement and laid out steps towards the country's first democratic elections since independence.

Sustained U.S. and international support is critical to implementing this agreed political settlement and strengthening efforts towards national reconciliation. The U.S. should encourage all sides to engage in this process, by which a democratic government may be elected to provide representative government that has the legitimacy to begin to address Congo's development challenges.

In Angola, the death of UNITA rebel leader Jonas Savimbi in February 2002 paved the way for a cease-fire in April 2002. This formally ended the war which had devastated the country since independence in 1975. Up to one-third of the population was displaced by conflict, which included direct South African and superpower intervention as well as civil war among Angolans. Economic infrastructure was shattered. Food shortages and inadequate health services have contributed to a massive humanitarian crisis that now threatens up to a million Angolans with starvation. Although Angola has immense natural resources, including oil reserves and diamond mines, Angola's people have received few benefits. Per capita annual income is only $270, making Angola one of the poorest countries on earth.

Now, for the first time in a generation, Angolans have the opportunity to rebuild their lives and their country. The U.S., which contributed greatly to the destruction of Angola by promoting war, has a special obligation to support Angola's reconstruction. This requires not only immediate support for humanitarian efforts, but also accountable investment in rebuilding economic and social infrastructure and strengthening democracy. The U.S. should also support international de-mining efforts in Angola, which is one of the most heavily mined countries on earth. The presence of millions of land mines throughout the country is a major obstacle for agricultural activity and post-war reconstruction.

Elsewhere in Africa, there are flashpoints of instability which must not be ignored, and where timely U.S. engagement could do much to prevent further conflict.

In West Africa, the end of Sierra Leone's war provides an example of successful international support in peace efforts. However, the international community must continue its involvement to ensure the country's stability, especially in providing a counterweight to the instability of Liberia. The current crisis in Côte d'Ivoire and the massive displacement of populations in West Africa, could potentially disrupt the entire sub-region. The U.S. should increase its involvement with diplomatic efforts in this region in support of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS).

In East Africa, Somalia continues to struggle with political crisis and economic ruin more than a decade after the breakdown of the state. As noted above, the U.S. bore a special responsibility for Somalia's collapse. New U.S. concerns about Somalia's insecurity and its potential as a terrorist haven have revived U.S. interest in that region. But Washington has yet to act positively to bring peace to Somalia and support its reconstruction.

U.S. approaches to promoting security in Africa continue to rely on a policy that keeps the U.S. one step removed from engagement with African conflicts. This policy focuses on arming and training African armed forces rather than making a sustained investment in conflict prevention and diplomacy. The African Crisis Response Initiative (ACRI) is one program that seeks to strengthen African countries' own capacity for peacekeeping in their region. Over the past decade, the U.S. has supplied more than $225 million in arms and training to African nations. In addition, U.S. special forces have trained troops from 34 African countries under the Joint Combined Exchange Training (JCET) Program. It is important that all such bilateral initiatives include mechanisms by which they can be reviewed, and by which their impact on human rights in those countries may be independently assessed.

A serious U.S. approach to promoting peace and security in Africa must involve a commitment to reduce arms sales to African countries. In 2000, the U.S. ranked first in arms exports to poor developing countries. Recent international efforts to curb the proliferation and misuse of small arms around the world should be supported by the U.S. as an important means to promote international peace and stability.

U.S. security cooperation with Africa has taken on new meaning since 9/11. Increased U.S. interest in projecting military force into the Persian Gulf has led to a massive increase in the U.S. military presence in the Horn of Africa. Meanwhile, U.S. concern with West Africa as an alternative oil source has raised the prospect of a U.S. base on the island nation of Sã o Tomé. These recent developments indicate a return to a U.S. policy that treats Africa in purely geo- strategic terms, and seeks to form alliances with African governments according to their value in the framework of the U.S.' "war on terrorism". It is critically important that the U.S. relationship with Africa not return to this dangerous Cold War model. A U.S. commitment to promoting peace and stability in Africa can do much to enhance international security. However U.S. policies must address African concerns and priorities, from HIV/AIDS to poverty to conflict resolution, if global stability is truly to be advanced, and if the U.S. is to expect African cooperation on U.S. priorities.

Policy Recommendations

1. The U.S. should increase its financial and diplomatic support for African Union and United Nations initiatives aimed at the prevention and resolution of conflicts in Africa.

2. The U.S. should redouble its bilateral and multilateral diplomacy in support of the existing peace processes in Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).

3. The U.S. should provide financial resources for reconstruction in Angola, and should support Angolan civil society in demanding full accountability and democratic control of the country's wealth.

4. The U.S. should join the Convention on the Prohibition of the use, stockpiling, production and transfer of antipersonnel mines and on their destruction (Mine Ban Treaty), as a step consistent with its funding for mine removal and victim assistance. This treaty has already been signed by 146 countries and ratified by 130.

5. The U.S. should pay its assessments and dues to the United Nations for peacekeeping and for the general UN budget, especially where it is in arrears.

5. DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Overview

Democratic governance and respect for human rights are the foundations for political and social stability and economic progress. They are also intrinsic to the goal of human development. Today, the struggle of Africa's people for democracy and human rights continues, and, as in the past, international support can play an important role. African victories in recent decades in overcoming colonial rule, apartheid, and other forms of dictatorship, have marked important progress, empowering Africa's people and unleashing their own vision. While democratic advances have been made across the continent, serious challenges still remain. As is the case everywhere, democracy in Africa is a work in progress. Constitutional reform movements now seek to advance the democratic process in many countries. African civil society organizations continue to struggle for women's rights, and for government accountability to the needs of Africa's poor majority.

U.S. support for democracy and human rights in Africa should focus on promoting the full spectrum of human rights and encouraging mechanisms to ensure government accountability. In this way, the U.S. can offer real support and partnership with Africa's people. A consistently positive U.S. contribution in this area can do much to advance the shared goal of international stability. It is also an essential pre-requisite to economic growth and social progress.

As a matter of priority, the U.S. should focus on three key African countries Nigeria, Zimbabwe and Kenya. Each is at an important political juncture, where U.S. engagement could be instrumental in boosting democratic forces and averting a potentially de-stabilizing crisis. Each country is important to the resolution of key African problems, and to the region's future. In each country, U.S. and international insistence on respect for human rights and the rule of law must be unequivocal.

In Nigeria, Africa's most populous nation, democracy remains fragile. Since the country returned to civilian rule in 1999, hopes of greater political and social stability and economic growth have been frustrated. The efforts of Obasanjo's government to promote national unity and to bring "democratic dividends" to Nigeria's people have had limited success. Internal ethnic and religious divisions have led to rising violence and instability. The introduction of a particularly punitive interpretation of Sharia Islamic Law in some northern states has heightened tensions and raised human rights concerns.

Nigeria also faces an economic crisis that undermines support for the government. Despite its vast oil wealth, problems of corruption and mismanagement have left Nigeria one of the poorest countries in the world. Over 66% of its population lives below the poverty line. The government is also massively indebted to foreign creditors. Nigeria's democracy appears increasingly to falter under economic and political pressures.

As Nigeria prepares for elections this year, the U.S. must strengthen its support for the country's nascent democracy. Nigeria represents an important African partner for the U.S., particularly but not only in economic terms. More importantly, Nigeria is home to one-eighth of Africa's people. As such, it is a pivotal country, and its fate impacts that of the entire continent. A peaceful and prosperous Nigeria could do much to encourage stability and growth in neighboring countries. However, unless Nigeria's fragile democracy receives real support from international partners, particularly the U.S., its future will remain uncertain.

Zimbabwe was not long ago one of Africa's most democratic, stable and prosperous countries. Now embroiled in a political and economic crisis, its democratic processes and institutions have been damaged by the manipulation of President Mugabe and the ruling party. They have desperately fought to extend their 22-year hold on power in the face of growing internal opposition. Mugabe's re-election in March 2002 was widely disputed, both inside and outside Zimbabwe. Intimidation and political violence during the two year run up to the election campaign claimed several hundred innocent lives, fueled frustrations and captured international attention. The ruling party's actions in its aftermath have further damaged Zimbabwe's political institutions and alienated the country internationally.

The Zimbabwe government's controversial land redistribution program has increased tensions and exacerbated the political and economic crisis. The historic maldistribution of land in Zimbabwe is a real problem, but government's current policy aims to simply replace a tiny white elite with an equally small black one. It fundamentally fails to address the needs of both the rural and urban poor majority. Widespread food insecurity, massive unemployment and economic decline fuel the country's instability. Inflation reached a record high of 135% in the summer of 2002. Three-quarters of Zimbabweans are living in poverty, and up to half of the population was reported likely to need emergency food aid in 2002/03.

The erosion of Zimbabwe's democratic culture should be a cause of great concern for the international community, as it is for Africans. Mindful of its own credibility problems, resulting from the 2000 U.S. election and Washington's traditional preoccupation with the white minority, the U.S. must nevertheless insist that the Zimbabwe government respect human rights and the rule of law. The U.S. should support democratic forces within Zimbabwe. It should also support efforts to address the underlying sources of political and economic tension, such as the land issue, that undermine the democratic system.

In Kenya, the December 2002 elections marked an important political transition. President Moi, in power since 1978, was finally required to step down by the constitution. His retirement could greatly strengthen Kenya's democratic prospects. U.S. and international support for the government of Mwai Kibaki will be crucial as Kenya begins this major political transition.

In recent years, the manipulation of ethnic tensions has created an unstable political environment. Despite the opposition's victory, these internal tensions remain. Kenya also faces a serious economic crisis, with the majority of the population living below the poverty line. Economic growth is shrinking, while unemployment is on the rise and crime is a growing problem. The new government inherits an economic crisis that has been fueled by mismanagement and persistent corruption. It must also grapple with the legacy of political repression and human rights abuses that have long undermined Kenya's democratic processes. Of these twin challenges, the government is likely to show more immediate progress on the political front than on fighting corruption. Many members of the new government are themselves implicated in past corruption.

At a time when the Bush administration is giving Kenya more attention in the context of the "war on terrorism", it behooves Washington to pay closer attention to the Kenya that Kenyans are trying to create and less to geo-strategic chimeras. Kenya's prospects depend upon three key factors: successful constitutional reform (including effective inquiries into past wrongs), a fresh start on economic development (requiring the cancellation of the country's external debt), and victory in the war on HIV/AIDS. U.S. support for these priorities will require new resources but could help determine the country's long-term stability.

U.S. commitment to promoting democracy and good governance in Africa in general must extend beyond support for the electoral process. It should involve long-term support to true democracy in Africa, including the promotion of not only political and civil rights but economic and social rights as critical expressions of healthy societies.

Respect for women's rights remains a challenge in many parts of Africa. International attention in support of local activism is crucial to holding governments accountable on gender equality. Increased political participation of women in African countries should be encouraged. This is essential to representative democratic governance. New election rules in Morocco, reserving a certain number of parliamentary seats for women, are a sign of progress, but there is still much to be done. The African Union (AU), created last year, requires an increase in women's representation in all of its institutions. The U.S. should be a strong champion of the rights of women in Africa and worldwide.

Press freedom is also an important aspect of a vibrant democracy. The growing number of independent media across the African continent is an indicator of democratic progress. At the same time, however, media repression and persecution persist in many countries. In all instances where press freedom is curtailed, U.S. and international condemnation should be consistent and forceful.

The New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD), the initial development plan adopted by the AU, lays out a commitment to democratic principles and good governance in Africa. This commitment is intended to be the cornerstone for attracting increased foreign investment. NEPAD is an ambitious new plan for African development, originally defined by a small group of African leaders. However, the absence of civil society participation in the evolution of this plan makes it, as yet, incomplete. A true vision and agenda for Africa's future must be more inclusive, and should itself be more democratic. U.S. initiatives to support democracy in Africa should, similarly, be mindful of civil society voices. African civil society must be a vital actor in the effort to advance democracy and sustainable development throughout the continent.

Policy Recommendations

1. The U.S. should support women's rights in Africa by first restoring funding to important family planning and health education programs. Washington should also support women's organizations in Africa, especially those working to increase women's political participation. The U.S. should ratify the Convention to Eliminate All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).

2. U.S. support for human rights and democracy in Africa at this time requires an increased U.S. investment not only in government reforms, but also in non-government institutions such as a free press. Washington should continue to support African civil society development as a complement to more effective and stable state structures, not as an alternative.

3. U.S. policy toward Nigeria must look beyond oil and consider its 130 million people and their environment. First, the U.S. should provide support to ensure that upcoming elections in Nigeria are both free and fair, and that human rights are protected. Secondly, Nigeria's economy needs relief from foreign debt payments and an infusion of new investment in support of diversification.

4. The U.S. should monitor the political situation in Zimbabwe, and seek appropriate ways to encourage democratic forces within that country. Washington must develop a more sophisticated policy toward Zimbabwe that helps to address the underlying sources of the present crisis, and seeks to foster reconciliation between the opposing sides.

5. In Kenya, the U.S. must look beyond geo-strategic concerns and assist the new government in its efforts to combat poverty, insecurity and HIV/AIDS. Washington should seize this new opportunity and design a development cooperation plan that will ultimately prove more important than conventional security cooperation.

Home | About Africa Action | Action Center | Resources and Information | Newsroom | Site Map | Privacy Policy