[dehai-news] ( fpif.org) Congress Challenges AFRICOM; “establishing a process that’s in search of a problem.”


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: wolda002@umn.edu
Date: Wed Jul 23 2008 - 04:51:53 EDT


Congress Challenges AFRICOM

Beth Tuckey | July 23, 2008

Editor: John Feffer
www.fpif.org

Congress is finally taking up its constitutionally mandated duties of
oversight and responsible budgeting – at least on U.S.-Africa policy. From
humanitarian relief for northern Uganda to the Jubilee Act on debt relief,
Congress is making some very important steps forward on the side of the
African people. Although there have been a few major disappointments like
the Farm Bill, the legislative branch is beginning to ask the right
questions about responsible U.S. engagement with the African continent,
particularly with regard to the U.S. military.

In mid-July, Congress held a hearing on the progress of the new AFRICOM
planned to become fully operational in October. Chairman John Tierney
(D-MA) and at least five other members of the Subcommittee on National
Security and Foreign Affairs of the House Oversight Committee expressed
stern skepticism and borderline anger at the expansion of the U.S. military
in Africa. Representative Stephen Lynch (D-MA) noted that leading with the
military is a “projection we don’t want to make on the continent.”

AFRICOM’s explicit aims are to increase security in Africa by sending
soldiers to conduct diplomacy and humanitarian aid as well as administer
expanded military programs. In fact, the new Africa Command is designed to
increase access to Africa’s oil, counter terror, and offset China’s
economic influence in the region. The new command is coming on line just as
the United States is beginning to buy nearly one-quarter of its oil from
African sources.

General William Ward, commander of AFRICOM, has insisted that AFRICOM’s
goal is to empower Africans to solve African problems. But as
Representative Tierney suggested in the subcommittee hearing, if the goal
is to help address Africa’s needs, we are wrong to send in the military.
The people of Africa need education, health care, and good governance –
diplomatic tasks, not military missions. The Pentagon may say it will help
the African people, but as Tierney remarked, “who’s going to buy that?” To
him, “it looks like [AFRICOM is] going over there to protect oil and fight
terrorists, the same misguided way that we fought terrorists in other
places.” He speculated further about the U.S. reaction if China or Russia
were to set up a military “outpost” in Africa.

Each of the members’ questions contained a similar thesis: the priorities
of the U.S. government are misguided and out of order. Representative John
Welch (D-VT) noted that it sounds like AFRICOM is “establishing a process
that’s in search of a problem.” While the previous Congress complied with
Bush’s request for military spending, certain members of this committee
certainly seem to have learned their lesson.

According to the testimony of John Pendleton of the Government
Accountability Office, AFRICOM is estimated to cost $4 billion between 2010
and 2015 (including $2 billion for the Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of
Africa base in Djibouti). Presumably, this excludes many of the other
current military programs in Africa, all of which total several hundred
million dollars a year. Congressman Welch asked the panel what the
comparable State Department and USAID budgets are in Africa, but no one
seemed to have a clue. According to a recent report, the United States
spends approximately 30 times more on military operations globally than it
does on diplomacy and development under the State Department and USAID.
Additionally, the Pentagon now controls over 20% of U.S. Official
Development Assistance while USAID controls only 40% of aid abroad. For
Representative Betty McCollum (D-MN), the fact that USAID has to have an
office of military affairs to communicate with the Pentagon “means that
something has gone horribly awry.”

Congress and the next administration certainly need to develop a new
strategy for working with the world. Today, the United States maintains a
powerful military apparatus, but when it comes to putting our civilian foot
first, “there is no strategy,” said Congressman Tierney. The members may
prefer the State Department to exert more influence over the Department of
Defense, but their budgeting and oversight must match their words for U.S.
foreign policy to shift in the right direction.

Foreign Policy In Focus (www.fpif.org) contributor Beth Tuckey is the
associate director of Program Development and Policy at Africa Faith and
Justice Network (AFJN) in Washington, DC.

  

-- 
 
 Million. 
Mpls MN
 
  ***HeGeRey ZBeLet LBe GhiDN'u Kt'ReKeBi AsBei***  
        AWET N'HAFASH!!!

----[This List to be used for Eritrea Related News Only]----


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

webmaster
© Copyright DEHAI-Eritrea OnLine, 1993-2008
All rights reserved