What the U.S. owes Africa

By Brendan Rogak

We live in a world which, generally, can accurately be referred to as war-torn, unequal, and dysfunctional, and no area better embodies these dubious traits than sub-Saharan Africa.

Anyone who owns a television set has seen commercials showcasing the pitiful conditions in which many Africans live; rows of tin shacks lining filthy unpaved thoroughfares, where electricity and plumbing are still extravagant and unattainable luxuries. The life expectancy in African countries hovers around 40 years, mostly owing to AIDS infection rates that approach or exceed 50 percent in certain nations.

Considering just how much wealth exists currently, and the relative comfort which we in the United States enjoy, these facts should be embarrassing to all of us.

We are accustomed to hearing from the hosts or narrators of these commercials that mere pennies a day per person could provide every man, woman and child on the continent access to nutritious food and desperately-needed medicine.

However, the French-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development reports that President George W. Bush has nearly tripled American aid to Africa, from $1.4 billion annually to $4 billion, since his 2001 inauguration. Bush vowed in 2006 to increase that figure to $9 billion per year by 2010, and the G-8 summit of world economic powers agreed that same year to double yearly aid to Africa to $50 billion, and move toward debt forgiveness.

This assistance, funded by American taxpayers, goes to Africa on top of additional billions from private and non-governmental organizations. Which begs the question, if the United States is so generous, why in the world do we still see starving, swollen-bellied African children on our TVs? And further, if all this foreign aid isn't improving conditions on the ground, why should we throw a penny more into the money pit?

Such skepticism is understandable, but the truth is that humanitarian and development aid funds to Africa really do enhance the quality of life for poor Africans. What's more, this assistance helps to create a positive impression of America among the people at a time when the United States needs to rehabilitate its reputation as a friend of the downtrodden and a promoter of human rights.

As with every government program, there is significant waste, corruption and abuse involved in the dispensation of foreign aid money and the goods it is used to purchase. Often times, funds intended to be put toward buying food or constructing a hospital end up in the hands of warlords who spend it on weapons, which are then used to menace the very people the money was supposed to help.

Americans have every right to be outraged at such mismanagement of their tax dollars, and to demand accountability so that every dime is spent appropriately.

But those who throw the baby out with the bathwater, and say that the perversion of the African aid program means it should be done away with entirely, are making a grave miscalculation. There is another, more pragmatic reason why the United States should continue to fully fund African relief efforts: The rise of China.

Mainland China, seemingly overnight, has become an economic powerhouse whose international influence now rivals that of the United States. In recent years, the Chinese have begun to invest heavily in Africa, and have struck up friendly relations with many of the regimes there.

Although the Chinese have lately instituted market reforms and liberalized certain aspects of their social policy, China remains an oppressive totalitarian state, ruled by the Communist Party. Freedom, civil liberties, and individual rights do not exist. The government can imprison or execute threats to its power without due process or cause. It is in no one's best interest for Africa to forge an alliance with a superpower dictatorship; unfortunately, China has already found ideological comrades in certain rulers, such as Zimbabwe's president Robert Mugabe.

While the United States for its own part does not have a great record when it comes to dealing with Africa, we would be doing today's Africans a huge disservice if we were to cut off our aid, and thereby allow the continent to become indebted to Communist China and set the stage for a new Cold War.

In the 1960's, food shipments from America were affectionately referred to as "Kennedy milk" by Africans, after our late President. This was a time when all who were free, or wished to be, looked to America for help. If we were to cease aid to Africa, we would only slip in the eyes of the world, when we need the world's approval desperately.

So while we must continue to be vigilant in our insistence that aid funds be spent responsibly, we must continue to support the millions who are already dependent to some degree on our help, while also bolstering efforts to assist the Africans in the transition toward economic self-sufficiency.