The Cost of the US Elections on Africa
by Pilirani Semu-Banda
Malawi
When Americans go to the polls next year, Africa will be very far from the minds of most voters; after all, US elections are not won or lost on African issues. However, the economic and social well-being of most Africans, including the majority of people in Malawi, is so dependent on the USA that all eyes from this part of the world will be on the American voters.
The American people provide over $35 million (USD) to Malawi every year in the form of development aid through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). This money is used to promote rural economic development, foster governance, reinforce basic education and to improve the health of people in this poor nation
One might even say that a lot of lives in Africa are in the hands of the American people since it is not only Malawi, but a lot of other countries who receive financial aid from the USA. War-torn Sudan, for instance, derives 80 percent of all its humanitarian assistance from America. Barack Obama, a Democratic presidential candidate, said in April, when he delivered his presidential campaign’s first major address on foreign policy, that there was need for the US foreign aid to be doubled to $50 billion (USD) by 2012. He argues that advancements in stability and living conditions in poor nations would minimize the interest in terrorism and enforce the security of Americans.
The figure mentioned by Obama is only a fraction of what Africa really needs. However, with attention in the 2008 presidential campaign debate focused on terrorism and controversial issues such as immigration, gay marriages and abortion, African concerns seem to be very far from the minds of many Americans, including most of the presidential candidates. The war in Iraq is probably one of the very few major election issues that might touch on Africa’s concerns. According to Congressional Budget Office reports, over $532 billion (USD) has been approved and spent for America’s war spending and another $214 billion (USD) is expected to be requested by President Bush for 2008. This amount, which totals $746 billion (USD) , would make an enormous difference to the lives of Africans, especially in Malawi, where up to 55% percent of people live below the poverty line of less than $1 per day, according to USAID.
The issue of climate change, which is of interest to the American voters, is in fact paramount to a lot of Africans. People in this continent would like to see the next administration in the US get serious about curbing global warming.
Africa has become the continent most susceptible to the effects of climate change. The African continent is current experiencing desertification; loss of productive land and reductions in rainfall is becoming commonplace. Countries with economies based on subsistence agriculture are experiencing food shortages. Increasingly frequent droughts and floods mean increased famines. The African continent is paying the price for global warming despite the fact that Africa’s emissions have been negligible compared to the US. The United States recently came in last under the World Wildlife Fund’s Climate Scorecards, which rate the performance of G8 countries in their performance contributions to curb on climate change. The US’s bottom ranking highlights its failure to work towards stopping global warming.
Scientists say that a warmer climate could also increase the range of carriers of vector-borne diseases, and perpetuate a lack of adequate fresh water. These environmental pressures may lead to conflict between struggling nations, unleashing migrations of environmental refugees on the African continent.
From Africa’s perspective, large World Trade Organization economies such as the US leave Africa out as they focus on bilateral and regional free trade agreements. Africa needs more useful opportunities in the global market for its goods in order to be able to use trade to lift itself out of poverty. Accessing these prospects will require renewed political commitments from the US. Lower tariffs and fewer barriers for products that Africa has the capacity to produce, like textile, sugar and cotton, could help the continent. According to a WTO case study on Malawi, agriculture supports 85% of the population. Mr. Kabambe, a senior minister of agriculture, says that the high tariffs (15%) distort trade opportunity, and the non-tariff barriers that set product standards for agriculture, cannot be met by a poor country like Malawi.
So far trade agreements such as the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act, passed by the US Congress in 2000 and amended in 2006, are failing to provide access to systems that ensure that as African countries integrate into the multilateral trading system. They don’t have to compromise their national economic development priorities. African countries are being made to get into trade commitments that do not harmonize with their domestic economic growth policies. Instead of domestic policies shaping their external engagements, there is a sense that things are being forced down the throats of these developing countries by powerful countries like the US.
As the leader of the world’s super power, the US president is regarded by many as a leader whose decisions affect the whole world. Today, the US needs to live up to its name as a super power, but this time, the election should provide a good leader that is liked by the world.
As Americans get ready to go to the polls, they should advocate for debt relief and adequate foreign aid for poor African countries like Malawi. According to the WTO, exports in Malawi decreased from $442 million (USD) in 1999 to $310 million (USD) in 2001. In 2005, trade accounted for 81.3% of the GDP; in other words, our whole economy depends on trade for its economic health. As a three-year average, 57.8% of the gross national income must be used for debt relief. With such a large percentage of its budget going to debt servicing, it’s not hard to see how Malawi can never work its way out of abject poverty without aid.
These are all very important concerns. They are not just issues. The statistical evidence of global warming, especially on Africa, and the impact of unfair trade and economic policies on the African continent cannot be ignored. It is time for action. Both the US presidential candidates and voters should start suggesting and implementing ways of helping Africa solve the perpetual quandaries facing our continent. With the American people’s and US president’s help, it can be done.
About the Author
Pilirani Semu-Banda is a journalist contracted by the USAID as Media Specialist for Casals and Associates in Malawi. As a freelancer, Pilirani has won both local and international awards, including the Africa Education Journalism Award. She has also been voted Malawi’s best female journalist twice.
Environmental pressures can and will lead to more conflict. In a Washington Post editorial on Saturday, Secretary General Ban Ki Moon challenged the discourse surrounding the crisis in Darfur which is generally understood and accepted as “an ethnic conflict pitting Arab militias against black rebels and farmers.” Instead he provided a historical context for the crisis that stems not from ethnic conflict but has roots in an ecological crisis that is most likely the result of climate change. In southern Sudan annual precipitation has decreased by 40% since the 1980’s. Nomadic herders and farmers now compete for both land and water in a region where they used to coexist peacefully. When Africa is the continent most susceptible to climate change and the US is the largest contributor of carbon dioxide emissions, the US President must commit to resolving this conflict and providing the necessary aid so future atrocities like Darfur never happen again.
It’s easy to forget that American politics has a broader context and impact range than immigration, Iraq, and executive repeal of American civil liberties. Thanks for reframing the issue of genocide in Darfur and other critical African issues in terms of climate change.
Curbing global warming or rather climate change is a major issue in the upcoming election. Unfortunately climate change is on a course that cannot be curved or stopped. If we were to turn off every automobile and power plant in the world today, it would take 50 years for the worlds temperature to stop rising. It would take another 50 years after that for the climate to return to pre-1800 conditions. The upcoming elections will focus on curbing climate change but what they should also be addressing is the impact that climate change is having and will have on our environment, economies and people. It is time for the United States to create policies and to take action on the effects of climate change.
Thanks Pilirani for the story that is seeking out for Malawi and Africa. I think if the Americans should use their power, money and dominance for good causes,not funding war and conflicts, the World would a better place. Imagine the transformations that would occur if all that money (more than $700 million!) was to come to our continent to help fund key areas such as access to quality and affordable maternal health for women, health and education, clean water and sanitation.