AFRICOM and the perception mess

[JarodParker]

Funny how most on the Board and Executive Committee of the "Concerned Africa Scholars" are based out places like Syracuse, Rutgers, Stanford and Pomona. I guess they're not that concerned.

That statement betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of the relationship between Africans and Africans in the diaspora.

That wasn't a statement about the relationship between Africans and the African Diaspora. It was a commentary on how easily the diaspora can post a blog or write an open letter and absolve themselves of responsibility. It's easy to sit at Syracuse and point out how the US is doing it wrong.
Sure they send some money... but they could accomplish a lot more if they went back and did the nation building. It shows how even they have given up on the politics, governance, development, etc back home and how it's now each man for himself.

For example, each year, Nigeria receives about $10 billion from Nigerians abroad. I.e. they are an important source of funding and with funding comes influence ($10 billion is a lot more money than either USAID or the USG spends on Africa).

You're welcome... I take it a good deal of said diaspora live and work in the states, so a portion of that $10billion is another form of US aid. I find it amazing that one would even expect US aid to match the money coming in from the diaspora. It should just be more reason to love the good ol US of A.

Put simply, it is important to listen to what they have say about America's policies in Africa because (a) it is unwise to underestimate the impact the diaspora has on shaping public opinion in Africa and (b) their influence on American politics is set to rise in the near future.

Somebody said earlier that relationships in Africa are complex. That applies to diaspora relationships as well. They do not have 100% credibility... especially the ones engaged in politics from the safety of the west.

Consider this example, a former US ambassador to Nigeria, John Campbell estimates the number of Nigerians in the US at 2 million. They are overwhelming from Southern Nigeria and tend to be evangelical Christians. In his words:

Have you got them on board with AFRICOM? If not, why? The second largest group are the Ethiopians and the same applies to the them. May suspicion is that the USG didn't bother (a) to identify the most important stakeholders and (b) tailor messages to cater to them.

First of all, I don't see the need to get them on board. A great majority do not care about Africom and those who do, already have their minds made up one way or the other.
Secondly, if Africom were to engage the African diaspora, how do you propose they go about doing it? Invite them to a town hall with some 4-star general? You seem to state that would be counterproductive in your statement below.

But this points to a much wider problem, the US government is no longer in the business of selling itself or its policies to an increasingly sceptical world. Many of you guys don't fully appreciate the impact of Iraq on US credibility.

I would argue that most reasonable Americans (including the president) appreciate OIF's impact on how others perceive the US.

The man on the street in Africa is of the opinion that the US cooked up evidence to invade Iraq in the past, and is thus, very likely to do something similar in future.

That's not just Africans... a lot of Americans believe that as well.

Then there is the slightly unusual spectacle of senior US military officers explaining US Africa policy. Is it so important to raise the media profile of senior US military officers? What do you think the reaction would be if senior PLA officers were given the task of explaining China's Africa policy? The Chinese have smartly refrained from doing so.

I can't argue with you here.

Africa is neither Afghanistan nor Iraq (the ambassador Ryan Crocker / General Petraeus model will not work here), stop giving the impression it is the model you are adopting here.

Can you elaborate on this?

Work your way back, the best outcome is for Africom to do its job well, while giving the impression that Africom does not exist.

The problem with that is, there is no way to keep such things completely under wraps. So once it leaks to the media, then you have a "secret military program" on your hands. That would probably be a bigger PR nightmare than the current one. It's a no-win situation.

Anyone who has studied the history of Africa knows that soldiers (both foreign and African) have a very bad reputation. Idi Amin was a soldier and so was Jean-Bedel Bokassa, Mobutu also pretended to be one.

That's one of the problems Africom is trying to fix. They're trying to help host nations develop a professional military which doesn't committee genocide, rape or plan coups. The problem with that is sometimes (ok almost always) those "professional" military forces are turned against their own people. So once again it's a no-win for the US.

We have foreign missionaries as heroes, but not a single foreign soldier is treated as a hero in Africa.

My experience is that Africans are as distrustful of missionaries as they are of mercenaries.

Cast your minds back to the world that existed before 9/11.

Why? I enjoy the complimentary happy endings from the TSA.

Africans generally like America. But they're also susceptible to rumors, conspiracy theories and the like. Starving people in East Africa appreciated those sacks of wheat with the red, white and blue stamp... but they were also convinced that the US boiled the wheat before shipping it so they wouldn't be able to sow the seeds. It is believed (even by the educated) that the US dumps millions tons of grain into the ocean each year to prevent prices from falling.
So this is not something that's gonna go away with a new agency name, logo, PR campaign or town hall meetings. That's just how people are. Nothing short of the US giving up any and all economic and political advantage (free trade, free travel zones, debt relief...) will satisfy the "Concerned Africa Scholars".
Americans did not colonize Africa; most of resentment for slavery is confined to the African-American community (not sure about west Africa). Africans in general dislike the Indians and they fear and dislike the Chinese even more. America on the other hand is usually well intentioned, transparent and accountable. Besides, the opposition to US military basing seems to be global... Japan, Korea, Guam (i think), Pakistan, Tajikistan (not sure if the deal fell through). The Africom issue is not unique.

Sorry it's 2am and i have to go to bed.