One begs the question...does the US Army require one to have experience in Africa before one is appointed commander of AFRICOM?

In other words, do job specific skills matter, or do we just determine that we can put any "smart" guy in any position and therefore be assured of a good outcome. Would you drive your M-1 tank over a bridge that was designed by a cardiologist?

How do we opine on the level of in-country or in-region experience needed at this level of command?
Such an individual needs to understand Africa, he needs to understand ethnic rivalries and ethnic compositions. He needs to understand that there are many sides to a story and if there are 250 ethnic groups, there are 250 different sides to the same story. He should be able to smell out whether the host nation military he is dealing with is a national army or merely an ethnic militia.

He should understand the broad socio-cultural trends in the African continent. He should be able to distinguish between the "Bantus" and the "Nilotics", the "Afro-Asiatics" and the "Niger-Congo" people. He should be aware of African colonial history and its impact on the perception of the US in Africa. He should have a frame of reference for assessing the impact of the insertion of US forces in a given host nation.

He should be able understand the impact of displaying pictures of US forces training soldiers of "country X" today on AFRICOM's website and soldiers from country X massacring civilians tomorrow on US public diplomacy. He should understand demographic trends (on a regional / country basis) intimately.

Finally, he should know Africa, not as "Africa" but as a continent of 54 different and unique nations.

I doubt such a person exists in the US Army.