Stan,
So why do US presidents visit Israel?Presidential or State visits have their place. But, not in donor countries. As a taxpayer and having had the unfortunate task of preparing for such visits, I see no justification (1984 to 2013) regardless of the timeframe.
Kingjaja,
Outside of the obvious answer which is very political, they are not exactly a donor nation. Foreign Military Financing make it not a donor nation. One needs a better understanding of how DSCA:http://www.dsca.mil/ works and how it is financed. That is, in a nut shell, non-appropriated funds.
A quick look at Wiki gives you a glimpse of the presidential trips and reasons.
Regards, Stan
Originally Posted by KingJaja
Last edited by davidbfpo; 10-29-2013 at 03:50 PM. Reason: Author's request
If you want to blend in, take the bus
Stan,
I thought the donor nation was the nation that gives?Outside of the obvious answer which is very political, they are not exactly a donor nation. Foreign Military Financing make it not a donor nation. One needs a better understanding of how DSCA:http://www.dsca.mil/ works and how it is financed. That is, in a nut shell, non-appropriated funds.
A quick look at Wiki gives you a glimpse of the presidential trips and reasons.
Regards, Stan
Okay, that aside - we've established a few key points.
1. US trade with Africa is only a fraction of its total trade with the World.
2. Africa is full of aid recipient nations.
3. US presidential visits to Africa cost too much & involve very difficult logistics.
4. Consequently, the African continent (especially Sub-Saharan Africa) isn't worth a US presidential visit. It is a waste of tax payers money - as the money is better spent on funding aid initiatives in recipient nations.
5. In other words, Sub-Saharan Africa is a strategic backwater with limited relevance to the United States of America.
6. The US thinks that some form of military engagement is important in this strategic backwater - hence AFRICOM, which helps in counter-terrorism, removing explosive ordnance & doing (exactly what, I'm not clear on) in Congo DRC.
7. If the Chinese or Indians want to waste their taxpayers money on presidential visits to this strategic backwater - it isn't the problem of the US taxpayer - who is yet to communicate to the US State Department that it should stop getting worried about Chinese etc senior leadership interaction with African leaders (especially when compared with the limited face to face interaction with African & US leaders).
8. Since all that is needed is a phone call - President Obama should ensure he phones African leaders regularly.
Now that we've established all this, we'll move over to other topics.
Kingjaja,
Boy have we been busy today
Lost in translation… and yet, we are both speaking English !
The donor nation in my former diplo speak is the recipient (nation or country).
On to your questions and statements !
Very true, but the sources of funding are dependent on the host nation (recipient) and the Country Team (Members of the US Embassy). Some harmony actually exists there. If the host country doesn’t request, or, the Country Team does not suggest, then there is no funding despite the fact that the State Department offered a program or avenue to fund eligible countries. Even then, the process is scrutinized in DC and may not make the grade. Human rights violations kill the project dead in its tracks. That said, most African nations will not make the grade unless someone gets real creative at writing.
Presidential visits are normally offset in most host countries which could be a contributing factor to why such costlier visits are nixed before they happen. For example in the former Zaire, where humanitarian cargo flights were being assessed over flight and landing fees. “I’m sending you free food and clothing, yet you are charging me to land?” WTF ? Now we can discuss logistics as much as 4 weeks prior to and up to 2 weeks following the visit. The worst person you would ever like to meet is a presidential or spouse’s strap hanger (pre-deployed 20 year-old prima donnas charged with making sure they get what they want and you are blamed for everything that goes wrong). Ungrateful, rude and abysmal all come to mind. I wouldn’t wish that experience on my worst enemy. You have no clue ! The host country and her teams generally make life easier, but, not in Sub-Sahara. A team of Presidential Guard and Guard Civil begin beating bystanders and forbid you from entering a Children’s Hospital. I could go on.
Paradoxically ! IMO, it is a waste of money and we also have people with no health insurance and no home to live in. Sorry, but I would prefer our people had a place to live and table to sit at for dinner if we are going to spend my tax dollars. Those presidential trips to France and Israel probably don’t sit well with a lot of Americans, but some sort of politics plays a bigger role and most would understand that. The day that Nigeria joins NATO, things will get totally out of hand and you will be sick of the visits, and not just from the USA. My point much like above in para 3 is we are donating. Make it easier to explain, support and visit. Or, forget it.
I think I sufficiently covered this one.
We killed this subject way back when. For years there was a command known as EUCOM (European Command) that had not only Europe but Africa as well. AFRICOM is little more than a mini EUCOM tasked with handling Africa. Both EUCOM and AFRICOM answer to the Dept of Defense among others. Assistance funding is handled by the Dept of State. It makes no difference how many stars your General has in EUCOM or AFRICOM if State does not agree. AFRICOM and the host country come up with a plan and State approves and funds. If either party disagrees, it’s dead. We do not, nor can we, simply start training your LEO and Military without you. Is there something strategic at play ? I would hope so, or there would be no reason to spend so much money. The removal and destruction of UXO in DRC and now Mali were at the request of the host nation. No capability, no money, no enthusiasm, etc. Nigeria the same this year. Would it be better to re-watch videos of a Nigerian policeman being blown to bits because of lack of experience and training, not to mention lack of equipment that your government has yet to fund ? You insist that our minescule 93 million is not needed, but your claims are based on your limited knowledge of what is really needed. You posted and asked me why that Nigerian policeman had to die such a gruesome death and I, in grave detail, explained the circumstances. Your government needs to train her personnel and needs to equip your LEO and military with $25,000 bomb suits. That being said, you need about 40 bomb suits per State. Now maybe you understand what I do and I am not politically charged with this task, just paid to do so.
I personally don’t care and didn’t see anything that I would pursue as a president. I have communicated my thoughts in an official capacity and I doubt that would be sufficient to change anything. Then during the Rwandan genocide and now in relative calm. Why would I think my public voice would turn heads at the Capital ? Now imagine people like my sister who has yet to travel outside of America. Even if she had an opinion about support to Africa (which she doesn’t) how could she possible support her view and why would she march on DC ? American tax payers want to know where all their money is going and 100 million for a plane trip is a bit much. If the POTUS wants to travel, I recommend he take economy class and go alone.
I sadly do not have access to Obama’s phone bill, but I am sure the NSA does
When I was in Zaire, those phone calls occurred monthly at $6.00 a minute. And when things began to go to Sierra in Zaire, so did the phone calls.
Agreed !
Regards, Stan
If you want to blend in, take the bus
Africom reaching out
Sequestration means Africa comes to Washington DC, well nearly:Link:http://africacenter.org/2013/10/afri...rican-nations/Ambassadors, diplomats, and military officers representing 45 African nations participated in a 90-minute roundtable discussion October 23, 2013, with three of the top U.S. officials engaged in U.S.-Africa relations.....
There's a wide selection of programs, courtesy of "Uncle Sam":http://africacenter.org/home/
davidbfpo
davidbfpo,
Another group session?
On March 28, Presidents Macky Sall, Joyce Banda, Ernest Bai Koroma & Jos Maria Pereira Neves met President Obama in a group at the White House.
Predictably, Macky Sall, the leader of Senegal (one of Africa's more important nations) got a LOT of flack from Senegalese media for going to the White House as part of a tour group.
There's something that the US doesn't get; that the Chinese seem to get - US might unwittingly be sending out the vibes that it is too busy to visit African officials, so it prefers to seem them in groups.
This is never intentional but, I think diplomats need to be careful about that - Africa is very diverse & it is very difficult to cover the ground in a group.
That’s fair. But there is also the practicality that the President of the United States is both the nation’s head of state and head of government. There are so many hours in a day and days in a term.
If you don’t read the newspaper, you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper, you are misinformed. – Mark Twain (attributed)
President(s) from Africa, which countries?
I wondered who three of the African leaders were, Ms Banda was easy. So the White House press release was found and has the spin on why they met:davidbfpo,
Another group session?
On March 28, Presidents Macky Sall, Joyce Banda, Ernest Bai Koroma & Jos Maria Pereira Neves met President Obama in a group at the White House.
Predictably, Macky Sall, the leader of Senegal (one of Africa's more important nations) got a LOT of flack from Senegalese media for going to the White House as part of a tour group.
There's something that the US doesn't get; that the Chinese seem to get - US might unwittingly be sending out the vibes that it is too busy to visit African officials, so it prefers to seem them in groups.
This is never intentional but, I think diplomats need to be careful about that - Africa is very diverse & it is very difficult to cover the ground in a group.Today President Obama welcomed President Ernest Bai Koroma of Sierra Leone, President Macky Sall of Senegal, President Joyce Banda of Malawi, and Prime Minister Jos Maria Pereira Neves of Cape Verde to the White House. The United States has strong partnerships with these countries based on shared democratic values and shared interests. Each of these leaders has undertaken significant efforts to strengthen democratic institutions, protect and expand human rights and civil liberties, and increase economic opportunities for their people.
davidbfpo
Kingjaja,
I'd like to have a link to that because I can't find anything even in the French press. There are gobs of news regarding Obama's gay rights during his trip to Senegal, but nothing about President Sall and his so-called tour to DC.
Would be great if you linked those articles concerning predictable outcomes. Otherwise, it's mere innuendo.
.
Regards, Stan
If you want to blend in, take the bus
Tough Love - The African Sun Times
Kingjaja,
I think I found your twin at The Sun Times.
Regards, Stan“The question really is what should Africans and the African continent realistically expect from the President Barack Obama administration? My answer to that is TOUGH LOVE.
It would appear it is the ‘TOUGH LOVE’ closeted with abhorrent silence that President Obama has chosen to practice. It is beginning to appear that after his eight years in office, his legacy to Africa would amount to zero achievement, compared to his two white predecessors, Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.
If you want to blend in, take the bus
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks