Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
Download MP3
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton finished up her 11-day tour of Africa today, after a final stop in Cape Verde. The World’s Jeb Sharp reports that the trip was strong on rhetoric but not especially ground-breaking in terms of policy.
Read the Transcript
This text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.
MARCO WERMAN: I’m Marco Werman. This is The World. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ended her Africa trip today, after a final stop in Cape Verde. It was a long voyage: 7 countries in 11 days. And all along, Secretary Clinton urged African leaders to embrace good governance, battle corruption and support democracy. She also spoke out against atrocities, and in support of governments battling terrorism. The trip was not especially groundbreaking in terms of policy. But it did earn Secretary Clinton good reviews, as we hear from The World’s Jeb Sharp.
JEB SHARP: Many Africa analysts were impressed by the ambitious itinerary and Hillary Clinton’s tough love, no-nonsense approach. Robert Rotberg teaches at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. He says no Secretary of State has ever spent 11 days focusing on Africa.
ROBERT ROTBERG: That’s remarkable in and of itself, simply the time. She’s covered enormous ground, she’s put the US front and center in almost all the conflict areas and she has put the continent on notice that the United States is watching and will help Africans help themselves. This is an extension of Obama’s inaugural address when the President said that “if countries would unclench their fist, we would join them.”
SHARP: Rotberg sees a substantial change in emphasis. So does Akwe Amosu, Africa advocacy director at the Open Society Institute in Washington.
AKWE AMOSU: This is not going to be an administration that pursues business as usual in Africa. There’s a willingness to get into the weeds and really engage with actual real-life problems. We’re not just seeing the usual pro forma reference to corruption. Nobody could accuse Secretary Clinton of having, you know, tried to avoid the hard issues on this trip. And from my point of view, that’s extremely welcome.
SHARP: Amosu says the trip was mostly about delivering a message, not about delivering aid. Although she points out there was some of that too, including a $17-million dollar program to help victims of sexual violence in eastern Congo.
AMOSU: That issue is an absolute atrocity and an outrage, and it’s very, very good to see it getting some serious attention. And while the really important thing is to stop the rape, not just look after the victims, I think she did something important there and sent an important signal.
SHARP: But there was something missing from the trip, Amosu concludes. She’s not alone in wishing she’d heard a bit more self-criticism from US officials, including Secretary Clinton – and even President Obama before her.
AMOSU: It’s widely believed, even among the strongest civil society actors in Africa, that the US and the West have been directly responsible for some of the problems that Africa faces. And what we’re not hearing is a message from US officials saying, “We know we’re a part of the problem and we’re going to change the way we do business in the future.”
SHARP: What Amosu’s referring to is a decades-long pattern of dealing with Africa in the context of larger US priorities. James Mittelman of American University says that pattern is continuing even today.
JAMES MITTELMAN: The priorities have been to fight an enemy of the United States. During the Cold War, of course it was the Soviet Union. Today, it’s defined as terrorism. There has been an emphasis on stopping radical movements — previously, the liberation movements; today, Al Qaeda. And there has been a priority given to sharing in Africa’s bounty.
SHARP: One contentious aspect of US policy in Africa is whether it’s too focused on military aid and counter-terrorism. Abdi Samatar, of the University of Minnesota, says a good example is American military support for the transitional government in Somalia.
ABDI SAMATAR: A country that doesn’t need any more guns but needs pressure both from opposition and on the government to reconcile with one another. So what you begin to see are patterns that are sort of continuing the policies of the past.
SHARP: The real question, Africa analysts say, is whether the Obama administration will make a break with that past, and just how close it can come to having its policy match its rhetoric. For The World, I’m Jeb Sharp.
Copyright ©2009 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.
Discussion
No comments for “Clinton ends Africa tour”