Let’s grade Obama’s speech in Ghana on Saturday, July 11 relative to findings from the academic literature on aid & Africa. This is conveniently self-promoting as the current issue of the Journal of Economic Literature has a long literature survey article by yours truly, “Can the West Save Africa?” (Ungated version of the entire article here.) Of course, this is MY particular take on the literature, but it had to satisfy some hypercritical referees and editors who had no agenda.
“Africa’s future is up to Africans.”
A+. This is the big message of Obama’s speech and he nailed it. No, the West cannot save Africa. The JEL survey reviewed disappointments of the Big Push of foreign aid, structural adjustment, governance assistance, and post-conflict reconstruction, which makes it clear that Western actors do not have the knowledge or power to transform African societies, even if West can do some modest things to help African individuals (where there has already been success, especially in health and education).
“What we will do is increase assistance for responsible individuals and
institutions, with a focus on supporting good governance …. concrete solutions to corruption like forensic accounting, automating services, strengthening hotlines, and protecting whistle-blowers to advance transparency and accountability.”
B. On plus side, nice modesty of aid ambitions. On the minus side, seems to imply bad governance can be corrected with technical fixes, which overlook the systemic incentives that motivate the bad guys (as JEL lit review makes clear). Also assumes outsiders can tell good guys from bad guys, and surgically isolate them.
“Our $3.5 billion food security initiative is focused on new methods and technologies for farmers.”
C. Those who forget the past are condemned to hear a Santayana quote. The JEL survey makes clear the great efforts already expended on “new methods and technologies” for African agriculture (some going as far back as 1938), along with the universal agreement among observers that these efforts failed. Next step is to learn from this failure, try something new, not just repeat past attempts.
“Yet because of incentives – often provided by donor nations – many African doctors and nurses …work for programs that focus on a single disease. This creates gaps in primary care and basic prevention.”
A+, Obama nails another one. JEL survey makes clear the collapsing payoffs to the “vertical” approach to health (focusing on diseases rather than patients.)
“We welcome the steps that are being taken by organizations like the African Union and ECOWAS to better resolve conflicts, keep the peace, and support those in need. And we encourage the vision of a strong, regional security architecture that can bring effective, transnational force to bear when needed.”
D. Sigh. Obama seems to fall for the myth of the benevolent, neutral, outside, rapid-response “peacekeepers,” which is a leap of faith relative to the historical record that outside military intervention is rarely neutral and rarely available rapidly “when needed” (JEL article). Any given African country will not automatically see an outside force as neutral just because it is made up of other Africans.
“our Africa Command is focused not on establishing a foothold in the continent, but on confronting these common challenges to advance the security of America, Africa and the world.”
F. Double sigh. Why is Obama continuing Bush’s terrible idea of an Africa Command? Despite goodwill for Obama, goodwill for US military is nonexistent after a long history of Cold War Africa interventions, post-Cold War interventionist fumbles, reinforced by the more recent fiascos of Iraq and Afghanistan. Africans will never see US military (or any other Western force) as a neutral and benevolent force. They understand Great Power incentives better than the Powers themselves seem to.
“You can … make change from the bottom up…Freedom is your inheritance. Now, it is your responsibility to build upon freedom’s foundation. And if you do, we will look back years from now to places like Accra and say that this was the time when the promise was realized – this was the moment when prosperity was forged; pain was overcome; and a new era of progress began. This can be the time when we witness the triumph of justice once more. Thank you.”
A. Obama returns at the end back to his central idea. The speech seems written by different people with different views, which I’m sure it was. Let’s hope the other advocates lose out to this closing inspiration of Bottom Up efforts of creative, free individuals — contradicting the Top Down ideas like military intervention or expert fixes for corruption or agriculture — hopefully the view closest to Obama’s personal vision.
19 Comments
Good grading.
President Hu of China once answered to a primary student who asked why he becomes a president, saying “I didn’t want to be, I was elected out by all the Chinese people, haha haha.”
Grading: Z- plus liar
From what I hear, Obama does bring a fresh point of view to the table for growing African economies. I also agree with the analysis that he has several speech writers or special interests who do not agree and bring confusion to his speeches.
As for my own family in the US, myself having been on an aid mission to Africa, we respect our President whoever he may be. He is elected by the majority.
But Pres. Obama came from what has always been known as corrupt politics in Chicago since the gangland days of Prohibition and the Mafia. For him to reprimand anyone else in the world for corruption is ironic to say the least. More confusion for us all to digest.
I was expecting to see a grade for this passage, which was part of Obama’s speech: “Africa doesn’t need strongmen, it needs strong institutions.”
I would have given that passage an A for proper proritizing and focus, but with a cautionary note: The first thing strongmen do when they come to power(and too often even prior to formally assuming office)is to infest and take control of key institutions — Judiciary, The Treasury and Central Bank, Armed Forces, Police, Education Media (TV, Radio, key newspaper houses) and even the “Church” — with their cronies (usually co-ethnics, if not relatives)and like-minded self-aggrandizers and looters. Thus, there is dim hope for sustainable equity, justice and transparent governance in our institutions before the strongmen are themselves put out of action.
That is why, in the Kenyan case, the Waki Envelope, now in the hands of Luis Moreno-Ocampo at the Hague, has such great potential as a game-changer and catalyst for strong institutions.
“Yet because of incentives – often provided by donor nations – many African doctors and nurses …work for programs that focus on a single disease. This creates gaps in primary care and basic prevention.”
A+, Obama nails another one.
Yet in the every next sentence or two he lauds anti-malarial programs – another one disease-centered campaign – in Nigeria. As much as I agree that Obama’s speech is a fresh perspective on Western-African relations – I can’t help but imagine that his administration will simply be a continuation of that we have seen with previous American presidents. However, I don’t fault him – for Africans need to realise that he is an American president first. And to echo his sentiments, Africans will largely be responsible for shaping future relations with the West in a positive and sustainable direction.
Might not the purpose of the shout-outs to ECOWAS and the African Union simply be to gain more political popularity in Africa rather than to outline major tenants of Obama’s future plan for Africa? As an orator, Obama clearly name-drops a lot to gain widespread support; I don’t know that it means there will be particular future emphasis on these programs.
I don’t understand your issue with AFRICOM. Did you prefer to have responsibilities for Africa split between EUCOM, PACOM, and CENTCOM? If so, why?
CRITICISM BEGINS AT HOME
I hate the idea of lecturing others, even those in need of some lecturing, without addressing oneself first. -
So it’s o.k. to apologize for not coming to Rwanda’s rescue, as Clinton did – we could have done more – but add that neither America nor the world community can prevent Africans from killing Africans if they are determined to do it. Something he never said.
Fine to exhort Africans to responsibility as Obama did: “Now, it is your responsibility to build upon freedom’s foundation” but where’s our promise no longer to meddle in local elections and dispose popular local rulers who do not suit America’s fancy. as in the DRC, Burkina Faso, and numerous times earlier in Africa’s history.
Fine to emphasize good governance of aid projects as Obama does: “increase assistance for responsible individuals and institutions, with a focus on supporting good governance …. concrete solutions to corruption” but where’s the commitment to eliminate the systemic corruption in World Bank projects meant to increase Western sales at the expense of local development. I could give numerous examples of this for Obama’s use but I’ll let Dr. Easterly fill in the blanks, he was a principal economist at the Bank, not I.
So Obama, as Clinton before him got the issues half right. That’s an “F” in any Professors scoring. I don’t recall Bush even saying anything intelligent on the subject nor visiting Africa, an “incomplete.”
SS
TAKE SERIOUSLY THOSE WHO TAKE THEMSELVES SERIOUSLY!
Can you imagine the sense of responsibility and call to action if Obama had given the empowering type of statement above, acknowledging our own faults toward Africa and pledging to correct them while exhorting Africans to take responsibility for their own destiny. Now that would get attention.
Note: For those nay sayers I am not suggesting equivalency in our and the World Banks errors in Africa and the Africans own, only god can judge equivalency but suggesting that before reproaching someone else clean your own house. If for no other reason the other person might listen to you.
SS
I was disappointed by Obama’s speech more so for what he dis not say than for what he said.
He did not mention or apologize for the west’s complicity in Africa’s oppression. The picture of Mobutu and Reagan is on that still haunts me. Until the US is willing to not just tell us we should be doing something (which is true anyway) but to tell us, they will not continue to back governments that oppress Africa, to give legitimacy to their actions when it suits America’s interests, and to accept their stolen funds in their financial institutions, it remains the same message as Bush would have delivered but for a little emphasis on his skin color.
In any case we know why Obama actually came to Ghana, oil and Africom. The posturing is frankly disgusting. A revolutionary foreign policy towards Africa means that the West adopt a consistent political stance towards illegitimate African governments and not calculate their personal interests under the cover of offering altruistic help to Africa.
In conclusion, it is true that the West cannot save Africa, but it has it is fairly complicit in its destruction. Obama failed to take responsibility for that. It means the tinkering won’t end.
Life is complicated. Any one who denies the role of slavery or colonialism is always praised as a good black man in America. It’s a cheap way of gaining popularity. Obama chose that route. I am glad African intellectuals are beginning to speak out against Obama’s speech. Africa Uncensored has a beautiful piece here abut the speech. Read
http://africauncensored.com/obama-speech-on-africa.html
Life is complicated. Any one who denies the role of slavery or colonialism is always praised as a good black man in America. It’s a cheap way of gaining popularity. Obama chose that route. I am glad African intellectuals are beginning to speak out against Obama’s speech. Africa Uncensored has a beautiful piece here abut the speech. Read
http://africauncensored.com/obama-speech-on-Africa.html
Obama’s speech was refreshing. He addressed many realities in Africa. While people want to attack what he didn’t say and how America has contributed to some of the reasons Africa is where it is, they have not acknowled or reflected on the realities that he addressed on the continent. Excuses again. After spending ten years in Africa I have realized that assistance along will not transform Africa. Good governance is something lacking in many African countries. The political will to do the right thing is simply not there. Corruption is rampant on local, regional and national levels in many countries.People are hired to serve in ministies although they lack basic qualifications because of their political or tribal affiliations. The elites when sick go abroad because they know their health systems are poor. If I had my way I wouldn’t treat any of them in the West. Let them suffer like the poor in their countries. Maybe then they will do something.
Why has there not been an industrial or agriculture revolution in Africa. Oh the West is responsible for that too. Why are the health and education systems so poor? Inspite of the criticism of Western interference, Africa leaders have played a greater role in the underdevelopment of their countries. The people elect popular leaders that often don’t have a clue about good governance or vision. They have a responsibility to protect against foreign and domestic enemies, interference and oppression their own people. Many African leaders and the elites neglect andoppress their own people.
As far as the Rwandan genocide, why should Western countries come 3000 or more miles to save the Rwandan people when African countries didn’t lift one finger to intervene? What did Rwanda’s neighbor do? Nothing. What have they done in Sudan? Nothing. Shame on you. If anyone should be condemned it should be the African leaders who refused to intervene even though their fellow Africans were being slaughtered. And you wonder why the west doesn’t respect Africa and doesn’t expect much from it. I don’t think many of you respect yourselves. What do the African regional organizations do? Talk talk and talk. Who listens to them? Who implements their recommendations? Member states? I don’t think so. Although my roots are in Africa I am ashamed of what is going on their. Africa should be developed and take its rightful place in the international community. Eventually that will happened but I don’t see it coming for a long time. As far as being white in black skin. What ever, we have over come many obstacles that you can’t begin to imagine. Although racism and discrimation does exist, I would rather be poor, discrimated against, disabled, or deprived in America than be the same way in African countries. I have a chance in America. I would not have a chance in many African countries. I have seem the way many countries in Africa take care of their people it is horror in itself. I have seen many good efforts that go on, but for each one there are ten bad efforts that have been done. Hopefull the young educated professionals will do what their elders have been unabled to do… move their countries forward with all the speed they can muster. With all of the technology, experience, and skills in the world there is no excuse for incompetency, poor governance, and corruption, conflict, etc.
Bill
I share your reluctance to actively promote interventionism a la Collier, but you seem to imply that no security apparatus can do anything to prevent future Rwandas, Darfurs, Somalias. The OAU and ECOWAS have poor records, but does that mean only bilateral actions or no actions can be taken? Surely African security initiatives are preferable to US lead or UN lead initiatives.
@ Monique,
One can easily see that you are sincere in your criticism and have the good of the people at heart but I don’t believe that things are so simple in the relationship of Africa to the West.
Quite frequently when Africa has had really good leaders they have been assassinated or pushed out of power by the West. Start with Nhkruma in Ghana, Lumumba in DRC, Sankara in Burkina Faso. Destabilizing wars as that in the Eastern Congo have also had Western sanction and probably backing for the Rwandan invasion. Attempts to destabilize regimes like that of Angola also resulted in debilitating conflicts.
Once the progressive forces were swept away, dictators like Mobutu, or Campore have been kept in power with the acquiescence of the West in Mobutu’s case facilitating transfers of enormous wealth to the West. There is some evidence though inconclusive that even Taylor had some Western support in his attempt to take over Liberia. The history of relations is complex and one can hardly blame the West alone for bad governance but these incidences of harmful meddling have unfortunately not been rare and have cut the wind from out the sails of good governance and reform.
On the commercial front the West and World Bank have been even clearer in affirming their commercial interests while seeing that the continent accumulates massive debts that have prevented much independent development. A series of exploitive mining contracts in the DRC now being reviewed are but one example. Unlike commercial loans World Bank loans are repaid regardless of the success of the project which gives Bank managers little incentive to make good loans in the first place, many are insider deals, or to oversee their execution properly once made. The soverign African nation has to repay them not the failed businessmen or his collateral as would be the case for a Bank loan in the West.
The subject is too complex to do it full justice here but if you look around the world no place under the West’s sphere of influence has really prospered over the last few decades. China the outstanding exception has uniquely gone its own separate way and uniquely prospered. As you become even more familiar with the ins and outs of development keep your eyes open, all is not what meets the eye as national interest commercial and geopolitical trump cooperation and development every time.
SS
I wanted more from the speech on how to create those incentives, and agree that it was probably written by a posse.
I thought he was far more eloquent in off the cuff comments to http://www.allafrica.com on July 2.
Great grading on Obama’s speech. However, debate around the speech shouldn’t be reduced to finding out caused Africa’s problems.
To my my main point. I find your grading on Obama’s support for local conflict resolution initiatives, as those offered by AU and ECOWAS, too harsh. ECOWAS interventions in Liberia and Sierra Leone have proven to be worthwhile in the past. In that respect, what is needed to bring in results are strong institutions, even at regional levels, consistent with the Obama proposition. This would go a long way to ensure that the right things are done in every case and individual country sovereignty is not infringed upon. Africa arise!
good job
President Obama’s recent speech in Ghana placed welcome emphasis on the role of strong institutions in African progress. Recognizing the social and institutional prerequisites for economic prosperity, he noted that “development depends on good governance. Africans must improve “respect for rule of law and property rights,” he emphasized in a later video address.
I applaud President Obama’s promise to address the underlying problems in Africa, yet I wonder: was the speech a true declaration of a commitment to institutional change, or simply a continuation of status quo?
Elena Panaritis, former World Bank economist, current director of the Panel Group, and one of the few practitioners in institutional economics, eloquently outlines the critical impact of secure property rights and formal markets in her book “Prosperity Unbound.” Panaritis notes that lasting, positive change depends on a nation’s institutional foundations, namely a respect for private property and rules representing the social contract – that define how property is secured. Transforming informal to formal property rights has the potential to unlock billions of dollars in assets and encourage investment and entrepreneurship, as Obama himself noted in this address. In short, strong institutions are a must for economic and social development. They provide the foundation for lasting growth and poverty reductions and will effectively determine the impact of Obama’s $63 billion aid commitment. With the opportunity to make a lasting impact on the lives of Africans, Obama must lead the charge toward institutional reforms and real positive change.
President Obama’s recent speech in Ghana placed welcome emphasis on the role of strong institutions in African progress. Recognizing the social and institutional prerequisites for economic prosperity, he noted that “development depends on good governance. Africans must improve “respect for rule of law and property rights,” he emphasized in a later video address.
I applaud President Obama’s promise to address the underlying problems in Africa, yet I wonder: was the speech a true declaration of a commitment to institutional change, or simply a continuation of status quo?
Elena Panaritis, former World Bank economist, current director of the Panel Group, and one of the few practitioners in institutional economics, eloquently outlines the critical impact of secure property rights and formal markets in her book “Prosperity Unbound.” Panaritis notes that lasting, positive change depends on a nation’s institutional foundations, namely a respect for private property and rules representing the social contract – that define how property is secured. Transforming informal to formal property rights has the potential to unlock billions of dollars in assets and encourage investment and entrepreneurship, as Obama himself noted in this address. In short, strong institutions are a must for economic and social development. They provide the foundation for lasting growth and poverty reductions and will effectively determine the impact of Obama’s $63 billion aid commitment. With the opportunity to make a lasting impact on the lives of Africans, Obama must lead the charge toward institutional reforms and real positive change.