Bush's African safari: What was it upto?

Starting in Senegal and continuing through South Africa, Botswana, Uganda and Nigeria Bush pledged aids for fighting AIDS and trade concession, sparking new hope and bringing a healing touch to Africa's sufferings. His expansive disposition offering aids, his refreshingly sunny assessment of the continent's future and his administration's ambitious commitment to fight AIDS in Africa could not but catch the imagination of a new generation of Africans. As President Bush casts himself as successor to President Clinton's ambitious engagement with the continent, the mood of the Africans seems conciliatory notwithstanding their apprehension that another imperial warlord is assuming the overlordship of the continent.

Because although war-lords have a bad name but not all they do is bad, their basic premise is that a good gun is better than a good law. Also goes in tandem a horse trading: you give me oil, I will get you aid for AIDS treatment. And at the top of the list for Bush's horse trading in Africa are oil and military bases. Bush wants access to oil and installation of US troops to make the region secure against terrorism. Many Africans find it innocuous and a perfect deal.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

Bush clan and the members of the present presidential team, some of whom were connected with oil industry have great sense about oil and can instinctively find a wherewithal for its exploration. Or else how could a task force headed by Vice President Dick Cheney link African oil imports to US national security -- something pro-Israeli neo-conservative strategists advocated since September 11, 2001. Off West African coast lie vast deposit of high quality crude suited to US' oil refineries. Now a US investment in African oil production is being projected as a tool for development. As the US seeks to reduce dependence on the Gulf oil some $200 bn in revenues is also expected to flow into African government treasuries. To the Africans battered by chronic poverty it is the biggest bonanza in their history and it will dwarf western aid and will provide unique opportunity to alleviate their poverty.

For Mr Bush it is an excellent convergence: weaning the US off Saudi Arabia whom the US never fully trusted, particularly after 9/11 and also an objective of war on terror while helping Africa and scoring points with black voters in the run-up to his re-election campaign. The black Americans have already hailed the development as good news for Africa. The horse-treading or not, for both sides nothing could be a better deal.

But the elderly-Africans conversant with the continent's chequered past aptly conclude that oil and prosperity seldom mixed in Africa. Indeed oil had been a devastating fact for development in Africa: It concentrated wealth and produced disincentive for any other type of development. Nor did it help democracy since entrenched elites were likely to lose much more than office if they had to lose control over the government. Obviously there was slide of the politics towards authoritarian rule. Also the economic shadow effect of oil had been negative and it all wound up creating more poverty. Oil rich Nigeria and its 100 m poor is the case to testify the point.

For two decades Angola, Nigeria and Gabon pumped billions of barrels of oil only to discover that it fuelled corruption and poverty, a phenomenon the academics called 'paradox of plenty'. Sub-Saharan Africa is in the throes of a bigger oil rush that could launch afresh cycle of conflict and misrule instead of development and prosperity. Can the US and all other western governments make any difference in the prevailing trend? The Africans are non-plussed to find an answer while the west is never at rest in pouring down their pet sermons of transparency and good governance. In the meantime, as the seismic data suggest, billions of barrels lie offshore prompting comparisons to Brunei and Kuwait, the lure is irresistible and oil companies are expected to bid at least $300 m for exploration rights alone. Few in Africa share the US' exhortation that Africa will benefit from oil. They look beyond the rhetorics of Colin Powell who routinely told the African leaders last month to end corruption to benefit from their oil bonanza and see Washington playing by the old rules: dodgy deals, amoral alliances and military engagement. In Sao Tome, a tiny island off West African coast which is virtually floating on oil the signs are already ominous. It astonished industry analysts by awarding hugely favourable term to an obscure Texas oil firm, ERHC, since taken over by a Nigerian, with no drilling rigs.

Mr Bush also offered aid for AIDS victims and enhanced access to US markets. This is horse trading at its best. The fine print on the offer of US market-access has some interesting feature: the benefit for African producers is actually neutralised by the distortions resulting from US government subsidies to its farmers; these subsidies are in fact larger than many African economies, and they are three times as large as total US aid to Africa as a whole. America's generous handouts and subsidies to its vast agrobusiness push African farmers out of global and local markets, depriving poor economies of income and employment. All this drains President Bush's rhetoric of its good intent. In final reckoning aid for AIDS might be one item in entire horse trading that will actually bring benefit to Africa. But it has nothing to do with the noblesse oblige of imperial warlords. After a month of his African odyssey the hapless Africans, it is not surprising, are still trying to determine whether Mr Bush was there to 'plunder or provide.'

Brig ( retd) Hafiz is former DG of BIISS.