The following exchange with Rep. Donald M. Payne (Democrat - New Jersey) is one of an ongoing series of conversations about Africa policy in the next U.S. presidential administration that AllAfrica is publishing during the current American election campaign.
Payne, who became New Jersey's first African American member of Congress when he was elected to represent the 10th Congressional District in 1988, is the ranking Democrat on the House Africa Subcommittee and the point person on Africa for the Congressional Black Caucus. During his 16 years in Congress, Payne has made dozens of visits to almost every part of Africa, the latest this month to Sudan, Chad and Ethiopia. The interview took place before his most recent trip, which included Sudan's troubled Darfur region.
You were a cosponsor of the House resolution adopted unanimously last month declaring what is happening in Darfur is 'genocide'. What is the significance of the resolution - and a similar one adopted by the U.S. Senate?
People have held back from using the word 'genocide' - for fear, I guess, of what this declaration entails. But Congress, both Houses, have now said clearly that what is happening in western Sudan is a systematic destruction of a group of people - black Muslims.
This happened because of a bipartisan, bicameral coalition of people from all parts of the political spectrum who came together to bring the crisis in Darfur to a level of awareness that was not seen 10 years ago during the Rwanda Genocide. We must remind ourselves of what happened in Rwanda. We didn't stop genocide from occurring in 1994, and we haven't stopped genocide from occurring in 2004 in Darfur. The key difference between the two situations is that this time the Congress is doing what is right.
But we can't stop by declaring 'genocide'. People are dying every day and we - I mean the United States and the international community - we must find a way to protect of civilians. We must feed the hungry and provide the sick with adequate medical attention and supplies. We need to make sure that once this is all over, people can return home and begin to rebuild what little they had before. That means, we have to help with development assistance to address some of the resource deficiencies such as clean water and proper irrigation so that these conflicts do not occur in the future.
The UN Security Council has given the government in Khartoum until the end of this month to act. Do you trust that government to act to protect the populace in Darfur?
I have my doubts. We have to remember that this government gave sanctuary to Osama bin Laden from 1991-1996, allowing him to build his terror network worldwide. The mastermind of the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993. The mastermind of the 1993 bombing, Sheikh Abdel Rahman, who was sentenced to life in 1995, received his visa in Khartoum and reportedly was a guest of a senior Sudanese government official for several weeks. Of the 15 men indicted for that attack, five are Sudanese nationals - and these Sudanese nationals had strong ties to Sudanese diplomats stationed at the time in the Sudan mission to the United Nations.
Members of an Egyptian terrorist group that tried to assassinate President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt while he was in Ethiopia for an OAU Summit in 1995, is believed to have been given safe haven in Sudan to prepare for their mission, and their passports were prepared in Khartoum, according to a United Nations report.
The point of listing all of this is to show a pattern. This is a regime that does not care about human lives and to think that they will stop at Darfur we are fooling ourselves. We must begin to get serious about our dealings with the Government of Sudan. We must let the government of Sudan know that we are watching and we will not let them get away with it.
We haven't heard much about Africa during the presidential campaign thus far, either from the Democrats who competed for the nomination or from the president. Why is that?
I'm not sure that Africa's ever been discussed in the presidential primaries debates. There is normally little if any focus on international affairs. And other than Iraq, that's been true this year as well. We aren't hearing discussion about Africa in either party, but it's hard to get attention for Africa in an election year.
I think the tone was set in January in President Bush's State of the Union address, without Africa being mentioned at all. That was a contrast with last year's State of the Union address when the president talked about a lot about his new HIV /AIDS initiative and Africa. As a matter of fact, I think he talked about Africa as much as any other place in the world outside of Iraq.
How do you evaluate the Bush administration's dealings with Africa?
I wonder whether there's a true commitment. They say the right things about many issues but I just don't know if there's any sustainability. I look at their personnel choices and see people who seem to be well-suited for positions and not getting them. You take Johnny Carson [former ambassador to Kenya, Zimbabwe and Uganda]. He's probably the most natural person to be the ambassador to South Africa, but I don't think he was even considered. Take [Deputy Assistant Secretary of State] Charlie Snyder, a real veteran, not really being considered for the appointment for assistant secretary. I'm not sure what their agenda is or how committed they are to tackling some of the toughest issues.
What should Africa policy look like in a Democratic administration?
The first priority has to be the HIV/Aids pandemic. There are still nothing as devastating since the black plague in the middle centuries as is HIV/Aids in Africa today. The spread of the disease is creating large numbers of orphans and devastating economies. In many countries, you don't or soon won't have enough able-bodied men and women to do subsistence farming, which is what Africa depends upon to feed itself. They're losing whole groups of teachers and even the professional class. So I think HIV/Aids is by far the number one issue.
The increased funding that Congress has approved for fighting HIV/Aids is very important. And it is vital that this process not be politicized. We really should be providing most, if not all of this funding through the Global Aids Fund. They have the set-up on the ground in every country. They can, I think, do a better job evaluating all of the proposals that come in and dispensing the money, rather than have the United States set up its own structure in every place.
There are other issues that need real attention, of course. Infrastructure is so important. Health care, if it's ever going to be dispensed properly, there has to be infrastructure. Roads are just terrible in Africa, practically anywhere you go. We need to improve on the governance in Africa. And we need to deal with Africa's devastating external debt. And there's development in general and trade.
On the question of development, you have expressed concern that foreign assistance is being shifted from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) in favor of the Millennium Challenge Account.
I am concerned that the heavy focus on the Millennium Challenge Account is weakening USAID and politicizing foreign assistance. It's always been somewhat political, but now even more so. Qualifying for Millennium Challenge funds has nothing to do with how bad problems are in your country. USAID has tended to do that in spite of bad governance. If the money went through to NGOs, it was sort of guaranteed to get to the people. Now, we'll see countries that are in dire straits - take a place like Haiti - that will would never qualify under the Millennium Challenge program.
You cosponsored the African Growth and Opportunity Acceleration Act, or Agoa 3, that Congress adopted and the president signed last month. How can Agoa help Africa?
Great strides have been made over the last decade in Africa, and if Africa is going to become a major player in the global economy, these positive movements must be promoted. People have to learn to look beyond the stereotypes and see what African has to offer. That's the way to encourage increased foreign investment, more trade and ultimately, real development for Africa. Agoa is important in helping to position Africa to be more competitive in the global markets - textiles and others.
So you see trade as an important priority for U.S. policy towards Africa?
Yes, trade is very key. If Africa's going to be able to move forward, agriculture is vital. But the subsidies that developed countries have in place - they total something like $350 billion - is just devastating for Africa and for other areas, as well. In the Caribbean, I recently saw first-hand that it costs more to raise chickens in St. Lucia than to buy them from the United States. The poorest countries simply can't compete like this.
That's one reason we see such a lack of growth in inflation in this country, which helps the consumers. But it's unfair. There's no level playing field for countries that are struggling to exist, and there doesn't even seem to be any interest in their failures. At one time Sudan raised enough grain to supply large parts of the continent. In Nigeria, there's no reason agriculture couldn't thrive and feed that country's large population. Africa has to have the opportunity to thrive through trade.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
At the same time,. we can't ignore Africa's debt, much of it accumulated by dictators who are no longer in power But the debt remains, and it has major financial consequences for these countries. It impacts their efforts to improve health care, to support universal education, even to attract investment and promote trade.
What do you think about increased interest and presence in Africa by the U.S. military?
Well, when it comes to fighting terrorism, it seems that money is available. It's much more difficult to get more money in the pot for health issues or education or things of that nature. I'm not surprised that the Pentagon has a lot of concern about Africa now. I've talked with some of the generals involved and frankly was surprised by their interest in development. They want to see education improve and they're concerned about HIV/Aids and its impact.. If we could broaden the war on terrorism by talking about education, by having an alternative to war and propaganda, I think that would have a positive impact.
Now that peace has come to Liberia, where you visited earlier this year, are you hopeful about that country's future?
I think that Liberia is going to be able to succeed. One problem Liberia faces is that the leadership positions in the interim government are not determined by qualifications for the job but by their ability to mobilize combatants [during the fighting]. Some of these leaders have not shown any real concern about the country but seem to have been motivated by personal greed in a lot of instances.
But I think that Gyude Bryant [the interim leader] is really trying to make it work, and the United Nations is playing a critical role. We have to support them and help insure that there is now a return to war in that country. We have a long history and an obligation to remain engaged. The whole area, including Sierra Leone and Cote d'Ivoire, is very fragile. It must not be neglected.
