Politics - Navigating U.S. Africa policy: Rhetoric verses Reality

The recent statement by the top official of the Obama Administration Wendy Sherman, the Undersecretary for Africa Affairs reflects the unofficial policy of the Administration than the President's public statements or the Department of State's official report.

The Undersecretary's  unfounded praise for the Ethiopian ruling regime's 'democratic credential weeks before the upcoming May 2015 election  and the tone of her subsequent respond to Washington Post Editorial criticism didn't do justice to reform the crises in governance and human right violation of the regime. More shamefully, it negate the sovereignty and rights of the people of Ethiopia in favor of an authoritarian regime -- further exposing the unspoken agenda of the Administration towards the people.

The international community apathy in general do not help to find out who may be behind sustaining dictatorship for over two decades nor the looming crises to come in the country riddle with ethnic strife and poverty brought by the regime.

The broder dilemma of the Administration reconciling the public rhetoric (democracy) and private deeds (partnership with authoritarian regime) and the grinding lobbying interest groups exert behind the seen is narrated by Sarah Repucci of Freedom  House  article titled Giving Dictators a Veto on U.S. Democracy Aid. It pierce into the underline force that drives the U.S. policy and the crises looming in Africa and elsewhere.

The issue she raised was why the Obama Administration requested to remove Brownback Amendment that overrides the objections of foreign governments how U.S. democracy assistance for independent advocacy groups is spent.

Repucci noted;

"When the Obama administration sent its budget request to Congress this year, it featured a remarkable omission. The request for 2015 does not include language that has appeared for nearly 10 years, stating that U.S. democracy assistance will not be bound by the approval of foreign governments. This lapse threatens the interests—and potentially the lives—of people working to promote political freedom around the world."

Accordingly, quoting  a State Department spokesperson' defense on the Administration request to remove the Amendment in Daily Beast's  article;

“the administration’s requests frequently recommend that Congress remove restrictions and requirements that constrain flexibility to manage foreign policy, are overly burdensome, and/or are unnecessary due to policy or procedures already in place.”

The same Daily Beast's article highlighting President Obama's  contradiction 'speaking in Poland during an European visit a week early pledging to support democracy movements around the world.

'In a passionate speech he [Obama] promised';

“Wherever people are willing to do the hard work of building democracy—from Tbilisi to Tunis, from Rangoon to Freetown—they will have a partner"

The discrepancies can only be attributed to heavy-handed lobbying many authoritarian regimes exert on the Obama Administration's public rhetoric that contradicts the actual policy decisions.  But, the outright  underwriting of U.S. policy foreign regime's enjoy in shaping important decisions is unprecedented to the point where top official of the  Administration willing to travel to Africa to praise authoritarian regimes as Undersecretary Sherman did on the behalf of the Ethiopian regime that won by over 99% votes in all four past elections since it came to power 1991.

She said;

"Ethiopia is one of the fastest growing economies on the African continent. Ethiopia is a democracy that is moving forward in an election that we expect to be free, fair, credible open and inclusive in ways Ethiopia has moved forward in strengthening its democracy every time there is an election. It gets better and better".

The breakdown to monitor lobbying U.S. Congress and the Executive Branch and the little attention given by the mainstream Medias and advocacy groups is unprecedented. More troubling; the number of foreign agents spending millions of dollars to influence U.S. policy, particularly African regimes that receive substantial U.S. foreign Aid for their budgetary support and to pay for basic services to sustain their respective populations. 

The recent allegation the Clinton Foundation accepting Million of dollars donation on behalf of the Ethiopian government  is an eye opener to many possible unreported donations to come out. It isn't clear how it influenced Secretory Clinton's decisions on U.S. policy towards the regime.

But, Secretory Clinton on the helm of the Administration's foreign policy and her successor John Kerry following her footsteps while top officials  of the Administration making unsubstantiated statement and coddling up with the Ethiopian regime known for its atrocities, corruption and human right violation, it wouldn't be difficult to connect the dots; foreign interest groups -- as small as African regimes influencing  policy decisions  and undermining U.S. interest.

Many Foundations and philanthropists' unholy relationship with African depots and the fund raising mechanism from vested interest doesn't reconcile with the public image they portray. Millions of dollar donation from regimes, companies and individuals operating mining and agribusiness interest with questionable business practices incompatible with the spirit of charity and helping the poor is becoming more and more the norm than the exception.

The newly published book by Peter Schweitzer titled Clinton Cash and the negative Media coverage it generated and the foot dragging that followed not to disclose the donors further tarnished the image of the Foundation and raise more questions on the Secretory Clinton's role on the Administration's policy decisions in Africa . It raised dark cloud on every Foundation that accept fund from scruples individuals and corporations with direct economic interest in poor governed nations in Africa and around the world.

The mainstream Medias are not immune from criticism either-- courted to write favorable articles on behalf of foundations, corporate donors and ruling regimes. The Maryland Institute article on Journalists' Role Reversal: Dining at White House on the US-Africa Leadership Summit last year clearly blurred journalists' role to influence their reporting. Other mainstream Medias as major networks as CNN are not free of accusations for yellow journalism.  

The Obama Administration, Foundations and philanthropist are increasingly going the opposite direction to the aspiration of the people of Africa for good governance and democracy -- as they struggle to put favorable light on despotic and corrupt regimes.

Multinational corporations and organizations funding Aid agencies and projects that operate in poor countries while lobbying governments for favorable policy to business interest appear to be the main driving force influencing Foundations' activities  and western governments' policy in Africa and elsewhere.

Outspent, outmaneuvered and threatened, advocacy groups and grassroots journalists around the world are stuck between a hard place and a rock -- struggling to raise the peoples' cause of democratic governance, transparent development and human right protections with very little successes.

Unfortunately, no one knows why western governments, foundations and philanthropists choose to take the lower political and moral road not to see the bigger picture -- sustainable development and political stability can't be achieved under despotic regimes.

As political instability and economic insecurity continue in authoritarian ruled nations around the world, Western governments and international aid agencies burying their head in the sand and hoping for the better is naïve at best reckless at worst.   Such shortsighted policy and the lack of political will to reverse it would have far more implications for the future of humanity than what the eye can see.