Obama in Africa: his neglect, the shadow of China and the Power Africa initiative

Obama has just finished his trip to Africa and has received lot of attention here, and also worldwide – perhaps more so than some of his other travels – mostly because of the rarity of the visit, the health of Mandela and perhaps even the increasing attention the continent is getting as the next big thing, however true that may be. Much of the reporting has had an 'about time' theme to it, especially from African journalists, who reflect some local sentiment in lamenting his neglect of the continent in his first term, and the lack of any major initiative – which we now have. Much of the reporting has also drawn parallels with China's engagement with Africa, many times combining the two themes of US neglect with China's active engagement and, if at least implicitly, weaving into a backdrop of a changing global order and Africa as a coveted ally and battleground. A lot of this is misplaced, there is a tendency to get a little over-excited here in Africa about a changing global order, in part because we have been flattered by China's attention and it feels good to be acknowledged as having a role to play. Things are changing, but probably a little slower than often expressed and the entire China story still has to run its course. Also, much of this is misplaced because the US still has a role to play in Africa and does seem to enjoy support that is perhaps not always commensurate with the changing trade statistics that show Africa's huge shift to China. Nonetheless, China has changed the way the US is seeing Africa, and that is reflected in the shape of the new power initiative.

Firstly, on Obama's seeming neglect, it is hard to blame him really.  For one he has always carefully managed his identity in US politics by not making a big thing out of it, or using it very judiciously to select groups and only then to tell a very specific story that is not threatening to other voter groups, especially white Americans. It was always going to be difficult for him to come straight off the bat in the first year or two with some African initiative lest he scare people about exactly where his loyalties lied – perhaps absurd, but there are some scary people who oppose him and whose followers are equally scary. I do not pretend to be an expert on US politics, but I imagine had he touted some policy encouraging African immigration to the US as a means of development (economic arguments better than the political), Donald Trump would be more than riled up. Identity politics was probably a minor reason however; he also had wars to end, the Arab Spring and an economy to save and he was never going to be re-elected on a non-immediate foreign policy achievement. Let's not drive him too hard on this issue then, he is here now, fresh into his second term and his power initiative could be promising, caveats later.

The other focus on the reporting has been making comparisons with China. This is perfectly natural, China's expansion into Africa has been rapid this last decade. But there are some big issues on that front and China is grappling with the consistency's of its own policies and trying to win public support from an at time suspicious local populace. The graph below is interesting, although the data is old (2008, weighted), it is still revealing how equal, and overall slightly ahead the US is compared to China in public perceptions, despite the much larger role China plays in most economies relative to the US. This is from the Afrobarometer survey, and only shows those answering at the most positive extreme – but other categories were roughly similar; 30% in each country had no opinion. A recent Gallup poll highlighted the US' popularity in Africa too.

To say that his trip is about playing catch up or is a reaction to Chinese expansion is tenuous. The US wants different things from Africa (not raw materials, although arguably allies) and it still has much prestige and soft power to draw on. The world order has not changed so much that there is a zero-sum game amongst great powers that allows only one major bilateral relationship. Nonetheless, the shape of the initiative that Obama has chosen to pursue is interesting in its departure from the humanitarian agenda's of past Presidents, and the governance agenda of Western agencies that has dominated development engagements recently. It is infrastructural and focused on trade, not dissimilar to the Chinese model that has won it many favours in Africa. Perhaps China's use of such a model inspired him, or perhaps it is just a focus he wants to pursue given the impact it could have – indeed there is a great need for power in Africa, with many development gains on offer (both macro and micro – Dinkleman has an interesting paper on this.)

There are many types of power though, and it is not clear exactly where the Power Africa initiative will aim to strike the balance. Reading the White House factsheet, there does seem a focus on a variety of projects, that include clean and renewable (technology intensive) solutions that are both large and small in scale. Given Obama came very close to vetoing the World Bank loan to South Africa for the Medupi Coal Power Plant (the largest dry-cooled plant in the world, turning some of the world's dirtiest coal into gaseous form – like many great economic transformations before it), it is hard to imagine these types will be on offer. Which is a pity.  This is not to say that there is no room for the technologically cool and exciting small-scale, renewable projects many Western consultants will enthusiastically write up, but Africa needs cheap and reliable base load power. And we have the fossil fuels on hand to match it. Centralised (electrical) power is almost always more efficient and cheaper, and while with grid power comes grid responsibility (to paraphrase the equally inspirational Ben Parker), it is arguably easier than micro-managing and maintaining smaller sites. It requires a grid, and expertise – which many African states have, at least centrally located, and this is infrastructure we will need if we are ever going to transform into an industrial society and enjoy the wealth that it offers. For this though, $7bn is no where near the almost $400bn the AfDB estimates Africa needs for infrastructure. It is a start and the trade and infrastructure based nature of it should be welcomed, but Africa must ensure that the best development gains are honestly appraised and realised and that the initiative does not descend into pet projects of development practitioners and the American clean energy industry who ignore the economic development – environment trade off that sadly does currently exist.