On January 22, 2008 the Security and Development Workgroup and Africa Regional Roundtable hosted a panel discussion featuring Theresa Whelan, Nicole Lee, and Mark Malan.

The establishment of a new Africa Command (AFRICOM) has generated optimism about the possibilities to address security and development challenges in Africa while at the same time creating concerns about a "U.S. militarization" of the continent.  The roundtable highlights AFRICOM's agenda, both near and long term, its rationale and hopes, as well as recommendations that others have made to improve its operations and the reasons why some have opposed the initiative.   

Theresa Whelan, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for African Affairs, points out that there are current configurations in all geographical regions except for Africa.  The United States has never been able to have military relations with Africa as they do in other nations such as Poland.  Whelan believes what the U.S. has right now is not an optimal structure for future security options.  This is mainly because Africa is not in our “peripheral” vision or “Area of Responsibility” (AOR).  Africa is more than a humanitarian issue, and we need to address these smaller problems before they escalate to something more serious.  Whelan stated that AFRICOM is a good thing and she hopes that in ten years the African Union will be fully functional, African nations will recognize Maritime and most of all, she hopes that these issues will be resolved so a panel discussion on AFRICOM is not needed.

Mark Malan is a Peacebuilding Program Officer for Refugees International.  He prefaced by stating that the overall responses from Africa about AFRICOM are negative, but there is a widespread view that it will help.  Malan lays out three reasons why AFRICOM is opposed: (1) To use Africa’s natural resources, (2) To open doors for China inside Africa, (3) Lastly, in the United States self-interest, to use as an “attack on terror”.  The global war on terror is not a high priority for Africa, and the U.S.’s actions could be seen as a “one-sided”, “simplistic”, military intervention.  On the other hand, Malan does share that many feel that the U.S. presence exists there so not much will change.  For AFRICOM to work, Malan suggests that the U.S. needs strategy and development for government including a plan and budget because synthesizing and coordinating is not a quick fix for Africa. 

Nicole Lee, the Executive Director of TransAfrica Forum, offers a similar view to Mark’s.  She stated that Africa feels that AFRICOM does not listen to the peoples needs.  Lee feels that announcements and public relations amplify these concerns by not being consistent and not being able to offer a direct plan with goals.  She also points out that the country that ends up hosting AFRICOM will be discriminated against and this will make it harder for these countries to come together to discuss and negotiate.  Lee questions if this is a step toward democracy or if it is a “proxy war” because the U.S. is basically re-aligning their power to improve their own security, not to improve Africa’s interests.  She concludes that the United States has not followed through with regional bodies that have been instituted before, and that the U.S. is just trying to come up with a new command to ice it over.

In the Q&A portion the issue of Kenya was brought up, and whether or not AFRICOM would have played a role.  Whelan answered that AFRICOM would promote dialogue with Kenya military and push to abide by the Constitution.  She stated that the military should only be brought in if all else fails.  Malan made it known that AFRICOM is not a “development or humanitarian machine” but does play a huge role because security is the basis for many things.  He agreed with Theresa that Kenya is a political issue where basic security, governance, economics, health, and education need to work together.  Lee felt that the representatives of AFRICOM are sending two different messages to two separate audiences and that this can be seen because even Congress is questioning the plan.  She sees AFRICOM as an experiment and whoever brings the most money will determine how it is spent.  She states that AFRICOM should not be used in the example of Kenya, but that it is good that the U.S. is supporting Kenya’s government. 

Finally, the issue of Defense Contractors was raised.  Theresa said that defense contractors are much more prominent and have filled a void that is highly valuable.  Malan suggested that we have to distinguish between private contracting and public because the State Department problem is not the Department of Defenses’ problem.  He also reminded everyone that the United States is not the inventor of military intervention or aid in Africa.  The French, German, and British have to be recognized as well.  Lee strongly points out that Africans are concerned with what we are doing in the Middle East and that AFRICOM is seen as business, not as diplomacy.  She also pointed out that most contractors have not been successful.