Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-l4ctd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-24T02:09:42.270Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Towards A New Constituency for a More Active American Foreign Policy for Africa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 May 2019

Ross K. Baker
Get access

Extract

To make a case for greater American involvement in Africa is to take cognizance of what has gone before — eclectic embrace followed by selective disengagement. The Nixon Administration has opted for a policy of designating certain target countries for bilateral assistance and political cultivation. The itineraries of American public figures from the Vice President and Secretary of State to the astronauts and Mrs. Nixon tell us where the emphases are being placed: on the two long-standing areas of concern, Liberia and Ethiopia; on Africa's most populous state, Nigeria; on one of its larger states, Zaire, and on the home of one of Africa's senior pragmatic statesmen, Kenya. Somewhat more peripheral interest is maintained in Ghana, which has moved into the column of “reasonable” regimes. Most recently the situation in Sudan has dazzled U.S. policymakers with visions of picking up chips from the Soviets and conjuring up the type of Cold War determinant of involvement popular in the 1960s.

Type
Research Article
Information
African Issues , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , Spring 1973 , pp. 12 - 19
Copyright
Copyright © African Studies Association 1973 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Footnotes

1 Welles, Benjamin, “U.S. Seeks to Strengthen Its Sudanese Ties,” New York Times, August 8, 1971, p. 2.Google Scholar

2 Bernard, J. P., “Afrique noire-Etats Unis. Quelques aspects de la diplomatic américaine face à la décolonisation et après.” Res Publica 12 (2), 1970, pp. 217–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 Quigg, Philip W., “The Changing American View of Africa,” Africa Report, XIV, 1 (January, 1969), pp. 8–9.Google Scholar

4 Competition for policy preferences under a system of closed voting is dealt with by John C. Blydenburgh in “The Closed Rule and the Paradox of Voting,” The Journal of Politics, XXXIII, 1 (February, 1971), p. 59. Blydenburgh discusses the notion of the “cyclical majority” and demonstrates that, “it is not possible to design a method of summing individual preferences in such a way as to guarantee that the preferences of the voting body will be represented in group discussions.” In a more informal and more primitive way, this would be the manner in which the dynamic of sub-constituent policy rivalry might be manifested — no sub-constituency being able to obtain its optional choice and all being forced to settle on a second- or thirdorder preference. See also: Peter A. Wessel, “A Lexicographic Approach to Foreign Policy Decision-Making,” A paper presented to the 1971 Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, III., September 7-11, 1971.

5 “Principles and Pragmatism in American Foreign Policy.” An address by Secretary of State William P. Rogers before the American Legion Convention at Houston, Texas on August 31, 1971 (Washington: Department of State, 1971 [mimeo], p. 6).

6 James N. Rosenau, Domestic Sources of Foreign Policy (New York: Free Press, 1967).

7 American Firms, Subsidiaries, and Affiliates — Republic of South Africa (Washington: United States Department of Congress, Bureau of International Commerce, March, 1968), passim.

8 Smith, Timothy H., The American Corporation in South Africa: An Analysis (New York, USA: United Church of Christ, Council for Social Action, 1970), pp. 5–6.Google Scholar

9 Lincoln, C. Eric, “The Race Problem and International Relations,” in Shepherd, George W. Jr. (ed.), Racial Influences in American Foreign Policy (New York, USA: Basic Books, 1970), p. 56.Google Scholar

10 Cruse, Harold, The Crisis of the Negro Intellectual (New York, USA: William Morrow & Co., 1967)Google Scholar, passim.

11 Foster, Badi G., “United States Policy Toward Africa: An Afro- American Perspective,” Issue, II, 2 (Summer, 1972), pp. 45–51.Google Scholar

12 Robert C. Maynard, “Polaroid's Challenge: Racism or Morality,“ Washington Post, Outlook Section, January 17, 1971.Google Scholar

13 U.S. Sanctions Against Rhodesia — Chrome. Hearings before the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate, 92nd Congress, First Session, July 7 and 8, 1971, passim, and The Congressional Record-Senate, September 23, 1971. S14933-S14947. This information was augmented by conversations with Thomas A. Dine, Legislative aide to Senator Frank Church and Michael A. Samuels, Office of Congressional Relations, U.S. Department of State.

14 New York Times, Thursday, October 7, 1971, p. 1.

15 See: Ross K. Baker, “American Policy Towards Africa: Cause for Indictment?“ Worldview, XV, 12 (December, 1972), pp. 18-24.

16 A detailed account of impressive lobbying effort put forth by the entrepreneurial and irreconcilable constituencies can be found in Bruce Oudes, “Rhodesia Ore: Here's To Thee, Oh Club 503,” The Washington Post, March 19. 1972, p. B2. This article cites the convergence of corporate and right-wing activity that culminated in the inclusion of section 503 in the Military Procurement Act of 1971. See Also: Gale W. McGee, “The U.S. Congress and the Rhodesian Chrome Issue.” Issue, II, 2 (Summer, 1972), pp. 2-7.

17 Skurnik, W.A.E., “Recent United States Policy in Africa,” Current History, LXIV. 379 (March 1973), p. 135.Google Scholar

18 This ambiguous and somewhat equivocal stand taken on Africa by some important U.S. church groups is discussed in Rupert Emerson. Africa and United States Policy (Englewood Cliffs. N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1967). pp. 49-51.