U.S. aid has limits too

As a reader during the past 25 years of political commentary by the Ethiopian diaspora and based on my own contacts with that community, I am struck by the prevailing belief that the U.S. government has the ability to change Ethiopian polices and alter the fundamental direction of events in Ethiopia. This view is misguided.

The policy conundrum came to my attention again recently as I read an opinion piece in The Hill by Mesfin Mekonen, chairman of the All Ethiopia Unity Party International Advisory Board.

Ato Mesfin begins by urging a hastened review of U.S. policy towards Ethiopia. This is a reasonable request. Every new American administration should review its policy with counties that are as important as Ethiopia and where there is controversy about the nature of the bilateral relationship. The opinion piece goes on to state that “Congress should hold hearings and enact legislation to help Ethiopians create the conditions that are necessary to ensure that food aid is never needed again.” The implication is that the U.S. government can resolve Ethiopia’s governmental, demographic, political and social issues.

I beg to differ.

The United States can impact the situation on the margins, but it does not have the power to force fundamental change even if there was agreement on what that change should be.

While the United States does have influence in Ethiopia, in fact, more than most countries, there are distinct limits to that influence. Not only is Ethiopia a sovereign state but it interacts with dozens of other important countries and organizations.

Those in the Ethiopian diaspora who oppose the Ethiopian government usually suggest that American assistance to Ethiopia can and should serve as the leverage for forcing change in the country. The level of U.S. assistance in recent years has been impressive. In fiscal year 2007, it was about $474 million and in fiscal year 2008 about $456 million. It is important, however, to look more closely at this assistance.

In an essay in the November/December 2008 issue of Foreign Affairs, three former administrators of USAID — J. Brian Atwood, Peter M. McPherson and Andrew Natsios — wrote that in fiscal year 2007 about 50 percent of U.S. assistance to Ethiopia went to HIV/AIDS prevention, 38 percent to emergency food relief and 7 percent to child survival, family planning and malaria prevention and treatment. Only 1.5 percent went to agriculture, 1.5 percent to economic growth, 1.5 percent to education and 1 percent for improving governance.

In fiscal year 2008, by my calculations, 73 percent of USAID’s budget for Ethiopia went to HIV/AIDS treatment and prevention, 12 percent to child survival and health, 9 percent to development assistance, 5 percent for food aid and less than 1 percent for a combination of foreign military financing (FMF) and international military education and training (IMET). The amount for FMF was $843,000 and for IMET $620,000.

This is not an assistance program that has significant political leverage. In 2007, almost 95 percent of the assistance program went to HIV/AIDS, emergency food aid and child survival. In 2008, the figure was about 90 percent for these programs.

There are very few members of Congress and even fewer in the Executive Branch who are interested in cutting funding for HIV/AIDS, child survival and emergency food aid in an effort to change governmental policies in Ethiopia.

While Ethiopian officials also listen to the United States for reasons unrelated to foreign aid, the fact is that U.S. leverage is much more limited than most in the Ethiopian diaspora believe.

Image: "USAID" by US Army Africa via creative commons on flickr.

Climate change in Africa

The Grantham Institute for Climate Change has just released an excellent scientific study on the impact of climate change in Africa. It concludes that northern and southern Africa will become much hotter. Eastern Africa, the Horn of Africa and parts of central Africa are likely to see an increase in rainfall.

It is not clear, however, that this will result in an increase in the flow of water in the Nile. Vector borne diseases such as malaria and dengue may spread and become more severe. There continues to be a poor understanding of the drivers of Africa's climate and their complex interactions. The best assumption is that many regions of Africa will suffer from droughts and floods with greater frequency and intensity.

Prepared by Gordon Conway, professor of international development at Imperial College London, the twenty-four page report is titled "The Science of Climate Change in Africa: Impacts and Adaptation" and dated October 2009. You can access it here (in PDF).

Image: "Climate change canvas" by oxfam international via creative commons on flickr. "My illustration shows how time is running out for Africa – and it's in our hands," says the artist who is from Melbourne, Australia. "I feel that Africa will suffer most. As we all experience global warming, Africa’s resources are stretched to help overcome starvation and loss of livelihood."

Somaliland report

Berouk Mesfin has prepared a comprehensive and well researched report on Somaliland with a brief analysis of its conflict with Puntland.

Titled "The Political Development of Somaliland and Its Conflict with Puntland" dated September 2009, you can access it here (PDF).

Discussion on VOA Encounter on "U.S.-Sudan Policy Shift"

I appeared on Voice of America's Encounter program with host Carol Castiel to discuss Sudan. You can listen to the audio via this link.

NIBR report on Somali Piracy

An informative and thorough study on Somali piracy has been prepared by Stig Jarle Hansen under the auspices of the Norwegian Institute for Urban and Regional Research.

Titled "Piracy in the Greater Gulf of Aden: Myths, Misconceptions and Remedies," it is dated October 2009 and based on field studies in pirate areas and interviews with real pirates. It concludes that solutions should be geographically focused on piracy areas and include the placement of liaison officers on the ground in order to cooperate more effectively with local institutions.

You can access the document in PDF format here.

A well-written Sudan report from the House of Commons

The British House of Commons recently asked its research arm to prepare a comprehensive report on the situation in Sudan.

Titled "Sudan: Peace or War? Unity or Secession?" by Jon Lunn and dated October 6, 2009, this document looks at the North-South issue, Darfur and Eastern Sudan. It is intended to provide background information to Members of Parliament. It is well written and deserves a close look both on its merits and because it may help to mold opinion in the UK Parliament. You can access it in PDF format here.

Interview with George Washington Today

I am interviewed in the launch issue of George Washington Today, GW's "primary source of news and information." You can view the interview here.

Sec. Clinton on U.S. policy on Sudan

BBC TV asked for my reaction yesterday to the new U.S. policy on Sudan announced by Secretary Clinton earlier in the day. I replied that it reflected a new reality on the ground in both Darfur and southern Sudan. The situation in Darfur has improved and the death rate has dropped dramatically. The situation concerning implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement that ended the war between northern and southern Sudan has become more worrisome.

Although the policy proscribes the Obama administration from dealing directly with Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir, who is under indictment by the International Criminal Court for war crimes in Darfur, I did not believe this would hinder Washington's ability to engage with Sudan, which has designated senior officials to oversee negotiations concerning both Darfur and implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement.

When asked about the probable reaction of human rights groups to the new policy, I responded that some of them would be displeased but hoped they too would recognize the new reality on the ground.

Quote in IPS on Guinea-China

I am quoted today in the IPS story "Deal with Guinea Raises Questions About Chinese Role":

As far as deals with the U.S. government are concerned, it is frustrating for some in Washington to see the no-strings-attached deals being made with Beijing. The Guinea deals, however, as private agreements with a corporation, may not present a particularly special or troubling situation.

"I don't really see it as a major concern for the U.S.," said David Shinn, a former ambassador to Ethiopia and Burkina Faso currently working on a book on Chinese-African relations. "If the Chinese are the only ones that are going to go in and do these deals, then so be it."

The major issue with the deal, as Shinn sees it, is its role in "helping to prop up a Guinean government that is being subjected to a lot of criticism in the world right now."

Quote in the NY Times on Guinea, China

I am quoted in the Oct. 13 NY Times story "Guinea Boasts of Deal With Chinese Company":

One expert on Africa-China relations, David H. Shinn, a former United States ambassador to Ethiopia and Burkina Faso, said “the announcement remains something of an embarrassment to China and plays into its policy of emphasizing state sovereignty and avoiding interference in governance and human rights issues in other countries.”

Mr. Shinn said the deal “clearly complicates the ability of those in the international community who want to put pressure on Guinea.”

“Certainly the timing of this is unfortunate,” he said. “Obviously, it puts Guinea in a much stronger position than it would have been.”