US election: The candidate who would be better for Africa
According to the IMF’s 2016 World Economic Outlook,
global economic growth will be driven by emerging markets in Africa and
Asia. Ivory Coast ranked No 2 in its list of top 10 emerging markets.
The African Growth and Opportunity Act of 2000 grants duty-free status
to sub-Saharan African countries for most products imported into
America. This trade preference policy is a bid to open up African
markets to American goods and services and to develop and fortify the
African business landscape through increased trade and investment.
According to the Office of the United States Trade Representative
charged with implementing and overseeing AGOA, a 2013 programme
initiative was announced by President Barack Obama during his 2013 visit
to Africa, which would “seek to increase internal and regional trade
within Africa and expand economic ties between Africa, the United States
and other global markets.”
It is axiomatic that Africa needs the
unabated commitment and stalwart political will of the next
administration to further the intents and purposes of AGOA and the Obama
2013 trade initiative. Conversely, gains hitherto made under the
auspices of AGOA will be reversed and indeed the Act itself will be
ultimately checked, whilst potential mutual benefits will be lost.
Furthermore, the dictum “nature abhors a vacuum,” will be bolstered as
China which has become Africa’s biggest trading partner, will no doubt,
capitalise on the situation to fill the void.
I strongly believe that most Africans
would prefer increased trade with America given China’s poor human
rights record, lack of transparency and environmental neglect. Another
consequence which may occur from jettisoning AGOA and/or failing to
consolidate and expand its scope would be that the flood of economic
refugees from Africa to the West would be increased. This would no
doubt worsen the already extremely toxic social and economic environment
in affected Western countries. On a more sinister note, it would play
into the hands of terrorist groups, active on the continent, such as
Boko Haram, al-Shabaab and Al-Queda in the Islamic Maghreb, as fewer
people would be lifted out of poverty exponentially, thereby widening
the pool of recruits for terror groups, making the world less safe for
all.
From all indications, Africa would be
better off with a Hillary Clinton administration, as there is every
indication it would build on AGOA and Obama’s ensuing 2013 initiative. A
Donald Trump administration may not augur well for the crystallisation
of the vision spearheading AGOA. On the balance of probabilities, in
pursuing his stated aims of making America great again through insular
thinking and protectionism, Trump may be dismissive of the spirit of
AGOA or give it a cursory attention.
As an African female lawyer, active in
the areas of international law, education, human rights and gender
empowerment, it would be remiss of me to ignore the portents of a
Clinton presidency for Africa vis-à-vis the uplift of African females.
Should Clinton win the US Presidency, her ascendancy to the highest
office in America and the concomitant role of “leader of the free
world,” would singlehandedly cause a seismic shift in the way females
in Africa are traditionally viewed and treated. In effect, the
scenario is pregnant with the possibility of landing “a debilitating
blow” to the age-old “male child preference” syndrome, which has plagued
the African continent and is recognised by the United Nations as a
“harmful traditional practice,” which causes lasting emotional, mental
and physical pain and trauma and must be addressed and put aside.
The litany of human rights abuses and
violations which arise from the incessant discrimination suffered by the
African girl child not only perpetuates their social and economic
subjugation, but also cements their inferior status in society. A
Clinton Presidency would elevate the innate, intrinsic and inalienable
value of the African girl child, paving the way to ensure their access
to an education through a share in family resources, which in many cases
are scarce and are reserved for males. The underlying misguided
philosophy is that females are inherently handicapped and that males are
more likely to be successful and would therefore be able to contribute
to the family’s upkeep and welfare. Judging from recent revelations
concerning Trump’s shocking and repugnant behaviour towards women, which
has been universally rebuked and even repudiated by his allies and
family, I believe that if elected president, it would be a sad day for
African women.
As far as global security is concerned, I
am more inclined to throw my hat in with Clinton. Trump has publicly
demonstrated severe character flaws and other limitations ad nauseum,
which render him patently ill-equipped to ensure or promote the
delicate global balance of power. His tenuous grasp of global affairs,
superficiality, childlike mien and churlish behaviour are chief
debilitating factors, any of which should disqualify him from exercising
control over the nuclear codes as the Commander-in-Chief of the
American Armed Forces. Notwithstanding Clinton’s open transgressions, I
believe that her profound public service experience, superior skills
set and even keeled disposition will serve world affairs better.
Comments