South Africa and AFRICOM: U.S. Military Strategy in Sub-Saharan Africa

Introduction

As the United States continues its drawdown of troops in the Middle East and reevaluates its prosecution of the global war on terrorism — following the elimination of key Al-Qaeda leaders, most especially Osama bin Laden — it is important to assess the impact of these events on American military forces elsewhere, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa and South Africa. The so-called BRIC nations (Brazil, Russia, India, and China), with China taking the lead, are taking an increasingly active interest in developing improved trade and political ties with sub-Saharan African nations. Misperceptions of American global hegemonic intentions may interfere with the legitimate goals of the U.S. military in establishing improved relations with these countries.

To help identify key challenges and potential solutions, this paper reviews the relevant literature to describe current U.S. military strategy in South Africa and to provide salient policy recommendations that can be used between the military organizations of sub-Saharan Africa and U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM). The analysis covers issues such as military-to-military training, other military programs that make AFRICOM important to South Africa, the protection of U.S. national security interests, and the instruments, institutions, and approaches the U.S. might use to meet the challenges it faces on the continent.

Background and Overview of AFRICOM

On February 6, 2007, the United States Africa Command (AFRICOM) was established and tasked with responsibility for all African countries except Egypt, which would remain under the supervision of the Central Command (CENTCOM) (Ndlovu-Gatsheni & Ojakorotu, 2010). One of the key strategies of CENTCOM is to forge solid host-nation support for American forces; the siting of U.S. bases is guided by the dual objectives of providing as much support for the host nation as possible while avoiding the provocation of anti-American sentiments (U.S. Central Command Facilities, 2011).

From the outset, the establishment of AFRICOM was intended to facilitate the Department of Defense's (DoD) ability to concentrate its resources in support of ongoing U.S. initiatives aimed at assisting African nations, the African Union, and regional economic communities. In addition, AFRICOM was designed to provide African countries and regional organizations with an integrated DoD coordination point for addressing security concerns and any associated problems that might arise (AFRICOM, 2011).

Strategic and Economic Implications for South Africa

Although there are both strategic and economic implications of the AFRICOM mission in South Africa, it is important to note that while the American government has allocated resources specifically to assist African national development, the economic implications of the command should not be considered its main purpose. In this regard, analysts at Global Security emphasize that "as the Africans see the stand-up of AFRICOM, they should not look at it as here's another donor, here's another source of revenue; rather it is someone who's going to come and share their knowledge and know-how along a path that the Africans have chosen, to help them better be able to do a job for themselves" (AFRICOM, 2011, p. 4).

While this view may be readily accepted by Americans and other Western observers, it may be less apparent to South African observers, where religious fundamentalists have been hard at work sowing anti-Americanism (South Africa, 2011). History has shown time and again that, irrespective of the goals involved, a visible American presence in a foreign country generates a great deal of political backlash that can adversely affect the ability of American commanders to accomplish their missions. In this regard, Ndlovu-Gatsheni and Ojakorotu (2010) emphasize that "the phenomenon of securitization of Africa is complex, involving changing perceptions of the continent from a humanitarian and development category to a zone of conflict where terrorists hide. This is a concern of the West and America, which are trying to portray their territories as zones of peace that are only put at risk by areas that lack a strong security architecture, like Africa" (p. 94).

Consequently, the strategic implications of AFRICOM's establishment far outweigh the associated economic impact, at least from the perspective of American policymakers. This does not mean, however, that local policymakers will ignore the economic dimension of an American military presence — only that economic benefits will not automatically neutralize any anti-American sentiment generated in the process. The perception of the South African people and its government of AFRICOM might well mirror the view that "the African state, which like all other states had enjoyed some degree of control over the means and resources of violence, is now directly challenged by the American government to keep close military surveillance over the whole African continent via establishment of combat command centers. The phenomenon of weak, collapsed, and failed states has been used as the justification for such dangerous securitization of Africa" (Ndlovu-Gatsheni & Ojakorotu, 2010, p. 95).

In fact, the prosecution of the global war on terrorism in the Middle East has created the perception that America's foreign policy is primarily focused on countries that possess oil, regardless of what U.S. policymakers say about their true intentions. As Ndlovu-Gatsheni and Ojakorotu emphasize, "underneath the desire to monitor the movement of terrorists there is the more sinister and long-standing Western and American hegemonic strategy to access strategic resources like oil" (2010, p. 95). In this turbulent and unstable environment, identifying current security challenges to AFRICOM's mission and potential alternative courses of action is essential.

Conclusion

The research showed that in February 2007, the United States Africa Command (AFRICOM) was created and tasked with overall responsibility for all African countries except Egypt. Despite the stated goals of the command to assist African national development, AFRICOM is far from being received with open arms by many observers, who maintain that the United States is surreptitiously introducing additional military forces to counter BRIC nation influence in the region — especially that of China — and to increase American hegemony on the continent.

In reality, it would be disingenuous to suggest that these concerns are entirely absent from the thinking of American policymakers. Nevertheless, the research was consistent in showing that a number of steps have been taken to facilitate the establishment of U.S. Africa Command, including the solicitation of feedback from African national leaders during the planning stages and the use of an unprecedented civilian deputy commander charged with coordinating American resources to help improve the image and effectiveness of the assistance being provided.

Finally, the United States has a lengthy foreign policy track record that supports many of the assertions being made by AFRICOM's detractors, meaning that AFRICOM's commanders have their work cut out for them in demonstrating that an expanded American presence on the African continent can be to everyone's mutual advantage.