From the Archives: African scholars bemoan Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama’s foreign policy

African scholars bemoan Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama’s foreign policy
November 21, 2011 2:16 PM MST

Although the annual meeting of the African Studies Association rotates among various American cities, this year it was the turn of Washington, D.C., to host it. Hundreds of academic experts on Africa – anthropologists, economists, linguists, political scientists, and others – gathered at the Wardman Park Marriott Hotel from November 17 through November 20 for lectures, panel discussions, and networking.

One panel discussion was entitled “Obama’s Noble Ancestors: Nobel Prize Laureates of African Descent.” There were papers presented on earlier Nobel Peace Prize winners such as Ralph Bunche, Kofi Annan, Desmond Tutu, and Martin Luther King, Jr., but the focus was very much on 2009 laureate Barack Obama, who won the prize only nine months after taking office as the 44th U.S. president.

Two of the panelists were highly critical of Obama’s performance in office, saying that he did not live up to the ideals of the Nobel Peace Prize and that his foreign policy before and after winning the prize leaves much to be desired.

In a paper called “Obama’s Nobel Ancestors,” Adekeye Adebajo, executive director of the Centre for Conflict Resolution in Cape Town, South Africa, noted that the announcement of Obama’s Nobel Prize came as he was preparing to send more U.S. soldiers to Afghanistan.

‘Bush with a smile’

“Some of his foreign policy actions,” Adebajo said, “unfortunately have followed in the hawkish footsteps of his predecessor, George W. Bush. According to The Economist, in his first three years in office, Obama ordered targeted assassinations of terror suspects for an average of one drone attack every four days, compared to George Bush’s one every forty days."

These drone attacks, he pointed out, "have been mostly in the border area of Pakistan and Afghanistan, killing hundreds of innocent women and children. As a result of these actions, some of us have been forced to ask whether Obama’s foreign policy could come to represent ‘Bush with a smile.’”

Adebajo, author of UN Peacekeeping in Africa, also found Obama’s Nobel Prize acceptance speech “disappointing.”

It was, he explained, “quite a belligerent speech” in which Obama “was effectively explaining why force had to be used to bring about peace. A celebration of peace thus turned into a justification of war.”

Although he called Obama the “most cosmopolitan and urbane individual to occupy the White House,” Adebajo compared him unfavorably to Bill Clinton, saying Obama is “very much a dyed-in-the-wool politician cut from the same pragmatic cloth as his Democratic predecessor” as president.

Both presidents, he said, “have demonstrated a willingness to sacrifice core principles on the altar of political survival.”

In fact, Adebajo concluded, “Barack’s instincts to be a force for good in the world have often been diverted by his country’s imperial temptations, as we saw recently in Libya.”

On the same panel, Ali A. Mazrui, director of the Institute of Global Cultural Studies and Albert Schweitzer Professor of the Humanities at Binghamton University in New York, recalled that he “shed tears when Obama was elected president” and that he “was deeply moved even when he won the Nobel Prize for Peace,” but today he feels “upset that [Obama] has let us down so badly in foreign policy.”

‘Israeli-style assassinations’

In his paper on "Barack Obama and the Nobel Peace Prize," Mazrui also pointed to the targeted assassinations that the Obama administration has employed in the war on terror in the Middle East and South Asia, which he referred to as “Israeli-style assassinations.”

Obama, he said, “has orchestrated more political assassinations, either by sending troops to kill somebody or by the drones, if I’m not mistaken, than any U.S. president in the last 100 years. “

On Obama’s record in office since winning the Nobel Prize, Mazrui, author of The Politics of War and the Culture of Violence, conceded that on domestic policy, Obama still “looks hopeful.”

On the other hand, with regard to Obama’s foreign policy, Mazrui quipped, “I’m sure whoever voted for that prize, says ‘what were we smoking that day?’”

One reason, he pointed out, is that “Obama is one of the very few U.S. presidents in history who managed three wars at the same time -- since winning the Nobel Prize.”

Mazrui also cast suspicion on the motivations that led to Obama’s award of the Nobel Prize in the first place.

Racial obsession

“For some people,” he said, “it’s easier to understand how Obama became President than why he won the Nobel Prize so soon after being elected.”

Noting that the stated reason by the Norwegian Nobel Committee for giving the prize to Obama was for his “diplomatic efforts,” Mazrui added that “I suspect the hidden agenda among those who nominated Obama was almost entirely in the domain of race relations. The issue of race and the prospect of peace has obsessed the Nobel Foundation in Oslo for more than a half a century.”

He pointed out that four out of the seven Nobel Peace Prize recipients from sub-Saharan Africa were all from South Africa and suggested that “the obsession with defining peace too narrowly in terms of race relations” has infected the deliberations of the Norwegian Nobel Committee.


Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on November 21, 2011. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site went dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

You Keep Using That Phrase, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means

An article published this week in Foreign Policy brought to mind the memetic line of Inigo Montoya from The Princess Bride, "You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means."

Writing under the headline "Economic Rights Are Human Rights," Yale University's Samuel Moyn shows by the second paragraph of his article that he doesn't know what he's talking about:

For 40 years, America’s human rights policy has focused narrowly on political and civil liberties and has been coupled with a free market libertarian agenda for the world. By neglecting social and economic rights and the vast disparities both within and among nations, U.S. policy has exacerbated many of the evils it set out to eradicate. It needs an overhaul.

A "free market libertarian agenda for the world" is exactly what has promoted economic rights and liberties for the past generation. By promoting free market policies around the world, poverty has been reduced to a tiny fraction of what it was only 40 years ago. People nearly everywhere are healthier, wealthier, and better educated than their parents and grandparents were.

Why only "nearly everywhere"? Because some countries have refused to liberalize their economies, thus perpetuating and deepening the poverty experienced by all but the political elites and their cronies in the limited business sector. Compare, for instance, Botswana and Zimbabwe -- neighboring countries but one is politically free and economically prosperous while the other is both politically oppressed and economically depressed.  The conditions on both sides of the Botswana-Zimbabwe border are inextricably intertwined.

Check out anything posted to HumanProgress.org if you are skeptical of my claims.

By the way, I clicked on the article;s link because I agree with the headline: Economic rights are, indeed, human rights.  In fact, I addressed that issue from a somewhat different angle way back in 1991, just as the economic freedom revolution began to advance around the globe.

From the Archives: Virginia Congressman Robert Hurt discusses Africa policy, Ebola threat, and AGOA

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on October 10, 2014. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site was scheduled to go dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

Virginia Congressman Robert Hurt discusses Africa policy, Ebola threat, and AGOA

At a campaign stop in Charlottesville on October 8, U.S. Representative Robert Hurt talked to reporters about a wide range of political topics and policy issues.

He answered questions posed by the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner about foreign policy matters. In an exclusive interview, he explained his position on U.S. military assistance to Syrian rebel groups and the Obama administration's strategy to defeat the Islamic State (also known as ISIL or ISIS).

In reply to other questions, Hurt talked about U.S. policy toward Africa, with reference to the threat of Ebola and also with regard to trade and investment under the umbrella of AGOA (the African Growth and Opportunity Act), which comes up for reauthorization by Congress in 2015.

'Public health threat'
“The Ebola epidemic definitely poses a public health threat to the United States,” Hurt said, noting the death of Liberian Ebola patient Thomas Eric Duncan in Dallas a few hours earlier that day.

“We need to be able to know exactly who's coming into this country,” he explained, adding that the Ebola problem “highlights the need for border security, not just for terrorism but obviously for public health issues.”

With regard to the U.S. government's decision to send several hundred American troops to Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone to help manage the Ebola epidemic in those West African countries, Hurt warned that “we have to be very careful in deploying our military for humanitarian reasons. I know we do it from time to time but I think there has to be a demonstrable, justifiable use of our military for that purpose.”

The reasons for caution, he said, include that “it's a huge risk to the members of the military but” also that “the United States can't be the world policeman. We can't be all things to all people.”

Asked whether he planned to vote to reauthorize AGOA next year, Hurt said, “I need to look at it. We'll obviously have some time to look at that.”

AGOA and free trade
He explained that, “whenever you're talking about any kind of trade agreements, I think that we have to look for what's in the best interests of the United States.”

Hurt said that “we've seen instances where trade agreements have hurt us, and they've hurt very deeply people in places like Virginia's Fifth District, where you look at what's happened in the southern part of our district, in Martinsville and Danville and those sorts of places.”

Each trade agreement “is different,” he explained, so “you have to take it on a case by case basis and try to figure out what's the best deal.”

Congressman Hurt added, however, that he views free trade in a positive light. “Free trade – generally speaking – I'm all in favor of it.”

He favors free trade, he said, “because it does open up markets for our producers and for our manufacturers, so we want to open those markets – but we have to do so in a careful way.”

Referring to the situation on the ground in his own congressional district, Hurt illustrated his point by describing what Central Virginia farmers grow on their land.

“We were just coming down Route 29 and looking at the soybeans. A lot of the soybeans that are going to be harvested in Virginia [will] go down to Hampton Roads, [and] get on a ship” carrying them to China.

That, he concluded, is “a good thing for our producers, so where we can find those advantages, we want to pursue them” in appropriate trade agreements.

SUGGESTED LINKS

Virginia Congressman Robert Hurt discusses U.S. policy in Syria and Iraq
Omidyar Network's Karol Boudreaux offers optimistic view of African economies
Scholar reflects on why Africa was absent from final presidential debate
South African author Greg Mills offers solutions to African poverty
Virginia political leaders react to Supreme Court marriage decision

Original URL: http://www.examiner.com/article/virginia-congressman-robert-hurt-discusses-africa-policy-ebola-threat-and-agoa

From the Archives: Virginia Senate hopeful Robert Sarvis talks about U.S. policy toward Africa

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on November 1, 2014. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site was scheduled to go dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

Virginia Senate hopeful Robert Sarvis talks about U.S. policy toward Africa

The United States should “engage more with Africa,” says U.S. Senate candidate Robert Sarvis, because “there's a lot of human potential there.”

Sarvis is the Libertarian Party of Virginia's nominee challenging incumbent Democrat Mark Warner and Republican Party nominee Ed Gillespie in the election that takes place on Tuesday, November 4.

An economist and lawyer, Sarvis is the author of various policy papers, including "Understanding Public Pension Debt: A State-by-State Comparison" (Competitive Enterprise Institute, 2014) and "The Fiscal Health of the States" (Mercatus Center at George Mason University, coauthored with Jeffrey Miron, 2012).

Wealth creation and prosperity
The LP Senate candidate spoke about U.S. policy toward Africa in an exclusive, one-on-one interview with the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner.

Africa, he said, “needs to move towards a policy that is going to enable wealth creation and prospering societies. [Americans] know how to do that. We know how to have growing economies through property rights and the rule of law, contract rights and things like that.”

He added that, however, there is currently “too much corruption over there, there's too much violence.” To counterbalance those conditions, “everything we can do to help public policy there is a good thing.”

Sarvis emphasized that he does not think “propping up governments through foreign aid is the right way to do it.” Instead, “free trade is the best thing that we can do to help Africa and to help countries around the world,” where workers “just want to compete on the global marketplace through wages and through working hard. Our trade barriers,” he said, “are one of the contributors to global poverty.”

Reauthorizing AGOA
His support for free trade, Sarvis said, inclines him to support the reauthorization of the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) when it comes up for a vote in Congress in 2015.

“I would certainly prefer a broader policy of just reducing or removing tariffs, period, full stop. I think that's the right thing to do,” he stated.

“All people around the world should have the ability to compete on the global marketplace, and our consumers -- the American people – benefit from reducing tariffs. That's my ideal policy,” he explained, adding that “we'll see how amenable the Senate and the House of Representatives are to that kind of proposal.”

Asked about the expanding military presence of the United States in Africa through AFRICOM and the growing threats of terrorist groups like Boko Haram and al-Shabaab, Sarvis suggested that U.S. policy should be more circumspect.

Governments in Africa “know what they're dealing with and they don't want the terrorist groups to metastasize” any more than the United States does.

“But the problem,” he pointed out, “is that we have created a security umbrella and made implicit promises that mean that [those governments] are not doing enough to maintain their own security.”

What that means, he explained, is that “we're always, generation after generation, having to go in and provide for the security for them. This is something that has to end unless we want to be paying trillions of dollars over the next generation.”

Drugs in Africa
The role of African countries as transit ports in the international illicit drug trade is something that also concerns Sarvis, and he has a solution for it.

“Our drug war has undermined the rule of law and civil society in Latin America,” he noted. “That's also happening in Africa. It's also undermined our efforts in Afghanistan over the past decade.”

Whether in Africa or elsewhere, he explained, “the problem is our war on drugs and anything that we can do to move away from our prohibitionist mentality is going to undermine the violent gangs and organized criminal enterprises that we created” through current drug policy dating back several decades.

Sarvis said that legalizing marijuana in just two states, Colorado and Washington, has already had an adverse effect on drug cartels operating in Mexico.

“We can have beneficial effects around the world by changing our policy at home on drugs,” he asserted.

SUGGESTED LINKS

Virginia U.S. Senate candidates react to Fourth Circuit gay marriage ruling
GOP can regain control of Senate in 2014, says strategist Grover Norquist
Virginia Senator Mark Warner assesses situation in Iraq and the Middle East
Virginia Senator Mark Warner discusses budget issues, independent voters
'Republicans have learned a lesson' says GOP Senate candidate Ed Gillespie

Original URL:  http://www.examiner.com/article/virginia-senate-hopeful-robert-sarvis-talks-about-u-s-policy-toward-africa

From the Archives: Index of Economic Freedom shows global progress for 2015, while USA loses ground

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on February 2, 2015. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site was scheduled to go dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

Index of Economic Freedom shows global progress for 2015, while USA loses ground

For 21 years, the Heritage Foundation and the Wall Street Journal have collaborated to publish the annual Index of Economic Freedom, a list ranking nearly every country in the world on the basis of various criteria like rule of law, regulations, corruption, and openness to investment.

The 2015 Index was released on January 27, and two days later, the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner spoke by telephone to one of its compilers, Charlotte Florance, who is research associate for economic freedom in Africa and the Middle East at the Heritage Foundation.

In the interview, Florance explained that the Index “scores the metrics in four broad categories for every country in the world,” drawing on statistics gathered by the World Bank and other organizations.

Analytical categories
The four broad categories that the Index uses are, she said, “rule of law, government size, regulatory efficiency, and open markets.”

Those four categories are broken down further into sub-categories.

For instance, Florance explained, rule of law includes “property rights and freedom from corruption. Government size includes fiscal freedom and government spending. Regulatory efficiency includes business freedom, labor freedom, and monetary freedom. And then open markets include trade freedom, investment freedom, and financial freedom.”

This methodology, she continued, “covers a broad spectrum of the economies of countries around the world. Scores in each category are aggregated to create an overall score and then countries are ranked on that score.”

The rankings are then divided up among five additional categories: “free, mostly free, moderately free, mostly unfree, and repressed.”

The “repressed” category, she noted, refers to countries like Venezuela, Cuba, and Zimbabwe, “some of the most closed off economies in the world, with North Korea being the bottom of countries ranked.”

United States is 12
Florance noted that people are surprised to find out that the United States is not in the “free” category, and does not even have one of the ten most free economies in the world.

“The United States is actually twelfth,” she said, “in the mostly free category and it falls behind countries such as Hong Kong, Singapore, New Zealand, Chile, Canada, and even a very small African country, Mauritius.”

That last country, she explained, is “an island but still part of sub-Saharan Africa and it is actually ranked tenth – so a very tiny economy is actually ranked more free than the United States.”

In the past two decades, according to the annual Index of Economic Freedom, the world as a whole has become increasingly free. The United States is something of an exception in that it has become less free.

This year was the first year in seven years, Florance said, in which the United States “was bumped up slightly in its score.” While economic freedom has been declining here in the United States, she said, global economic freedom has been improving.

She cautioned, however, that “there are certain cases around the world where certain authoritarian regimes do certain things that hinder economic freedom.”

Florance noted how it is “a good message that in 21 years of measuring economic freedom, globally it's getting a lot better.”

She pointed to sub-Saharan Africa as “a region where, although you do have the most repressed economies in the world, there has been significant improvement over the past 21 years.”

Africa south of the Sahara, she said, “remains one of the leading regions in overall improvement year after year,” even though, she added, there is “still a lot to be done.”

SUGGESTED LINKS

Heritage Foundation's Matthew Spalding assesses the Calvin Coolidge revival
Amity Shlaes discusses significance of Calvin Coolidge at Heritage Foundation
Transportation policy 'unfocused,' says Heritage Foundation's Ronald Utt
Five reasons to be a libertarian
South African author Greg Mills offers solutions to African poverty

Original URL: http://www.examiner.com/article/index-of-economic-freedom-shows-global-progress-for-2015-while-usa-loses-ground

From the Archives: African ambassador calls for 'peace, love, and understanding' in D.C. speech

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on February 22, 2015. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site was scheduled to go dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

African ambassador calls for 'peace, love, and understanding' in D.C. speech

Recalling the Nick Lowe song from the 1970s, “What's so funny about peace, love, and understanding?,” the Gabonese Ambassador to the United States argued in a recent speech that peace, love, and understanding are necessary components of contemporary international relations.

Ambassador Michael Moussa-Adamo's remarks to the Universal Peace Federation and The Washington Times Foundation were published on February 20 by Sub-Saharan Monitor, a newsletter about African politics and culture. The occasion for the speech was World Interfaith Harmony Week.

Lowe's song (made famous by Elvis Costello), the Ambassador said, asks “why peace and love and understanding are remarkable concepts rather than mundane ones.”

'Inhumane acts'
He conceded that “if one picks up a daily newspaper, the front page headlines do not talk about peace or love or understanding. Instead, we read about war and terrorism and murder and sexual assault. We read about human beings performing inhumane acts against other human beings.”

While newspaper headlines and the evening news on TV may give people cause for pessimism, he said, a more nuanced approach to current events suggests reason for optimism.

Referring to Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker's 2012 book, The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined, Ambassador Moussa-Adamo noted that “we live in the most peaceful era of human history. Not only are there fewer wars now than there were even in the recent, 20th-century past, but there are fewer violent crimes such as assault and murder.”

He added that this is true not only in the industrialized, Western democracies like Europe and North America, but also in so-called developing countries of Latin America, Africa, and Asia.

Nonetheless, he said, statistics that say violence is reduced to record low levels is small comfort to the victim of terrorism or sexual assault.

'Interfaith harmony'
The Ambassador asked, “What can we do to promote interfaith harmony and the triplet: peace, love, and understanding?”

He said there were three action items:

“First, we must learn how to agree to disagree...

“Second, we must sit down and reason together....”

And third, “We must not be afraid to dream.”

In concrete terms, the Gabonese ambassador said that “we must invest in education, especially but not exclusively in education for girls. It is proven that, in societies where girls and women are able to learn in school, their societies are healthier, more affluent, and more peaceful. Those who oppose education for girls oppose progress for everyone, including themselves.”

'Gabon Emergent'
He referred to Gabonese President Ali Bongo Ondimba's program called “Gabon Emergent,” which posits that the country “must move beyond its reliance on a few natural resources – mostly oil, timber, and minerals – and create the conditions for a diversified economy that includes services like banking and insurance, high technology, and green industries.” The aim is to create jobs and new businesses and increase commercial engagement with overseas partners like the United States.

Concluding his remarks, Ambassador Moussa-Adamo said that “we must continue to pursue justice and peace through interfaith dialogue. Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists – even agnostics and atheists – must continue to talk to each other, to share what we have in common, to analyze what divides us, and work toward a world dominated not by conflict and pain but by peace, love, and understanding.”

Michael Moussa-Adamo has served as Gabon's Ambassador to the United States since September 2011.

SUGGESTED LINKS

South African author Greg Mills offers solutions to African poverty
Virginia Congressman Robert Hurt discusses Africa policy, Ebola threat, and AGOA
Omidyar Network's Karol Boudreaux offers optimistic view of African economies
Virginia Senate hopeful Robert Sarvis talks about U.S. policy toward Africa
Index of Economic Freedom shows global progress for 2015, while USA loses ground

Original URL: http://www.examiner.com/article/african-ambassador-calls-for-peace-love-and-understanding-d-c-speech

From the Archives: Poultry industry is trade-talk pawn of South African government, says analyst

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on May 5, 2015. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site was scheduled to go dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

Poultry industry is trade-talk pawn of South African government, says analyst

In the run-up to the recent introduction of bills in the U.S. Congress to reauthorize the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), which has broad bipartisan support because of the benefits gained by both African and American economies, there was a minor glitch owing to objections in South Africa to potential sales of U.S. poultry products in that country.

According to Kevin Lovell, CEO of the South African Poultry Association, the dispute stems from the United States “not selling chicken at the right price. They’re trading unfairly by dumping their chicken in our market. And that makes competition impossible for us to compete fairly.”

Senators Chris Coons (D-Delaware) and Johnny Isakson (R-Georgia), who represent major poultry-producing states, disagreed with Lovell and obtained a provision in the AGOA renewal bill (sponsored by Senate Finance Committee chairman Orrin Hatch) that requires a 30-day review of poultry policy in South Africa.

"It's not fair for them to continue to get” AGOA benefits, said Coons, ranking member of the Senate Africa subcommittee, “when they aren't playing fair with American exports.”

In a press release, Isakson stated that he and his colleagues “believe passionately in AGOA’s value and support its long-term renewal, but believe it unfair and inappropriate that the country that benefits from the law the most — South Africa — continues to maintain unreasonable tariffs on American poultry.”

Playing Chicken
One South African analyst sees something bigger at stake in the dispute.

After a presentation about South Africa's economy at the Cato Institute in Washington on May 4, the CEO of the South African Institute of Race Relations, Frans Cronje, suggested that this “playing chicken (literally)” represents a significant and troubling trend within South Africa's policy making circles.

In an interview with the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner, Cronje -- author of A Time Traveller's Guide to Our Next Ten Years (2014) -- explained that “South Africa is recording a trade deficit with every major region and country in the world except the United States and non-energy Africa, and that's only because of the generosity of AGOA.”

In the AGOA negotiations, he said, what we saw “was the chicken producers being used as a pawn by South Africa's Department of Trade and Industry.”

That is because, Cronje explained, “within the Communist left that has such influence over policy formulation in South Africa now, there is a drive to limit the influence and exposure of Western countries in the South African economy, even if that comes at the price of growth.”

From his point of view, “the chicken producers have been used as a pawn in this respect, to create stumbling blocks” that work to the advantage of left-wing factions within the South African government.

“Should South Africa see the benefits it draws from AGOA being limited, the chicken farmers can always be blamed by government as having caused this,” he said.

At the same time, “the government will accept that situation because it gives them one thing they don't have at the moment, which is a high-level excuse to explain our weak economic performance. They can say, 'Well, look at how the West is starting to treat us.'”

'Carcass' of economy
The attitude showed toward the United States in the AGOA negotiations has precedents, he noted.

The hostility that South Africa has “displayed on AGOA,” Cronje said, “is the same hostility we showed eighteen months ago in unilaterally canceling bilateral investment treaties with fifteen European countries.”

The result of that decision, he explained, is that “if that investment continues, South Africa will welcome it, but it's going to be on the terms and conditions set by the left of the South African government. Should the investment leave, to put it quite directly, the leftists will prefer to have absolute control over the carcass of the South African economy than to progressively lose control over a high-growth economy.”

The House Ways and Means Committee has approved H.R. 1891, the AGOA Extension and Enhancement Act of 2015, and the Senate Finance Committee has approved a companion bill, S. 1009. Both bills are expected to come to a vote on the floor of the House and Senate in June.

SUGGESTED LINKS

African ambassador calls for 'peace, love, and understanding' in D.C. speech
South African author Greg Mills offers solutions to African poverty
Scholar reflects on why Africa was absent from final presidential debate
Omidyar Network's Karol Boudreaux offers optimistic view of African economies
Index of Economic Freedom shows global progress for 2015, while USA loses ground

Original URL: http://www.examiner.com/article/poultry-industry-is-trade-talk-pawn-of-south-african-government-says-analyst

Recent Articles on Examiner.com: Bernie Sanders, Rick Santorum, & chickens

It has been quite some time since I provided a round-up of my recent interviews and articles on Examiner.com.  So why not now?

Here, in reverse chronological order, are the pieces I have written since October 2014, with brief excerpts from each:

Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders stumps for support in Charlottesville (May 13, 2015)

White House hopeful Bernie Sanders spoke to an enthusiastic audience in Charlottesville, Virginia, on Monday, May 11, laying out his policy vision and contrasting it directly with that of the Republican Congress and indirectly to that of his opponent for the Democratic presidential nomination, former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Sanders delivered his remarks to an overflow crowd at Trinity Episcopal Church, whose sanctuary has chairs for just 100 people. Another 175 or so squeezed into a basement room and the narthex....

In what is likely to become his standard stump speech, self-defined Socialist Sanders addressed a range of issues that were only related to the budget in the sense that they are items the government spends money on, such as free college tuition for students in public institutions and a multi-trillion dollar program to improve transportation infrastructure. He decried the Supreme Court's decision in the Citizens United case and proposed public financing for federal election campaigns.

That article about Senator Sanders' visit to Charlottesville also included this video:

Poultry industry is trade-talk pawn of South African government, says analyst (May 5, 2015)

After a presentation about South Africa's economy at the Cato Institute in Washington on May 4, the CEO of the South African Institute of Race Relations, Frans Cronje, suggested that this “playing chicken (literally)” represents a significant and troubling trend within South Africa's policy making circles.

In an interview with the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner, Cronje -- author of A Time Traveller's Guide to Our Next Ten Years (2014) -- explained that “South Africa is recording a trade deficit with every major region and country in the world except the United States and non-energy Africa, and that's only because of the generosity of AGOA.”

In the AGOA negotiations, he said, what we saw “was the chicken producers being used as a pawn by South Africa's Department of Trade and Industry.”

Think-tank head Jason Grumet reacts to Obama's mandatory voting idea (March 19, 2015)

Grumet described his 2014 book, City of Rivals: Restoring the Glorious Mess of American Democracy, and, in a post-panel interview with the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner, he reacted to the president's idea of making voting mandatory, under the threat of punishment, for American citizens.

“There's a constitutional issue,” he said.

Compulsory voting, he explained, is “more of an aspiration than a practical solution. Like everything, there are pros and cons.”

Grumet conceded that “it would be terrific to have greater participation in a participatory democracy” but he pointed to problems in the country identified by President Obama as a potential model.

In Australia, he said, experience has shown that “the downside is a lot of people are essentially forced to vote who have no desire to participate in the process, no information about the process, and so there's a question about whether you dilute the quality of the voter pool.”

Former Senator Rick Santorum says homosexuals deserve protection (March 8, 2015)

First, Santorum, who is well known for his socially conservative positions with regard to gay rights, was asked whether it is appropriate for the U.S. Department of State to defend the rights of homosexuals in foreign countries where their lives might be threatened by anti-gay governments.

“We have to defend human rights everywhere,” Santorum replied. “If someone's life is threatened because of race, sexual orientation, or other [reasons], I think we have an obligation to stand up and defend that human right. I don't have a problem at all, if people's lives are in jeopardy, then we have an obligation to protect all people and their freedoms.”

That article also included this video of a press gaggle with Rick Santorum at CPAC:

Lamar Alexander honored for his work promoting civics, history education (March 5, 2015)

Alexander recalled that the subject of his maiden speech on the floor of the United States Senate “was the importance of teaching U.S. history in our schools so our children could grow up knowing what it means to be an American.” He noted that the lowest test scores for high school seniors “are not in math or science. They're in United States history.”

He conceded that “there's not much the federal government ought to try to do about that in local schools” because that kind of involvement at the local level is “not a very good Republican, federalist idea.”

He explained that he was inspired to sponsor congressional and presidential academies for school teachers, one from each state, to learn more about American history and how to teach it better.

Conservative icon Stan Evans dies at 80; remembered as 'present at the creation' (March 3, 2015)

Noting that Evans had been “present at the creation” of the conservative movement, he replied to a question about whether the movement today is more disputatious than in the past, or if it is in an unprecedented crisis.

“Other times were infinitely worse,” he said, “because we didn't have the resources or the positions of strength we have now,” noting the low point of the movement may have been the 1964 presidential and congressional elections, when Barry Goldwater lost to Lyndon Johnson in a landslide and the Democrats won their largest majority in Congress since the 1930s.

In contrast to those years in the wilderness, Evans explained, 50 year later “we have a Speaker of the House, a Republican majority in the House. There are 30 Republican governors. We have 24 states that have one-party rule, governor and the legislature of the same party, all Republican,” compared to just 12 states controlled by Democrats.

“The list goes on,” he continued, but cautioned that “we're not using the position of strength we have. We're not fighting hard enough.”

African ambassador calls for 'peace, love, and understanding' in D.C. speech (February 22, 2015)

Referring to Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker's 2012 book, The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined, Ambassador Moussa-Adamo noted that “we live in the most peaceful era of human history. Not only are there fewer wars now than there were even in the recent, 20th-century past, but there are fewer violent crimes such as assault and murder.”

He added that this is true not only in the industrialized, Western democracies like Europe and North America, but also in so-called developing countries of Latin America, Africa, and Asia.

Nonetheless, he said, statistics that say violence is reduced to record low levels is small comfort to the victim of terrorism or sexual assault.

Virginia General Assembly passes bipartisan bills to legalize industrial hemp (February 12, 2015)

“The United States is the largest consumer of hemp products in the world,” says Virginia libertarian activist Nicholas Cote, “but it is the only industrialized country that prohibits farmers from growing hemp.”

Despite this, Cote is optimistic that change is on the horizon. Last week, both chambers of the Virginia General Assembly approved bills to allow the licensed cultivation of industrial hemp, following the lead of legislatures in Kentucky and North Dakota. The bill in the House of Delegates (HB 1277), sponsored by Del. Joseph Yost (R-Blacksburg), passed on a vote of 98-0. The Senate bill (SB 955)sponsored by state Senator Roz Dance (D-Petersburg), passed on a vote of 32-5.

In a recent interview, Cote -- who heads up the advocacy group, Right Way Forward Virginia -- told the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner that the bipartisan nature of the support for these bills is heartening, but he is disappointed that Virginia's congressional delegation has not stepped up to the plate.

Index of Economic Freedom shows global progress for 2015, while USA loses ground (February 2, 2015)

Florance noted that people are surprised to find out that the United States is not in the “free” category, and does not even have one of the ten most free economies in the world.

“The United States is actually twelfth,” she said, “in the mostly free category and it falls behind countries such as Hong Kong, Singapore, New Zealand, Chile, Canada, and even a very small African country, Mauritius.”

That last country, she explained, is “an island but still part of sub-Saharan Africa and it is actually ranked tenth – so a very tiny economy is actually ranked more free than the United States.”

In the past two decades, according to the annual Index of Economic Freedom, the world as a whole has become increasingly free. The United States is something of an exception in that it has become less free.

Top 10 most-read Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner stories of 2014 (December 31, 2014)

Interviews with the three U.S. Senate candidates – Republican Ed Gillespie, Libertarian Robert Sarvis, and Democrat Mark Warner, who narrowly won re-election in November – were among the top ten, as well as an assessment of David Brat's surprise victory over House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in the Republican primary. Early in the year, conservative activist Grover Norquist correctly predicted that the GOP would gain control of the Senate.

Gay marriage, Governor Bob McDonnell's indictment on federal corruption charges, podcaster Adam Koresh's views on NSA spying, and the self-defense products sold by entrepreneur Paul Jones rounded out the top ten most-read stories by the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner.

Barry Goldwater 'absolutely' was a libertarian, his son explains (December 30, 2014)

Goldwater, who represented California in Congress from 1969 to 1983, explained that his father remained an icon of the Republican Party despite differing from social conservatives on contentious issues.

In the senior Goldwater's view (and his son's, too), “whether you're gay or a lesbian is a personal thing. It's no business of the government. And abortion, a woman who is carrying this baby – that's her decision, not the government's,” said Barry, Jr. “He was pretty consistent with his libertarian and conservative views when it came to such things as social issues.”

Cato Institute panel discusses obscure but pivotal gay civil rights case (November 24, 2014)

Although these events took place decades ago, Rauch said, “this is not ancient history. The principle is alive today.” Linsky noted that the current work of the Mattachine Society of Washington is a “testament to history itself,” because it is “giving voice to individuals who couldn't stand up for themselves.”

Noting the progress over the past several decades – including legal gay marriage in the majority of states, the end to the gay military ban, and other legal achievements – Rauch said that ONE Inc. v. Olesen is “the most important civil rights case we've ever had” as gay people and it put gay men and lesbians “on the path to freedom,” because it provided the legal foundation to talk about ideas and to “transmit those ideas at a great personal risk.”

After a series of questions and answers with the audience, moderator Walter Olson noted the importance of the discussion, which has broader applications than simply gay Americans. It demonstrated, he said, how “freedom of expression” assists the liberation of “historically marginalized groups” and their individual members and that, ultimately, suppression of speech and the press harms those groups by depriving them of their capacity to argue for their own dignity and civil rights.

Gov. Terry McAuliffe touts Virginia film industry at Charlottesville movie fest (November 6, 2014)

Big Stone Gap was filmed entirely in its namesake Virginia mountain town and stars Jenna Elfman, Jasmine Guy, Ashley Judd, and Patrick Wilson. All four actors and Trigiani spoke at a press conference at the Paramount Theater prior to the film's screening, and Governor McAuliffe made a surprise appearance as it ended.

McAuliffe took that opportunity to boast about Virginia's film industry and the economic benefits it generates.

“We are so excited about our film industry,” he said, pointing to figures from 2012 that indicate there was “about $380 million of economic activity here in the Commonwealth,” creating 3,000 jobs.

Virginia Senate hopeful Robert Sarvis talks about U.S. policy toward Africa (November 1, 2014)

The role of African countries as transit ports in the international illicit drug trade is something that also concerns Sarvis, and he has a solution for it.

“Our drug war has undermined the rule of law and civil society in Latin America,” he noted. “That's also happening in Africa. It's also undermined our efforts in Afghanistan over the past decade.”

Whether in Africa or elsewhere, he explained, “the problem is our war on drugs and anything that we can do to move away from our prohibitionist mentality is going to undermine the violent gangs and organized criminal enterprises that we created” through current drug policy dating back several decades.

Sarvis said that legalizing marijuana in just two states, Colorado and Washington, has already had an adverse effect on drug cartels operating in Mexico.

“We can have beneficial effects around the world by changing our policy at home on drugs,” he asserted.

Monique Luiz, 'Daisy Girl' from controversial 1964 campaign ad, speaks at UVA (October 15, 2014)

For more than four decades, Luiz did not acknowledge that she was the girl in the ad. In 2009, however, she discovered that another woman was claiming to be her and was trying to capitalize on the TV spot's notoriety. Luiz came forward with documentation that she was the authentic “Daisy Girl” and subsequently was interviewed by Mann for his book, which is how she came to appear at UVA this week.

When she auditioned for the part, neither she nor her parents knew that DDB was making a political ad. She stood out among the many little girls who tried out because of her red hair, and also because her father was persistent.

“I think it was my father who sold them” on the idea “that I could do it,” she recalled. “He pretty much said, 'I can't guarantee anything but she'll try.'”

Economist Adam Smith looks at the 'Bootleggers & Baptists' phenomenon (October 14, 2014)

Smith explained that the term “bootleggers and Baptists” originated during alcohol Prohibition in the 1920s, when “you had bootleggers and Baptists with aligned interests” even if they did not realize it.

Baptists, he explained, proclaimed “Down with legalized distribution of alcohol!” because they saw drinking as morally detrimental. Bootleggers, too, proclaimed “Down with legalized distribution of alcohol!” because Prohibition raised the price of illegal liquor and fed more profits to the bootleggers.

“It was a boon to the bootleggers,” Smith explained, “and the Baptists were kind of oblivious to that situation.”

A full, reverse-chronological listing of Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner articles can be found here.

Sanctions: South Africa, Libya, and the Cuban Embargo

Today's announcement from Presidents Barack Obama and Raul Castro about progress toward normalizing relations between the United States and Cuba and the possible end of the 55-year-old embargo on trade with that island nation reminded me of a time, long ago, when I was testifying before the House Foreign Affairs Committee subcommittee on Africa.

The topic was sanctions against South Africa, with an aim of ending apartheid there.

I testified that sanctions were a futile gesture and never worked the way they were intended.

The subcommittee chairman, Howard Wolpe (D-Mich.) identifying me as a conservative -- I was testifying alongside Alan Keyes -- tried to trap me by asking whether I also opposed sanctions against Libya or Cuba. I said yes. He was surprised but commended me for my consistency.

Here's a clip from C-SPAN of that hearing on November 5, 1987:

Here's the entire three-and-a-half hour hearing, which includes testimony from Chester A. Crocker, Assistant Secretary, Department of State-African Affairs; Thomas Reilly Donahue, Secretary-Treasurer, AFL-CIO; Nicholas Haysom, Deputy Director, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg-Centre for Applied Legal Studies; Alan Keyes, Resident Scholar, American Enterprise Institute; James Mndaweni, President, National Council of Trade Unions; Thokoana "James" James Motlatsi, President, South Africa-National Union of Mineworkers; Patrick J. O'Farrell, Executive Director, African-American Labor Center; Richard Sincere, Research Associate, Ethics and Public Policy Center; Damu Smith, Executive Director, Washington Office on Africa; and Peggy Taylor, DirectorAFL-CIO-Legislation.

Meanwhile, over on Examiner.com ...

The last few days have been busy ones for me in terms of posting articles as the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner on Examiner.com.

I have two articles based on reactions to President Barack Obama's fifth State of the Union Address:

Virginia Republican Congressmen Respond to 2014 State of the Union Message

and

Gay groups comment on Obama's 2014 State of the Union address

On Monday, libertarian/anarchist activist Adam Kokesh was in Charlottesville to read excerpts from his forthcoming book and talk about his time incarcerated for civil disobedience in support of the Second Amendment. I interviewed him about some current issues and this is the result:

Podcaster Adam Kokesh talks about NSA spying, gay marriage, and Justin Bieber

Earlier, I posted three articles about Virginia political issues:

Legal ethicist Jack Marshall weighs in on Bob McDonnell 'Giftgate' scandal
Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring will challenge anti-gay marriage laws
Virginia political leaders react to Governor Bob McDonnell's federal indictment

Still earlier, I gathered some comments that expressed skepticism about President Obama's planned reforms of the NSA's extensive domestic spying operation:

Negative reactions to President Barack Obama's speech on NSA domestic spying

And finally, my last Examiner.com article of 2013 dealt with a professional interest of mine, Africa. This one was based on an interview with a libertarian Africanist -- not a phrase you're likely to hear very often.

Omidyar Network's Karol Boudreaux offers optimistic view of African economies

Keep checking back here to see when I link to new Examiner.com articles.

From the Archives: 'The Poverty of Development Economics in Africa'

(This article appeared originally in the New York City Tribune on March 16, 1990, under the headline, "The Poverty of 'Development Economics' in Africa."  It has not previously appeared on the World Wide Web.)

African development specialists complain that Poland and Hungary will get over $500 million in economic aid in 1990 while the entire continent of Africa gets only about two-thirds that amount. There are substantial arguments to justify this imbalance, the most persuasive being that the Poles and Hungarians are eager to transform their deteriorating economic systems into free enterprise zones.

At the same time, it is clear that billions of dollars poured into persistently socialist and increasingly corrupt African governments over the past two or three decades has been money down a rathole. Congress and the President seem to think that American aid should be sent where it will be used most wisely and most profitably.

Certainly, poverty in Africa is one of the most serious problems facing the world today. Pervasive hunger and heavy national debts on that huge continent drain the international economy of resources that could be put to better use elsewhere, creating wealth rather than depleting it. To understand the current sad state of economic development in sub-Saharan Africa, one must go back to the early independence period.


Unfortunately, for both political and economic reasons, African governments adopted statist economic policies whose effect was to stifle growth, not enhance it. As Indian economist Deepak Lal put it in his aptly-titled book, The Poverty of 'Development Economics', “The most serious current distortions in many developing countries are not those flowing from the inevitable imperfections of a market economy but the policy-induced, and thus far from inevitable, distortions created by irrational dirigisme.”

In other words, current poverty in Third World countries and especially in Africa is the result of conscious policy decisions by ruling elites, often aided by development economists trained in the West who quite readily discarded the classical and orthodox economics in the tradition of Adam Smith, David Ricardo, and even John Maynard Keynes in favor of dicier theories and practices.

Perhaps the most trenchant and unconventional critique of orthodox development economics is found in Jane Jacobs' widely-discussed 1984 book, Cities and the Wealth of Nations. In it, Jacobs tackles head-on the field of macroeconomics and the development policies that flow from it, calling the whole field “a shambles.”

Like others who have analyzed the history of development aid, Jacobs notes that the impulse to send aid to underdeveloped countries was electrified by the success of the Marshall Plan in post-war Western Europe. The problem, of course, is that Marshall Plan aid was intended to repair fully developed but war-damaged economies, not transform embryonic economies ex nihilo.

“The healing of organisms,” she says, “including the organisms known as economies – is not at all the same as the metamorphosis of organisms, the conversion of them into something different.” Since the growing development industry of the 1950s and 1960s insisted on calling its projects “mini-Marshall Plans” and the like, disappointment was inevitable. This disappointment came at a high prices, as well.

One estimate is that in the 30 years ending in 1986, the West transferred about $1.6 trillion to the Third World, an amount equal to the total worth of all industrial stock traded on the New York Stock Exchange, and double the value of the entire U.S. agricultural sector.

The failure of the development economists was in their definition of development. They saw poverty as an obstacle to be overcome. They used military rhetoric to define development as a single-minded goal that can be reached by strategies, long-term planning, and setting targets. The unstated assumption was that “economic life can be conquered, mobilized, bullied, as indeed it can be when it is directed toward warfare, but not when it directs itself to development and expansion.”

Moreover, as Michael Novak has often pointed out, development economists are forever seeking the “causes of poverty.” Poverty, across all cultures and for most of human history, is mankind's normal state. What needs to be explored are the causes of wealth. Fortunately, that project was set off on a good start by Adam Smith in 1776.

The key, argues Jacobs, is that by its very nature, “successful economic development has to be open-ended rather than goal-oriented, and has to make itself up expediently and empirically as it goes along.” Jacobs defines economic development “as a process of continually improvising in a context that makes injecting improvisations into everyday life feasible,” amplifying this definition with the concept of “drift”: development entails “unprecedented kinds of work that carry unprecedented problems, [which drift into] improvised solutions, which carry further unprecedented work carrying unprecedented problems ...”

Small-scale economic actors in the Third World can be remarkable flexible in this fashion. Precisely because of the precariousness of their situation (most often in the unprotected, informal sector that exists apart from the officially sanctioned economy), peasants and micro-entrepreneurs respond well to the price mechanism. Deepak Lal argues that “unlike in richer countries, economic agents in poor ones will have few 'reserves' to fall back upon and will thus have to adjust speedily to a change in their economic environment by swiftly altering the terms on which they are willing to exchange economic commodities.” In developed economies, protected by large savings or the safety net of the welfare state, economic actors “can postpone the required price adjustments in a changing economic environment.”

It seems clear from this analysis that the informal sector – which, after all, existed and grew in the pre-modern era in Western countries even during the age of mercantilism – is the most effective engine of economic growth. It alone, unencumbered by the conservatism of bureaucracies and political elites, ready to adjust to changing conditions, willing to risk arrest and prosecution in order to achieve economic success, can create the conditions for growth even in the poorest of countries. Western development aid should thus be focused on assisting the informal, small-business sector and avoid government-to-government transfers that entrench unproductive, statist policies.

Richard Sincere is a Washington-based issues analyst and author of Sowing the Seeds of Free Enterprise: The Politics of U.S. Economic Aid in Africa, published in 1990 by the International Freedom Foundation.

From the Archives: 2013 Nobel Peace Prize Recalls Chemical Weapons in Africa

Yesterday in Oslo it was announced that the 2013 Nobel Peace Prize will go to a group that monitors and discourages the use of chemical weapons in violation of international law.

As Alan Cowell reported in the New York Times,

Urging the destruction of an “entire category” of unconventional weapons, the Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded its 2013 Peace Prize on Friday to a modest and little-known United Nations-backed organization that has drawn sudden attention with a mission to ensure that Syria’s stocks of chemical arms are eradicated.

The award, to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, surprised some Nobel watchers partly because of the unprecedented nature of its current task: overseeing the destruction of a previously secret chemical weapons program quickly amid a raging civil war.

The award brought to mind an article I wrote almost a quarter-century ago about chemical-weapons use by the Soviet Union and its Cuban ally in Africa. Published in the New York City Tribune on July 25, 1989, the piece appeared under the headline, "Nerve Gas Use Poisons U.S. Relationship with Soviets." The headline is somewhat inaccurate, as the article is about calcium cyanide gas, not nerve gas (a distinction brought out in the text).

One sentence stands out as though it could have been written in recent weeks about the situation in Syria:

While 400 or 500 poison gas casualties among tens of thousands of Angolans killed by conventional mean in the past few years seems militarily insignificant, it appears that the Soviets and their Cuban surrogates are using Africa as a laboratory for inhuman experiments.

So far as I know, this article about chemical weapons deployment in Angola in the 1980s has not previously been available on the Internet.

- - -

Is the CIA covering up the use of chemical weapons by Soviet and Cuban forces in Angola? This question was raised recently when strong evidence came to light showing that calcium cyanide, a deadly poison with no known antidote, has been used by Cuban forces against Angolan civilians and supporters of UNITA, the anti-Marxist freedom fighters led by Dr. Jonas Savimbi.

Despite the physical evidence, which has been verified by teams of scientists in Austria, Belgium, Britain, and West Germany, the CIA and other U.S. intelligence agencies refuse to acknowledge that the Soviets have a new chemical weapon nd that they are using it in Angola.

Prof. Aubin Heyndrickx, a distinguished toxicologist from the University of Ghent in Belgium, came to the United States recently to bring his findings regarding these chemical weapons to the attention of American policymakers. He said that U.S. officials are afraid to acknowledge the use of calcium cyanide in Angola for political reasons, because there is a “direct implication of Russia” in the evidence. The United States, he said, “is one of the most difficult countries in the world to accept realism.”

Prof. Heyndrickx describes calcium cyanide as unprecedently effective. It is, he says, faster at producing death than nerve gas. In doses too small to kill, it causes irreversible brain damage, skin burns and abrasions. The surviving victims, he said at a luncheon sponsored by the International Freedom Foundation in Washington, need our humanitarian assistance. They need new clothes, because often all the clothing in their villages has been contaminated by the poison. They need medical care. But most of all, they need recognition by Washington officials of their plight.

The overarching reason for official U.S. skepticism on this issue is the renewal of detente and good relations with Moscow under Mikhail Gorbachev's policies of glasnost and perestroika, and the fear of damaging East-West relations. But the more immediate concern for American diplomats as well as others (from Cuba, Angola, and South Africa) is the success of the Angola-Namibia settlement agreement signed last December. This agreement, the result of eight years of hard negotiations under the leadership of Chester Crocker, former assistant secretary of state for African affairs, could be scuttled if news of chemical weapon use by Cuban forces became public.

In fact, Congress has mandated that if the president confirms that the Cubans are using chemical weapons in Angola, then the United States cannot provide money for the United Nations peacekeeping and transition forces in Namibia. The Bush Administration is hesitant to let Congress know – officially – that 400 to 500 Angolans are suffering the acute effects of calcium cyanide poisoning, not to mention the hundreds who have died since 1985, when the weapon was introduced to the Angolan conflict. As a result, despite the need for medical care in Western hospitals, the United States, Belgium, and the United Kingdom have denied entry visas to Angolans in great pain from cyanide gas poisoning. The authorities are afraid the victims' stories, once made public, will threaten fragile diplomatic efforts.

Still another reason why the intelligence community is afraid of this news coming to public attention is misplaced professional pride: the CIA and other agencies are embarrassed for not having discovered this new Soviet weapon. Moreover, because there is no known protective measure against this type of gas, nor any known antidote, its existence would throw NATO planning into a tizzy.

All the gas masks, all the poison gas pills, all the detection devices issued to NATO soldiers – all would be useless in the face of a Soviet calcium cyanide attack on the European front. Coincidentally, it has been demonstrated that in Afghanistan, Soviet troops have been testing new protective clothing and new types of gas masks. A captured gas mask is currently being examined by scientists in West Germany; no results of their investigation have yet been announced.

That is why this situation is worrisome. While 400 or 500 poison gas casualties among tens of thousands of Angolans killed by conventional mean in the past few years seems militarily insignificant, it appears that the Soviets and their Cuban surrogates are using Africa as a laboratory for inhuman experiments.

Like the Nazis and the communists who faced each other down during the Spanish Civil War, using the plains of Spain to test new weapons as a prelude to World War II, the Soviets and Cubans are testing this previously unknown poison on innocent Angolan civilians caught in the crossfire. Captured Angolan army officers have told Western intelligence agents that they themselves are not allowed to handle these weapons; only the Cubans use them under strict Soviet supervision.

Fortunately for the Angolan people, there has been no recorded use of these horrid weapons since April of this year. Still, that use came after the settlement agreement that is bringing an end to the 15-year-old conflict in the region and bringing independence to Namibia. It constitutes a violation of that agreement – not a minor violation, but a major breach of trust by one of the parties (Cuba) against the others (South Africa and the United States).

In light of the Soviets' use of poison gas against their own people in the Georgian capital of Tbilisi a few months ago, this situation should not go unnoticed. The Bush Administration should order a full-scale investigation.

Department of Defense scientists should go to Jamba in Angola, where an unexploded calcium cyanide bomb has been captured by UNITA soldiers and sits ready to be examined. The State Department should hurry along visa applications to allow gas victims to come to the United States for medical care.

President Bush should put pressure on our NATO allies to release the results of scientific studies that are currently being hidden from public view for political reasons, studies that demonstrate conclusively that new Soviet poison gas weapons have been used in Angola. The Soviets and Cubans should be called to account for this violation of human rights and the treaties that banned the use of such weapons more than 60 years ago.

Most of the world applauds the diplomacy that led to the Angola-Namibia settlement late last year. It would be foolish to jeopardize that agreement for trivial reasons. However, that risk is worth taking in order to expose to the world the Soviet Union's use of dangerous, new chemical weapons.

Richard Sincere is a Washington-based policy analyst who writes frequently on African affairs.