ASMA KHALID, HOST:
As President-elect Donald Trump prepares to return to the White House, we want to talk about what a second Trump term could mean for countries and regions around the globe. Today, let's turn to Africa. And for a look at how the U.S.-Africa relationship might shift in a second Trump administration, I'm joined now by two experts, Zainab Usman - she's director of the Africa Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace - and Mvemba Phezo Dizolele. He's director of the Africa Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Thank you both for being here.
ZAINAB USMAN: Very nice to be here.
MVEMBA PHEZO DIZOLELE: Thank you very much, Asma.
KHALID: What are the reactions that you've been hearing from Africans across the continent? How are they responding to the incoming Trump administration? And, Zainab, why don't we start with you?
USMAN: I think to begin with, many people are not that surprised to see President Donald Trump reelected. Even in his first term, people had very mixed reactions to him. There were those who kind of connected with his approach to being what they at least would describe as being a deal-maker, as someone who communicated what he wanted and what he expected in return. There are a lot of African leaders and perhaps African stakeholders who can connect with that. I suppose they are, in a sense, expecting him and his administration to be a lot more focused on that deal-making approach.
KHALID: What have you been hearing, Mvemba?
DIZOLELE: President Trump has a base in Africa, and that base is one that shares the religious views of many of the Republican party's and the support of (ph) Donald Trump. So they seen him as this person who stands on the right side of culture wars, issues of gay rights, issues of abortions and so on. If you take a country like Uganda, that has been in a very turbulent relation with United States and even with the World Ban, over gay rights and so on - they welcome the return of President Trump because these will no longer be the issues that will determine the quality and the nature of their relationships.
KHALID: If we can talk about economic policy for a moment here, Trump has said that tariffs are the most beautiful word in the dictionary. Tariffs are, broadly, one of his signature economic foreign policy tools. He has threatened tariffs against China, as well as regional trading partners like Canada and Mexico. What are any of the trade concerns in Africa? And are there concerns about tariffs or trade relationships?
USMAN: Indeed, the African continent has a trade preference program with the United States called the African Growth and Opportunity Act, which allows a number of African countries - mostly outside North Africa - to be able to export duty-free to the U.S. market about 1,800 product lines. This trade program is set to expire in 2025. I think September or so. But I would say that also, beyond AGOA, a key frame through which the U.S. has thought of engaging with Africa economically is the great power competition with China. I think that is going to really motivate even the incoming administration of President Donald Trump. Whether that means that there might be some strategic thinking around exempting African countries from these tariffs is yet to be seen.
DIZOLELE: But China is a key player in Africa, and U.S. doesn't come as close as China in terms of investment and infrastructure project and the level of money that China has put into Africa. So as the president and his administration seek to counteract China in Africa, will they offer more put into the Africans, or will they simply punish Africans for collaborating with China?
KHALID: When we talk about investments, just earlier this month, President Biden visited Angola and pledged an additional $600 million to this large infrastructure project. Do you both see investments in Africa like this as bipartisan? And do you see, you know, this project that we're talking about in particular as having longevity beyond the Biden administration?
USMAN: The Lobito Corridor project is meant to be a counter to China's Belt and Road Initiative. And I believe that there is actually bipartisan support around it. And the core of the project is actually a rail line that connects Zambia, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Angola and terminates at the Port of Lobito in Angola. And it's meant to transport unprocessed critical minerals - cobalt in particular, nickel, copper and a few others. There are a lot of African stakeholders that are also worried that this looks like an extractive project. And they want to see investments in refining, value addition and manufacturing and processing of these commodities rather than an extractive project.
DIZOLELE: There's a lot of incentive for the U.S. Congress, particularly on the Republican side, to invest more in it because it signal action against China. The problem is, on the ground, the Chinese have a strong grip on mining operations in Zambia and in the DRC. So unless the U.S. is determined to increase its level of investment in the mining sector and literally do more than the Chinese are doing, it only will make sense if the U.S. and China find a way to work together.
KHALID: The U.S. is the largest humanitarian donor to Africa in the world. At the same time, we've often heard the president-elect talk about the fact that America First is his central thesis. Are there concerns that aid priorities might change with this new administration?
DIZOLELE: Asma, for sure. Humanitarian aid has been important in Africa, and it is true that the U.S. has been the leader in that space. But I hope that as the president takes charge, it will be clear to them that America First will not just depend on cutting aid here and there, but the very survival of the U.S. is also connected to the rest of the world. It becomes important for the U.S. to continue engaging not just on the humanitarian side, but also on good governance and democratization, public health programs. There's just no way for the U.S. to retract fully. It's just not going to be practically possible.
USMAN: At the same time, if you really drill down into the numbers, something in the region of 50-70% of those disbursed funds actually end up staying in Washington, D.C. Very little gets to actual recipients. The amount of money that gets to actual recipients does help, but the problem is there's just a lot that is wrong with this entire system. When you talk to a lot of recipient countries, at least those that are not in war or in conflict, they would tell you that what they want is not humanitarian assistance. It's not charity. They want to be able to do better trade for their small businesses, for their local farmers. So I think there is some kind of reform that does need to happen.
KHALID: All right. Well, thank you both very much for taking the time.
DIZOLELE: It's a pleasure. Thank you for having us, Asma.
USMAN: Thank you very much for having us, Asma.
KHALID: That was Zainab Usman with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and Mvemba Phezo Dizolele with the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC) Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
