The US strategic move of its foreign policy towards Africa was driven by several factors at both the local and international levels. Domestically, the US aimed to counter Soviet influence in Africa and avoid another Vietnam war. Internationally, the US wanted to promote peace, security, democracy and economic development in Africa by supporting conflict resolution efforts, advocating for troop withdrawals, and pushing for debt relief. This included the African Growth and Opportunity Act which aimed to boost African exports to the US and reduce poverty. However, some argue that AGOA primarily served US political and economic interests by increasing US influence and opening African markets for exploitation.

1. Surname 1
Name
Instructor
Course
Date
#1 Factors Responsible for the Strategic Move of US Foreign Policy to Africa
The tactical move in the US foreign policy to the African from the Cold War era derives
circumstances both at local and international levels. The interests created by the US towards the
continent are in line with the economic and security features of the African countries (Olsen 6
and Travis 15). Olsen further says that the 9/11 incidence, the US policies focused on protecting
the Americans across the world (8). In this regard, the essay discusses essential factors that form
the base for the shift of the foreign aid policy.
At first, the shifting of the US foreign policy to African countries was driven by the needs
to wage aggressive agendas against the Soviet Union and their influence on the African countries
(Rothchild 199). However, the lessons of Vietnam war made the US accommodate African
aspirations because the Senate liberals did not wish for the outbreak of the war, following the
actions of the Soviet Union to supply military weapons and combat troops to Angola (181). The
Soviets wanted to aid Movement for the Liberation of Angola, but the US was against this
support.
Additionally, the US wanted to promote peace and security in Africa. African continent
attracted the US involvement in dealing with issues of African like security, conflict resolution,
democratization, human rights, trade, poverty and AIDS (Rothchild 179). These issues were
hazardous; therefore, the US wanted to help African countries fight them by curbing regional
tensions and working towards bringing out peace in Africa through cooperation with Soviets

2. Surname 2
(186). Besides, the US worked to bring peace to Africa through supporting mediation. For
instance, the US backing of countries and organizations like Italy, Portugal, United Nations and
OAU in conflict resolution ideas is shown by its support of formal mediatory efforts which was
an indirect form of resolving conflicts (187, 203). This effort helped African countries like
Angola, Namibia, Mozambique and Rwanda. Also, it is essential to note that the US advocated
for the withdrawal of Somali troops from Ogaden, and opposed the 1978’s second invasion of
Angola by Zaire’s Shaba province (182).
Similarly, the US foreign policy shifted to Africa to ensure there were debt cancellation
and economic development of African countries. The efforts are apparent when President Obama
hosts a summit that attracted many African leaders. The interest of the US is based on the fact
that African countries’ economies depict fast growth rate (Olsen 4 and Kindl 78). The US
involvement in trading with African countries increased from 1% to 5% during the President
Clinton era, and there was a consequent expansion of electrical machinery, telecommunication
and aircraft (Rothchild 195). Besides, the majority of US citizens supported the need to support
African countries with the need to combat world hunger. The support led to the formation of the
African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA).
Significance of the US Foreign Policy Shift
In terms of democracy, the US foreign policy advocated for regular elections and
demolition of the one-party system in Africa. The US invested about $244.24 million of USAID
on the development of African countries to achieve democratic goals (195).
On the other hand, the policy facilitated the peace process in Africa through partnering
slightly with Soviets to curb regional conflicts. For instance, the partnership works when the US

3. Surname 3
takes part in negotiation for Namibian independence in 1988 and freedom of Angola from South
Africa and Cuba.
Also, President Clinton urged the International Monetary Fund and World Bank to
proceed with cancelling the debts of African countries for them to have stable economic growth
and have the ability to borrow in the future (Rothchild 197).
The policy also played a role in peacekeeping in African countries like Somali. The US
deployed the United Task Force (UNITAF) to Somali for peacekeeping (Bah and Aning 89). The
US also helped in disarming warlords and providing a conducive environment for the delivery of
food in famine-stricken areas in Somali through the UNOSOM II.
In the economic point of view, the policy led to the formulation of AGOA which benefits
some countries like Mauritius, South Africa and Kenya by expanding their exports to the US
(Didia et al.45).
#3 Relationship between the US and African Interests
The legislation of the AGOA by the US carries both political and economic reasons. The
primary reason for the formation of this Act was to help the African countries export their
products to United States, which does not charge them any duty (Didia et al. 44). Also, the US
formulated this Act to provide a meaningful economic partnership with African countries by
giving them preferential treatment while exporting their products to the US. In this case, the
formation of the Act presents some significant interests in line with economic and political
aspects and benefits of both the Africans and the US.
Politics Around AGOA

4. Surname 4
The political interest by the US to form AGOA was to enhance global corporation and
peaceful coexistence among African countries (55). In my point of view, the formation of this
Act goes beyond the primary interests of the US. I believe the Act was a strategic move to make
the US have an economic impact on the African countries. Through controlling the economy of
these countries by providing cheaper ways of trading, the Soviet Union loses popularity in the
African continent because the US takes advantage of the trade. Also, most of the raw products
are exported to the US, thus making it easy for countries to be controlled. Although the countries
involved derive benefits like multilateral democracy, peace and security, the Act helps increase
the power and influence of the US in the African continent.
Economics Around AGOA
For instance, AGOA depicts the United States’ economic interest in legislating the Act. It
is clear to note that this Act follows a strategic move by the US to find ways of reducing their
Aid to African countries by varying its policy from aid to trade in 1993 (Thompson 56). Shifting
from aid to trade was for the satisfaction of the US’s economic interests to make the African
countries pay their debts. As a result, the benefits accrued from the trade; therefore, are low
because a high percentage of the returns from the business are used to finance the debts. In this
case, the US foreign direct investment shows a decline of 41% in 2002 compared to the year
2001 (56). In addition to that, the conditions for countries to join AGOA clearly define the
interests of the US and what it requires from the African countries. The requirements cover
broadly on the respect for human rights, security of the African countries, touches on child labor,
reduction of poverty, improvement of health care, barriers to trade and political pluralism in
Africa (Thompson 59). The African countries that meet all the conditions highlighted become
eligible to join this Act.

5. Surname 5
Similarly, the African economic interests around AGOA are overwhelming. They wish to
experience cases of reduced poverty, increased export and trading levels and improved peaceful
coexistence in Africa. Their view in substantial economic growth is depicted by the fact that the
Act boosts both the manufacturing and export sectors of the African countries and thus catalyzes
their economic development. Also, it provides the opportunity for the states to fight poverty
through advocating for entrepreneurship and informal trading activities (Thompson 53).
However, in this trade act, Thompson believes that Africans have little to benefit (53).
The small benefit generated creates low-interest levels among some African leaders. Thompson
points out that these leaders believe that the formation of AGOA was a form of modern
colonialization and some interests of the US towards enacting it. The idea is stressed when South
Africa shows the highest foreign direct investment recipience from the US because it provides
room for mineral exploitation (56). The analysis shows that African countries benefit partially
from the Act because they are faced with a contraction of $2.6 billion annually. The reason
behind this case is that the countries depend on primary products for export, thus creating a
vulnerable path that allows infiltration by the trade uncertainties that bring about economic
downfall (53).

6. Surname 6
Works Cited
Didia, Dal, et al. "The gravity model, African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) and US
trade relations with sub-Saharan Africa." The Journal of International Trade & Economic
Development, vol. 24, no. 8, 2015, pp. 1130-1151.
Kindl, Martin. "African Security Futures: Threats, Partnerships, and International Engagement
for the New U.S. Administration."
Olsen, Gorm R. "The Ambiguity of US foreign Policy towards Africa." The SHAFR Guide
Online,
Rothchild, Donald S. "The U.S. Foreign Policy Trajectory on Africa." SAIS Review, vol. 21,
no. 1, 2001, pp. 179-211.
Thompson, Carol B. "US trade with Africa: African growth & opportunity?" Review of African
Political Economy, vol. 31, no. 101, 2004, pp. 457-474.
Travis, Rick. "Problems, Politics, and Policy Streams: A Reconsideration US Foreign Aid
Behavior toward Africa1." International Studies Quarterly, vol. 54, no. 3, 2010, pp. 797-
821.
Sarjoh Bah, A., and Kwesi Aning. "US Peace Operations Policy in Africa: From ACRI to
AFRICOM." International Peacekeeping, vol. 15, no. 1, 2008, pp. 118-132.