U.S.-Africa Policy: An Interview with Judd Devermont

When you were drafting the U.S. strategy towards sub-Saharan Africa (launched in August of 2022), what were your primary objectives? What did you see as the most important things to reshape how the U.S. engages with the continent?  After almost two years, what do you feel like the Administration has achieved, and what is left undone?

Judd Devermont: When I came into the Biden Administration to draft the Africa Strategy, I felt very strongly that it was time for a facelift. We have an incredible record of achievement and making significant contributions to the continent: peace and security, trade investment, particularly health. That’s really been the hallmark of our work for the last 30 years.  But the world has changed a lot in recent years, and we think about this time as a decisive decade, where the ordering of the world is actually being done.

It was my view and the President's view that it was time to reframe Africa's importance to U.S. national security interests. And that is because our key goals globally - whether it's climate change; or it's a free, open prosperous, stable international system; addressing the pandemic and other global health threats; dealing with democratic backsliding – all of those problems require an African voice, African leadership, African contributions, African input. And sometimes that's been missing in our policy. Oftentimes, we talk about what we can do for Africa and not what we can do with Africa.

And what I really thought was important, and ultimately was the animating idea behind the strategy, is that Africans need a seat at the table. There's a whole host of decisions that you have to make if you start with that premise: how do we have more complexity in our relationship? Talk about the things that we agree with and be very comfortable with the things that we disagree with. How do we talk about the multiple variable interests that we have on the continent, and not just allowing a single story to define the relationship? And then what are the kind of partnerships that we need, with African governments, with global partners, with our private sector, with our diaspora? And so, from that conceptual framework, we changed the way that our government thinks, talks, and partners with the continent.

Now, when I look at what we have done in the past two and a half years, there are a number of things I'm really proud of. I said that a goal of ours was to get more African seats at the table, and we did that. The African Union joined the G20 in September of 2023; we added a third seat for Africa at the IMF; Africa is now joining more of the multilateral development banks; and the President has repeatedly said that Africa should have a permanent seat at the Security Council.

We've also recognized that there is enormous economic opportunity on the continent.  But there are a number of constraints, and the US government would need to have to change the way that we engage with our private sector and African countries to make a difference.

During the Biden Administration, we have directed billions of dollars towards clean energy projects, towards ICT –internet technology –as well as infrastructure, really doing something that we haven't done in decades. We are currently in the process of refurbishing a rail from Angola to Congo to Zambia that is enveloped with agricultural projects, with telecommunications, and with solar energy programs and it's creating a new economic corridor that connects African markets to global markets.

So those are things I think are some of the hallmarks of what we've done. I also can talk about our role in establishing a Diaspora Council recognizing the importance of people to people ties.

But maybe I'll flag just a couple of things that I want to see us continue to do. One is that the continent is increasingly young, connected, and urban.  And we are in a slow shift, I think, towards really engaging in urban development on the continent. It will be 50% urban by the end of this decade. We have a new program in Kenya – it’s a 60 million-dollar program - around urban planning, land use, and transportation. I feel like that's the start, but there's a lot more to do.

I also think there's a lot more that we can be doing in education. African students want to study in the United States. That's a great benefit to our economy and our relationships but also to Africa. I think we can be innovative of how we think about whether it's online education, or more students coming to the continent. And that's something I'd like to see us continue to work through and resolve because it's to the benefit of everyone.

***

Secretary Blinken said we need to stop treating Africa as the subject of geopolitics and treating it instead as the major geopolitical player that it has become. How are you thinking about that? What role do you see African leaders or countries currently taking on in terms of global leadership or on specific issues?

Judd Devermont: It's been an enormous and important shift in our government, mainly with the consistency that we are doing it. It's not like President Nixon didn't talk to Emperor Haile Selassie about Vietnam, for example, or that President Bush didn’t talk to President Museveni of Uganda about the Iraq War. That did happen, but it wasn’t part of the framing, and it lacked the sort of intentionality that we have brought to it. And so that means when we have had major global conferences and conversations, Africans are invited: there were five African leaders at President Biden's Climate Summit in 2021; African leadership and African hosting of the Summit for Democracy in 2022 and 2023; and inviting Africans to join us in a new arrangement around cooperation around the Atlantic Ocean.

And then look at the conversations that we are having to solicit African views on the most important issues of the day: President Biden and President Ramaphosa of South Africa had very good conversations about Russia and Ukraine. They have a different perspective on how we get to a just peace than we have. But by having this conversation, by not being afraid of it, by sharing different points of view, I think it was extraordinarily constructive.  Jake Sullivan, our National Security Advisor, has talked to his counterpart, the South African National Security advisor, Sydney Mufamadi, multiple times to keep working through these issues together.

So, I think that's an extraordinary example of what we're talking about. Consistent, consecutive, and constructive conversations about how we order the world and how we think about the major foreign policy issues of the day.

I'll share just one point that I think is maybe counterintuitive to some people, but we're really proud of it. As we think about the peaceful use of space, we want Africans to be part of that conversation. So three African governments - that's Angola most recently, but also Nigeria and Rwanda – have now joined the Artemis Accords (which is a series of norms), because even the final frontier, even space is a place where Africans need to be part of the conversations. It's a small point, but I think illustrative of the way that we think about the future, and Africa’s role in the future.

***

A lot of the questions we get here when we’re talking about the future of Africa are the roles of other external actors - China, Russia, the Wagner forces, etcetera. How are you thinking about those players vis-a-vis U.S.-African relationships and how did that factor into both your strategy and your actual day-to-day engagement with partners?

Judd Devermont: I think that the central animating idea around the strategy that Africa is important and needs to be part of a global conversation is not something that was perhaps that revelatory because many countries noticed that. There's also almost a reinforcing effect there that we see it, and they see it. So how do we all work together or how do we think about our interests and African interests, and maybe others’ interests, and where there is a need to be competitive, or where there is a need for cooperation, and where there's a need, as Secretary Blinken said, where we have to confront? And so, this has been a really interesting moment as we think about maybe different combinations of partnerships to do positive things on the continent. We work very closely with a number of Gulf States, as well as European States, on Somali security, for example. There's a new interest in having partnerships with, for example, Japan around critical minerals. So we're excited about bringing more countries to the table, recognizing that they're interested in Africa, they see its potential, and we remain interested, and we want to work with them.

At the same time, we understand that there are countries that may not have the same interests or goals in Africa that we do. In some cases, you can be very clear that it is a negative, [for example] the role of Russia and Wagner in Africa that's led to greater exploitation of their resources, manipulation of their politics, and dramatic increases in civilian casualties. And in fact, since Wagner first went to Mali in December 2021, there has been a 270% increase in civilian casualties in that country. So you know, in the case of Russia, it's very clear how disruptive and destructive that relationship is for many countries that have welcomed those military mercenaries into their country.

With the case of China: the views on China for many Africans are about as positive as they are for the United States. And so we have to take that into consideration. Our policy can't be divorced from global competition with China, but it also can't be defined by it. So we've been very intentional. What are the things that we see are threats to the U.S. interest or African sovereignty that is posed by China's engagement there - and let's be very clear about that. Let's have honest conversations, candid conversations, let's not try to obfuscate.

What are the things that China is doing on the continent that is good for Africans? And what are the things that China is doing in Africa in on the continent that could be good for Africans if our African partners negotiated the deals that made sense for their sovereignty, that did not have onerous debt responsibilities or obligations, that respect labor rights, that didn't have environmental degradation, that would be an outcome of that work. And we're here to assist, but there are also lots of opportunities for Africans to avail themselves of the negotiation skills, the mediation, maybe due diligence, and lawyering, so that they can get the best deal that is going to benefit themselves as well as all of us who want to continue to partner with the continent and move towards greater peace and prosperity.

***

What are some of the interesting dynamics at play among “middle power” countries – such as those in the Gulf, or India, Japan, South Korea – and their engagement with Africa. Where do you see growth or opportunities for the U.S. to factor that into our partnership strategies?

Judd Devermont: I think overall, it's a net positive. Although when we talk about specific countries and specific sectors, there may be a more complicated story about what are the negative effects and that's often sometimes when there is civil war conflict and how different countries outline on different sides.

But it does mean an introduction to more capital; it does mean the introduction of more expertise, perhaps; it does mean that we can find or identify countries that may not have as much colonial baggage or not are colored as much by this moment of geopolitical competition, where their interventions are seen as more neutral or at least not perceived as trying to do one thing or the other.

I think there's a huge opportunity about creating value chains on the continent, whether we're talking about agriculture, or critical minerals. I think there are a number of things that, for example, Japan is interested in doing, around disaster response; India as well has done a number of things after some of the cyclones on the Indian Ocean. I think there is some capacity building when it comes to the military that certain countries are able to bring to bear.

I also think there are alliances that can be had across divides when it comes to international issues of importance.  One of the things that may have gone unnoticed, but I thought was really an important moment at the last G20 Summit, is that President Biden, President Lula da Silva of Brazil, Prime Minister Modi of India, and President Ramaphosa of South Africa issued a joint statement about their trust and support for the G20 and cooperation. All of those countries are either current, past, or future G20 hosts. So that's an example of South Africa, India, Brazil, and the United States working together for global order, for global prosperity, for writing the rules of the road that benefit more people.

***

Turning to the role of the private sector, what has been your view of innovation or areas for growth in this space from a perspective as a policy maker, and how are you thinking about that as you're entering this new role in the private sector space?

Judd Devermont: So in 1957, Vice President Nixon went to the inauguration of Kwame Nkrumah in Ghana in March and wrote back a letter to President Eisenhower saying, you know, we need to do more to stimulate U.S. investment and interest in Africa. And so, this has been a 70-year project. Africa still sadly is only one percent of U.S. global trade, and there have been good initiatives that have removed tariff barriers, like the African Growth and Opportunity Act, and lots of different issues, including Prosper Africa, under President Trump, which the Biden Administration continues to support and invest in, that has tried to solve this problem.

But I was compelled to join this incredible company, Kupanda Capital, because there is something amiss between the way the U.S. government talks about increasing trade investment, and what it means to be a company that is succeeding in Africa.

I work with a group of people who have an extraordinary track record of accomplishments -- whether it's in the creative sector –we have a joint venture with a Nigerian record label called Maven that is very successful –to geospatial analytic companies that help people make better decisions about health interventions or investment opportunities, to a company that focuses on fintech and the climate sector.

And so, by working at Kupanda, I feel like I have a front seat, and hopefully, I can share some of those lessons learned with colleagues or former colleagues because this is the value proposition of the United States: that we bring not just government, but a private sector or people-to-people ties which are innovative, a health sector and technological sector to the continent.

I think that there are a really extraordinary amount of opportunities on the continent. It doesn't mean that it's easy. I think that we need to get away from being so overly bullish that it doesn't make any sense; that it sort of challenges what any business person would think about a new venture. But there are opportunities - in the creatives, in the tech sector, in agriculture, and increasingly in infrastructure. As we, the United States, work on improving our infrastructure, we're going to be able to get a lot of capacity, a lot of expertise, and a lot of know-how that I think will ultimately be beneficial to the continent as our companies partner up with African companies or global companies to address some of these problem sets. So, I think that this is an “I will come back to you later, Natalie” conversation!***

As someone who has been on all sides of information production and consumption inside government and out, how can centers like ours, based in universities, pulling together researchers, academics, and students with their own ideas -- best create value or add to the discussion, on any issue? How we can better inform policy makers, particularly in the US, but globally, around the issues that you've spoken about today?

Judd Devermont: I think the opportunities are endless. You don't have to be in the Beltway to make a huge difference. Maybe three categories: first is about ideas. When you are working in government, you're always looking for the best idea, but sometimes that's either not accessible to you, or it just seems impossible to get from ideation to implementation, but having a place like the Belfer Center create and present an idea in a way that can be ingested by the U.S. government and the bureaucracy, to sort of stress test and have followed up conversations - I mean, some of the biggest [U.S.] programs that we have done in Africa, have started out as ideas that came from academia, or from think tanks. There's a value in writing without constraint.

There's a little bit of beneficial ignorance about all the things that make it harder to do, that academia can sometimes bring to bear and it's welcome! I don't say it in in a critical way.

Two, which is related, is you can show us what's worked elsewhere. Sometimes, those of us who have worked in a particular region all our lives are not as familiar with what worked in Indonesia or Brazil, what has been a success story for South Korea, or, you know, in America. Right? In Omaha, in Detroit, I've been really interested in urbanization in Detroit, and what are the lessons learned for Africa as that city starts to revitalize?

But at an academic institution, you can bring all that to bear. You can package that, and say not only is this an interesting idea that we want you to work through, but let me tell you how it's worked and not worked in other places, and what can you learn from that? So I think it's ideation, maybe a little bit of the evidentiary base that you derive that from, and how it's worked in other case studies, so real-world examples.

And then, don't underestimate the importance of perspective. When you work in government you live in a little bubble, and you talk to people who have the same goals and maybe have the same backgrounds, same experiences and it becomes an echo chamber.

Maybe the platforming that a think tank, or an academic institution can do, to give people a mic to share… this is how I'm thinking or responding to what you're doing, this is what you're not doing well. Sometimes it's a hugely important insight that we just didn't understand. Sometimes, it’s an issue where the U.S. government believes they're doing some really important work and no one's hearing it, and no one's seeing it. So maybe it's a public diplomacy and communication problem. Unless you have that ability to give people the mic to share their perspectives, Africans, and other academics, sometimes, it won't break through that echo chamber.

So those are three, there are probably hundreds more examples, but those are the ones to mind quickly.