EXTRACTS: the criteria used was to leave specific programs mentioned consultable in the press communication of Mr. Blinken available at The State Department web Page, and reiterate our Democratic governmental blueprint in ethics, which I find beautiful and moving. That a nation in the world could consider The Freedom Charter stating that its nation belongs to its people as treason shows the need for a Freedom Charter in the first form. Focusing on what treason meant to apartheid within this context pisses me off something awful.
Our relationships across the African continent are absolutely central to meeting global challenges. That's why, this week, I traveled to South Africa, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Rwanda. We're strengthening our partnerships to build a better future for our people. ( the) Congressional Black Caucus, many of whom were stalwart supporters of the anti-apartheid movement and who represent part of the vast African diaspora that enriches our nations’ ties. Seeing our first black president, the son of a Kenyan father and an American mother, stand in the two-by-two-meter cell on Robben Island that once jailed South Africa’s first black president. Or hearing the buzz of the vuvuzelas as the U.S. men’s team played the first World Cup ever held in Africa. Today, I have the honor of setting out our government’s new strategy for the partnership between sub-Saharan Africa and the United States. It is fitting to set out the strategy here, on the Future Africa campus, an institution whose mission is bringing together people from different disciplines, backgrounds, and nationalities (...) We know that in South Africa, like in the United States, the long walk to freedom is unfinished. Yet the remarkable progress made is all around us.
In 1956, 156 activists were rounded up for rallying support for the Freedom Charter, a document that had the audacity to claim that South Africa belonged to its people. When the Treason Trial began here in Pretoria, the accused included one of the charter’s drafters, Professor Z.K. Matthews, and a rising ANC activist, Joe Matthews – father and son, and grandfather and father to the woman who today serves as South Africa’s Minister of International Relations and Cooperation, Dr. Naledi Pandor. We see that progress also in the achievements of her fellow South Africans – the recent triumphs of the women of Banyana Banyana, the men of the Springboks. The enduring musical influences of Makeba and Masekela, the new sway of the Amapiano and DJs like Black Coffee, who just took home a Grammy. Finally, it’s fitting to set out our strategy here in South Africa because there is such a deep bond between our nations and people, and all we have in common as vibrant democracies whose diversity remains our greatest strength.
It’s a strategy that reflects the region’s complexity – its diversity, its power and influence – and one that focuses on what we will do with African nations and peoples, not for African nations and peoples. That is why I’d like to focus on four priorities that we believe we have to tackle together which are at the heart of the U.S. strategy for sub-Saharan Africa. First, we will foster openness, by which we mean the capacity of individuals, communities, and nations to choose their own path and shape the world we live in. When leaders of newly independent African nations came together in 1963 to establish the Organization of African Unity, the predecessor to the African Union, here’s how they began their charter: “Convinced that it is the inalienable right of all people to control their own destiny.” It was a conviction born of the struggle of generations of Africans whose destiny had been determined by colonial powers. This inalienable right depends on a system of rules and principles which Africans have helped forge over decades through their leadership in institutions like the United Nations and the African Union. And yet too often African nations have been treated as instruments of other nations’ progress rather than the authors of their own. Time and again they have been told to pick a side in great power contests that feel far removed from the daily struggles of their people. The United States will not dictate Africa’s choices. Neither should anyone else. The right to make these choices belongs to Africans, and Africans alone. At the same time, the United States and the world will look to African nations to defend the rules of the international system that they’ve done so much to shape. These include the right of every country to have its independence, its sovereignty, and its territorial integrity respected – a principle at stake now in Ukraine. We believe that all nations should be able to stand up for the right of a country not to have its borders redrawn by force, for if we allow that principle to be violated anywhere, we weaken it everywhere. Openness also means creating pathways for the free flow of ideas, information, investment, which in the 21st century requires digital connectivity. So the United States is partnering with African governments, businesses, and entrepreneurs to build and adapt the infrastructure that enables that connectivity – an open, reliable, interoperable, secure internet; data centers; cloud computing. (...)
(...) have choices, (...) be able to weigh them transparently, with the input of local communities without pressure or coercion.
Now, for as long as they’ve had their independence, African countries have also recognized that the right of nations to chart their own path is bound up in ensuring the right of individual citizens to do the same thing. (...) The overwhelming majority of people across Africa prefer democracy to any other form of government. Even greater majorities oppose the authoritarian alternatives to democracy. More than 70 percent reject military rule; more than 80 percent reject one-man rule, according to the Africa-based polling organization Afrobarometer. African citizens want democracy – that is clear. The question is whether African governments can make democracy deliver by improving the lives of their citizens in tangible ways. That is a challenge that is not unique to Africa. It’s one facing democracies in every part of the world, including the United States. And it’s a problem that won’t be fixed by maintaining the same approach. (...) We won’t treat democracy as an area where Africa has problems and the United States has solutions. We recognize that our democracies face common challenges, which we need to tackle together, as equals, alongside other governments, civil society, and citizens. (...)
We will work with partners to tackle 21st century threats to democracy like misinformation, digital surveillance, weaponized corruption. (...) We’ll focus on the connection between democracy and security. History shows that strong democracies tend to be more stable and less prone to conflict – and that poor governance, exclusion, and corruption inherent in weak democracies makes them more vulnerable to extremist movements as well as to foreign interference. That includes the Kremlin-backed Wagner Group, which exploits instability to pillage resources and commit abuses with impunity, as we’ve seen in Mali and the Central African Republic. The United States recognizes that African countries face real security concerns, and that countless communities are afflicted by the twin scourges of terrorism and violence. But the answer to those problems is not Wagner, it’s not any other mercenary group. The answer is working to build more effective, accountable African security forces, which respect people’s rights, and tackling the marginalization that often drives people to criminal or extremist groups. (...)
Finally, the answer is peaceful transitions of power, through free and fair elections. African leaders are increasingly underscoring the importance of these transitions to regional security and prosperity. That includes ECOWAS, which is debating whether its 15 member nations should adopt a ban on presidents seeking a third term. Among the most outspoken proponents of the ban are the presidents of Ghana and Nigeria, both of whom are in their second term. Every one of these elections is an opportunity for African citizens and nations to reaffirm that leaders are accountable to their people, and strengthen the case for democracy in the region and around the world. (...) Even before President Putin launched his full invasion, 193 million people worldwide were in need of humanitarian food assistance. The World Bank believes that Russia’s invasion could add another 40 million people to this unprecedented number. Most are in Africa. (...) as the pandemic has demonstrated – as long as any of us are at risk, all of us are at risk. (...)
Leaders across Africa have made clear that while they are committed to doing their part to reduce climate change, they need greater and more reliable energy access to meet people’s urgent needs and growing needs.
We know that this transition will not look the same in every country or community – that it will need to be tailored to individual capacities and individual circumstances. And the United States is committed to working closely with you as you determine how best to meet your specific needs for expanded energy access and economic development, as well as the climate targets that you’ve set. We’re also committed to helping you support the workers and communities who will bear the greatest short-term costs of the shift to clean energy. All that is part and parcel of making what we call a just energy transition. (...) We’re also working together to conserve and restore the continent’s natural ecosystems, which is crucial to reducing emissions and preserving the continent’s unique, extraordinary biodiversity. That means delivering real incentives for governments and communities to choose conservation over deforestation (...)
Prior to 1994, public investment… was largely an instrument for advancing the objectives of the apartheid goverment. the best partnerships: They expand our horizons in unexpected ways. To solve problems, yes, but also to marvel, to explore, to inspire. | 
