Bush’s Legacy in Iraq
Although there is a lot to criticize about George W. Bush’s presidency, and about his foreign policy, there is not much bad one can say about his policy towards Africa, the forgotten continent.
He is one of the most popular U.S. presidents in history in Africa with parents in Darfur calling their sons George Bush.
Andrew Natsios takes a look at why Bush is so popular in Africa, while the rest of the world thinks so little of him.
Certainly one factor is that Africa is not the Middle East or central Asia where America is fighting two unpopular wars and where polls show America at an all-time low in public esteem. In Sudan, the United States played a central role as peacemaker in ending a 20-year civil war between the Arab north and African south, which killed 2 million people.
It was the Bush administration that first raised the alarm about the atrocities in Darfur, organized a massive humanitarian relief effort to save people in the displaced camps, and rallied an international coalition to send peacekeeping troops to restore order through the United Nations and the African Union.
While the civil war continues, casualties have declined and people are being fed by aid agencies, thanks to US government generosity, which may explain why Bush is so popular among the Africans in the camps. America has played an important role as mediator in Burundi, Liberia, Northern Uganda, Sierra Leone, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo after civil wars devastated all five countries. Administration policy in Africa has not been without its failures: its military campaign in Somalia has been an embarrassment, putting vulnerable people at risk.
Although the above has certainly contributed to Bush’s popularity, his enduring legacy in ‘Africa rests on humanitarian and economic, not political, foundations. More than anything else it has been the revolution in the US government’s development assistance that is responsible for Bush’s popularity.’
The Bush administration doubled foreign aid worldwide over the past eight years, the largest increase since the Truman administration, and used it to encourage poor countries to undertake political and economic reform. Total US government development aid to Africa alone has quadrupled from $1.3 billion in 2001 to more than $5 billion in 2008, and is scheduled to go to $8.7 billion in 2010, principally for education (primary school enrollment in Africa is up 36 percent since 1999), healthcare, building civil society, and protecting fragile environments.
Africa has received $3.5 billion in additional funds from Bush’s Millennium Challenge Corporation initiative, which rewards poor countries that encourage economic growth, govern well, and provide social services for their people. The president’s HIV/AIDS program, principally focused on providing Africans with anti-retroviral drugs to treat the disease (1.7 million people are on the therapy), has been such a success that the program has been extended to 2015 at $48 billion. His five-year, $1.2 billion effort to combat malaria has provided 4 million insecticide-treated bed nets and 7 million drug therapies to vulnerable people.
The Africa Growth and Opportunity Act, approved in 2000 and reauthorized in expanded form in 2004, provides trade benefits with the United States for 40 African countries that have implemented reforms to encourage economic growth. Since 2001, US exports to Africa have more than doubled to $14 billion a year, while African exports to the United States more than tripled to $67 billion, of which $3.4 billion has been in goods other than oil. USAID has provided more than $500 million in trade capacity building for poor countries to access international markets, which is the only way Africa will escape the poverty that has for too long oppressed the continent.
In short, Bush has done a lot for Africa, more than any other Western leader in (modern) history, be he either American or European.
Despite all the jokes commentators frequently make about Bush’s ‘compassionate conservatism’ he has shown to have compassion with Africans who struggle daily; not to buy that new flatscreen television, but to survive. For this, he deserves respect.










I never voted for W, but by 2006 I came to the idea that maybe W is Truman for the right (but less cranky), at least with Iraq, we see the beggings of a represenative democracy within 5 years of its invasion/incursion (you pick) than the 20 years of military dictatorship (and 33,000 US soldiers deaths within 3 years) South Korea endured before it had a represenative government. Also, Truman worked with blacks like W. And both were very unpopular at the end of their terms in office.