Order Code IB95052
CRS Issue Brief for Congress
.Received through the CRS Web
Africa: U.S. Foreign Assistance Issues
Updated June 28, 2005
Raymond W. Copson
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress
CONTENTS
SUMMARY
MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
U.S. Aid to Africa: An Overview
Bilateral Aid
Background
DFA and Child Survival assistance
Economic and Security Assistance
Food Aid
Peace Corps
Security Assistance
Regional Programs
African Development Foundation
Refugee and Disaster Assistance
Multilateral Assistance
Total U.S. Assistance
FY2006 Request and Congressional Action
FY2005 Request and Congressional Action
Comparison with Other Donors
Recent Trends in U.S. Aid
Sustainable Development Initiatives
Issues
Millennium Challenge Account
AIDS
NEPAD and the G8
Other
LEGISLATION
Appendix: Selected Africa Assistance Acronyms
IB95052
06-28-05
Africa: U.S. Foreign Assistance Issues
SUMMARY
Under the Administration’s FY2006
teers there by the end of FY2005. The U.S.
foreign assistance request, U.S. aid to sub-
African Development Foundation makes small
Saharan Africa would continue to grow, due
grants to African cooperatives, youth groups,
to sharp increases through the State
and other self-help organizations. U.S. secu-
Department’s Global HIV/AIDS Initiative.
rity assistance, though still far below levels
Twelve “focus countries”in Africa are benefit-
seen in the 1980s, has increased in recent
ting substantially under this program. Assis-
years, primarily because of U.S. support for
tance through the Child Survival and Develop-
African peacekeeping initiatives. The World
ment Assistance programs would decline, but
Bank’s International Development Associa-
a new Transition Initiatives program would
tion (IDA) is the principal multilateral channel
provide $95 million to Ethiopia and Somalia.
for U.S. aid, but the United States also con-
Overall, non-food aid to Africa would total
tributes to the African Development Bank and
about $3.6 billion under the request compared
Fund, and to United Nations activities in
with an estimated $3.4 billion being allocated
Africa.
in FY2005.
USAID Administrator Andrew Natsios
U.S. aid to Africa reached a peak in
has testified that in FY2005, the aid program
1985, when global competition with the So-
is emphasizing peace in Sudan, ending famine
viet Union was at a high point. As the Cold
in Ethiopia, and combating HIV/AIDS. He
War eased, security assistance levels for
has also stressed the importance of agricul-
Africa began to drop. In 1995, at the outset of
tural development. In a June 26, 2003 speech,
the 104th Congress, substantial reductions in
President Bush described a “partnership” with
aid to Africa had been anticipated, as many
Africa including support for security and
questioned the importance of Africa to U.S.
development. In August 2002, the Adminis-
national security interests in the post-Cold
tration announced initiatives on access to
War era. As the debate went forward, how-
potable water, clean energy, reducing hunger,
ever, congressional reports and bills acknowl-
and development and conservation in the
edged U.S. humanitarian, economic, and other
Congo River basin. The initiatives are to
interests in Africa. Aid levels did fall, but
make extensive use of public-private partner-
began a gradual recovery in FY1997. Assis-
ships. As part of its counterterrorism efforts,
tance through the Child Survival and Develop-
the Administration has also launched initia-
ment Assistance (DA) accounts has now
tives to strengthen security forces in the Sahel
leveled off, but aid to Africa is reaching new
region and in East Africa.
highs due to aid through the Global AIDS
Initiative.
The overall level of funding for aid to
Africa remains a continuing subject of debate.
U.S. assistance finds its way to Africa
Other issues include the eligibility of African
through a variety of channels, including the
countries for aid through the Millennium
USAID-administered DA and Child Survival
Challenge Account and U.S. support for the
programs, food aid programs, and refugee
New Partnership for Africa’s Development
assistance. The Peace Corps is expanding in
(NEPAD), an African initiative linking in-
Africa and plans to have about 2,700 volun-
creased aid with policy reform.
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress
IB95052
06-28-05
MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
On June 27, 2005, the House Committee on Appropriations reported the Foreign
Operations Appropriations bill (H.R. 3057/H.Rept. 109-152). As in previous years,
appropriations for most Africa-specific programs are not earmarked in the bill, but the
appropriators would provide more than requested worldwide for Child Survival and Health
programs as well as Development Assistance, suggesting that the Administration would have
ample resources for meeting its proposals for Africa through these programs. On June 10-11,
2005, G8 finance ministers meeting in London agreed on a plan to provide $40 billion in debt
relief to 18 poor countries, including 14 in Africa. The agreement is subject to approval at
the G8 summit in Scotland, July 6-8. In a June 7 press conference with Britain’s Prime
Minister Tony Blair, President Bush announced an additional $674.4 million in aid to Africa
in FY2005, to be drawn from food and disaster assistance funds, as well as refugee aid,
already appropriated by Congress. The President affirmed that the United States would not
be participating in Blair’s proposed International Finance Facility, which would initially
provide $25 billion in additional aid to the sub-Saharan region.
Related CRS products include CRS Report RL32796, Africa, the G8, and the Blair
Initiative; CRS Issue Brief IB10050, AIDS in Africa; CRS Report RS21181, HIV/AIDS
International Programs: Appropriations, FY2003-FY2006; CRS Issue Brief IB98006,
Agricultural Export and Food Aid Programs; CRS Report RL32427, Millennium Challenge
Account: Implementation of a New U.S. Foreign Aid Initiative; and CRS Report RS21772,
AGOA III: Amendment to the African Growth and Opportunity Act.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
U.S. Aid to Africa: An Overview
Bilateral Aid
U.S. assistance finds its way to Africa through a variety of channels. Bilateral or
country-to-country aid, also known as direct assistance, is given through non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) or private and voluntary organizations (PVOs), contractors, and
African government ministries and agencies. Multilateral aid, or indirect assistance, is given
first to international financial institutions (IFIs) and U.N. agencies, which in turn channel it
to Africa through their own programs.
Background. Bilateral aid obligations to sub-Saharan Africa were at high levels in
the mid-1980s due to the global competition with the Soviet Union and efforts to combat
famines afflicting several African countries at the time. Toward the end of the decade,
competition with the Soviet Union began to fade as a U.S. priority, and efforts to reduce the
U.S. budget deficit began to intensify, contributing to an overall reduction in assistance to
the sub-Saharan region. Moreover, policymakers were placing increased emphasis on human
rights and commitment to economic reform programs in making their decisions on aid
CRS-1
IB95052
06-28-05
allocations. Consequently, aid to some African countries that had been major Cold War aid
recipients, such as Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of the Congo) and Liberia, was
sharply reduced.
The reduction in Africa aid took place almost entirely within the security-oriented
programs: military assistance and especially the Economic Support Fund (ESF). ESF aid is
a type of economic assistance allocated by the State Department, in consultation with the
U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), with the objective of promoting U.S.
security interests. By the mid-1980s, many in Congress and in the wider aid-oriented
community had come to believe that security assistance programs in Africa had grown too
large and that more U.S. aid should be used to promote long-term development. During the
Cold War, a few African countries regarded as strategically important, such as Sudan, Kenya,
and Somalia, had received substantial grants for the purchase of military equipment, but this
sort of aid was also dropping as the 1980s ended. By FY1994, military grants or financing
to purchase equipment had been phased out, and military aid was largely confined to small
training grants, typically ranging between $100,000 and $200,000, funded under the
International Military Education and Training (IMET) program.
Figure 1. U.S. Non-Food Economic Aid to Africa
F is ca l Ye a rs , $ m illio ns
2 5 0 0
2 0 0 0
1 5 0 0
1 0 0 0
5 0 0
0
1 9 9 6
1 9 9 8
2 0 0 0
2 0 0 2
2 0 0 4
2 0 0 6 R
G lob al A ids In itia tive
D A , C h ild S u rviva l, E S F , TI
In 1995, at the beginning of the 104th Congress, proposals to restructure and reduce the
U.S. foreign assistance program raised questions about the future of U.S. aid to sub-Saharan
Africa. Many questioned the strategic rationale for assisting Africa in the post-Cold War era,
and asserted that 30 years of U.S. assistance had accomplished little — whether in terms of
promoting economic growth and democratization, or achieving other objectives. The critics
generally favored humanitarian assistance, but sought sharp cuts in other programs. As the
CRS-2
IB95052
06-28-05
aid debate proceeded, however, it became apparent that cuts for Africa would be less than
initially anticipated. The view that the United States has important humanitarian, economic,
and other objectives in Africa was vigorously asserted by supporters of the Africa aid
program, and came to be reflected in report language on the major foreign assistance bills,
as well as in the bills themselves. Aid did decline, but a slow recovery began in FY1997.
The solid portion of the bars in the accompanying chart (Figure 1) shows non-food
economic assistance to Africa through the major bilateral U.S. aid programs: Child Survival
and Health, Development Assistance (DA), and the Economic Support Fund (ESF). Also
included is Transition Initiatives (TI) assistance, a new program that would be created under
the FY2006 foreign assistance request to promote stabilization, reform, and post-conflict
reconstruction in fragile states. These four programs are administered by the U.S. Agency
for International Development (USAID). The checkered portion of the bars shows aid to
Africa through the Global HIV/AIDS Initiative (GHAI), administered by the Department of
State. GHAI is the principal component of the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief
(PEPFAR) and began operations in FY2004. Assistance through GHAI to the 12 PEPFAR
focus countries in Africa was an estimated $264 million in FY2004 and $781 million in
FY2005, and would reach $1.2 billion in under the FY2006 request; while the USAID
programs, taken together, would level off. GHAI assistance includes the provision of
antiretroviral therapy, safe injections, safe blood supplies, and abstinence/faithfulness
education. (Table 3, below, provides detail on these and other programs that channel aid to
Africa.)
DFA and Child Survival assistance. Falling ESF levels threatened the overall
scale of the sub-Saharan aid program after 1985, and this threat led to the creation of the
Development Fund for Africa (DFA), which specifically earmarked a minimum level of the
worldwide Development Assistance (DA) program for the region. Obligations for sub-
Saharan Africa projects under the DFA reached $846 million in FY1992, but dropped well
below $800 million in subsequent years despite efforts by some Members to increase the
DFA appropriation to $1 billion or more. The DFA was last earmarked by Congress in the
FY1995 appropriations, when $802 million was appropriated, and DA for Africa has since
been provided out of the worldwide Development Assistance appropriation.
For FY1996, Congress began to appropriate another type of assistance: the Child
Survival and Disease Programs Fund, renamed the Child Survival and Health Programs Fund
(CSH) in FY2002, which has channeled substantial amounts of aid to Africa. In recent years,
annual USAID presentations to Congress on the budget request for aid to Africa have varied
both with respect to using the term DFA and with respect to including CSH aid in an overall
DA amount or in breaking out CSH assistance and DA separately. This has left the
terminology governing aid to Africa somewhat confused. However, appropriations bills now
treat CSH and DA as separate programs, and that practice is followed in this issue brief.
Meanwhile, the term “DFA” is rarely used today, although the Development Fund for Africa
is mentioned in the Foreign Affairs Authorization (S. 600) reported in the Senate (S.Rept.
109-35) on March 10, 2005 (see below, Legislation).
CRS-3
IB95052
06-28-05
Economic and Security Assistance
Table 1 ranks African countries that would receive more than $5 million under the
FY2006 request through a wide range of U.S. economic and security assistance programs,
including the Global HIV/AIDS initiative but not food aid and disaster assistance.
Madagascar and Cape Verde have agreed to $110 million compacts with the Millennium
Challenge Corporation (see below), but information on the annual allocation of this aid is not
yet available and it is not included here.
Table 1. Leading U.S. Assistance Recipients in Africa
($ millions)
Country
FY2006
FY2005
FY2004
Request
Estimate
Actual
Uganda*
220.4
148.6
112.8
Kenya*
212.9
159.1
101.2
South Africa*
189.9
139.4
99.1
Nigeria*
175.7
130.1
80.2
Zambia*
160.0
113.4
82.1
Ethiopia*
145.0
114.1
74.3
Tanzania*
127.5
103.4
58.9
Sudan
112.4
200.9
170.7
Mozambique*
81.5
80.3
59.9
Liberia
89.8
44.1
203.0
Rwanda*
85.0
50.5
35.9
Namibia*
58.8
44.2
26.8
Botswana*
43.7
30.5
11.7
Mali
39.2
38.6
43.0
Dem. Rep. Congo
33.5
38.0
40.4
Ghana
33.4
40.3
41.5
Malawi
32.9
33.3
34.8
Senegal
30.0
29.9
34.1
Cote d’Ivoire*
30.0
20.9
7.5
Madagascar
22.8
22.8
23.3
Angola
20.7
21.5
23.4
Guinea
20.5
17.7
21.9
Benin
17.9
17.9
18.4
Zimbabwe
14.3
13.8
15.5
Djibouti
9.3
6.3
7.1
Sierra Leone
9.0
11.3
9.2
Eritrea
6.9
10.1
8.2
Burundi
6.1
6.4
6.4
Chad
5.2
3.0
3.1
Source: USAID. Amounts exclude food aid.
Note: All amounts include economic and security assistance, as well as assistance
under the Global AIDS Initiative.
* Global AIDS Initiative “focus” country. Estimated allocations included.
CRS-4
IB95052
06-28-05
The high aid level for Uganda reflects not only U.S. backing for its struggle against
AIDS, but also a view among policymakers that Uganda’s “Prosperity and stability are
essential to growth and stability in the east and central African region” generally (USAID
Congressional Presentation, FY2004). Kenya is going through a democratic transition
following multi-party elections in December 2002; and with Ethiopia, Nigeria, South Africa,
and Djibouti, it is regarded as a strategic partner in the war on terrorism. Sudan’s relatively
high rank reflects U.S. assistance directed to southern Sudan and is focused on conflict
prevention, food security, and primary health care. (Aid for Darfur is being provided
principally through disaster relief, refugee assistance, and Contributions for International
Peacekeeping. For further information, and CRS Issue Brief IB98043, Sudan: Humanitarian
Crisis, Peace Talks, Terrorism, and U.S. Policy.)
Plans to phase out the South Africa program were shelved by the Clinton
Administration because of that country’s slow rate of economic growth and the difficulties
it has experienced in creating new jobs. Moreover, policymakers have wanted to show
continuing support for South Africa’s post-apartheid transition, which began in 1994 with
the country’s first universal suffrage elections. South Africa has the world’s largest
population of HIV/AIDS victims, with an estimated 5 million infected. Aid for Zimbabwe
focuses on the struggle against HIV/AIDS, expanding opportunities for participation in
political decision making, and expanding economic opportunities for the disadvantaged. No
assistance is channeled through the Zimbabwe government.
Food Aid. Emergency food aid to Africa fluctuates in response to the continent’s
needs, and the amount provided by the end of a fiscal year often exceeds the initial request.
The additional amount is taken from a food aid reserve fund. Emergency food aid is
provided under Title II of the P.L. 480 program (named for P.L. 83-480, enacted in 1954),
which is implemented by USAID in cooperation with the Department of Agriculture. For
further information on food assistance programs, see CRS Issue Brief IB98006, Agricultural
Export and Food Aid Programs.)
Peace Corps. The Peace Corps expects to have more than 2,700 Peace Corps
Volunteers (PCVs) serving in 26 sub-Saharan countries by the end of FY2005, up from an
estimated 1,900 in 2002, because of the Administration’s Peace Corps expansion program.
(For further information, see CRS Report RS21168, The Peace Corps: Current Issues.)
Under the Peace Corps Act (P.L. 87-293), volunteers are to help the poorest people meet
their basic needs, to promote a better understanding of the American people, and to promote
a better understanding of other peoples on the part of Americans. In Africa, the Peace Corps
attempts to accomplish these objectives through small-scale projects in agriculture,
education, health, the environment, small business development, and youth. PCVs are also
involved in the struggle against Africa’s AIDS pandemic through prevention efforts,
capacity-building for local AIDS support providers, care for orphans and vulnerable children,
and support for people living with HIV and AIDS.
Security Assistance. The security assistance program in Africa, which had declined
with the end of the Cold War, has expanded in recent years, primarily in response to
widening conflict and political instability in Africa. Economic Support Fund aid has been
used to support economic reform in Nigeria, a “safe skies” program to improve African air
traffic safety, human rights and democracy education, and other objectives. ESF aid is also
helping strategic partners in the war on terrorism through cooperation on border control,
CRS-5
IB95052
06-28-05
freezing terrorist assets, implementation of the peace agreement in southern Sudan, and other
activities. In addition, the Defense Department conducts AIDS prevention education
programs, primarily with African militaries.
Table 2. Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities
($ millions)
Operation
FY2006
FY2005
FY2004
(Request)
(Estimate)
(Actual)
War Crimes Tribunal - Rwanda (UNICTR)
13.7
16.4
16.3
Sierra Leone (UNAMSIL)
3.7
47.4
71.0
Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUC)
202.3
249.1
30.1
U.N. Operations in Ethiopia/Eritrea (UNMEE)
32.8
50.4
49.5
Burundi Operation (ONUB)
89.9
94.1
41.6
U.N. Mission in Liberia (UNMIL)
159.2
134.3
290.3
Sudan/Darfur
250.0
250.0
UN Operation in Cote d’Ivoire (UNOCI)
71.9
112.7
82.0
Total
823.5
954.3
580.9
(Errors due to rounding.)
Through the Peacekeeping Operations (PKO) program, the United States supported the
Africa Crisis Response Initiative (ACRI), which trained small units of African armies for
possible peacekeeping duties, as well as for other regional peacekeeping initiatives. In
FY2004, ACRI was succeeded by the Africa Contingency Operations Training Assistance
(ACOTA), which focuses on training trainers and on programs tailored to individual country
needs. Foreign Military Financing (FMF) resumed in FY1999 and under the FY2005 request
under the FY2005 request would be used to strengthen counter-terrorism capabilities in
Africa, bolster border security, and help Kenya protect itself against terrorist infiltration from
Somalia. International Military Education and Training (IMET) programs in Africa are
aimed at promoting professionalism and respect for democracy and human rights, while
enhancing capabilities for participation in peacekeeping operations. These programs
typically run well under $1 million per country.
The United States contributes to United Nations peacekeeping operations in Africa and
elsewhere through a program entitled Contributions to International Peacekeeping Activities
(CIPA, Table 2). Funds for CIPA are appropriated in the legislation that funds the
Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, rather than in the Foreign Operations
appropriation, which governs foreign assistance.
Regional Programs. Both DA and ESF funds are used to support USAID’s Africa
Regional Programs, which are designed to confront challenges that span the borders of
African countries. These include regional programs in health, conflict prevention,
democracy, education, and agriculture. The Initiative for Southern Africa supports efforts
to promote trade and investment through the Southern Africa Enterprise Development Fund
and other programs. The Trade for African Development and Enterprise (TRADE) initiative
aims at strengthening business and promoting policy and regulatory reform throughout the
sub-Saharan region. The Africa Trade and Investment Policy (ATRIP) program, which
CRS-6
IB95052
06-28-05
provides technical assistance, training, and other aid to African countries implementing free-
market economic reforms, is part of this initiative. For FY2005, the Administration sought
$4 million in FMF for an African Coastal and Border Security program.
African Development Foundation
The African Development Foundation (ADF) has a unique mandate to make small
grants directly to African cooperatives, youth groups, and other self-help organizations.
These grants usually range from less than $20,000 to a maximum of $250,000, although
appropriations language permits a waiver of the $250,000 ceiling. In addition, the ADF
supports grassroots development research by African scholars and promotes the
dissemination of development information at the community level. By law, the ADF is
limited to 75 employees. Its seven-member Board of Directors must include five
private-sector representatives. ADF does not station U.S. employees in overseas posts, but
instead works through local-hires and periodic field visits.
The creation of the ADF in 1980 reflected a widespread view among many development
experts — and in Congress — that foreign policy considerations were playing too large a role
in the U.S. development aid program for Africa; that the USAID bureaucracy tended to delay
the delivery of needed assistance; and that existing aid was governed by a “trickle down”
philosophy that could be combated by delivering some aid directly to poor Africans and their
community organizations. Legislation establishing the ADF (P.L. 96-533, Title V) stated
that its purposes were to strengthen the bonds of friendship between the people of Africa and
the United States; support local self-help activities in Africa; stimulate participatory
development; and promote the growth of indigenous development institutions (P.L. 96-533,
Title V). The organization began operations in 1984.
Refugee and Disaster Assistance
The United States responds to African humanitarian crises in part with Title II food aid,
discussed above, and in part through its refugee and disaster assistance programs. Most
refugee assistance comes from the Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA) account and
goes to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and international organizations,
as well as private and voluntary organizations assisting African refugees. In addition, the
Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance (ERMA) account, created in 1962 to deal with
unexpected refugee situations, has been drawn upon for African emergencies several times
in recent years.
USAID’s Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA) also plays a major role in
responding to African crises. “Situation Reports” published by USAID’s Office of Foreign
Disaster Assistance monitor the U.S. response to African humanitarian crises through food
aid and other emergency assistance. To find these reports, visit [http://www.usaid.gov/] and
click on “Our Work” and “Humanitarian Assistance.”
Multilateral Assistance
The United States provides aid to Africa indirectly through international financial
institutions (IFIs) and United Nations agencies. World Bank lending through its “soft loan”
CRS-7
IB95052
06-28-05
affiliate, the International Development Association (IDA) is the largest single source of
development capital in Africa. IDA loans, which are considered a form of aid since they are
virtually interest-free and carry extended repayment periods, have focused on strengthening
public sector management, transportation, agriculture, and various social problems. IDA
has been particularly active in assisting efforts by the recipient countries to carry out free-
market economic reforms. In 2004, IDA devoted about 45% of its new loan commitments
to sub-Saharan Africa, so that about $408 million of the $907 million U.S. contribution to
IDA in that year can be said to have gone indirectly to the region. The African Development
Fund (AfDF) has been another major channel for indirect U.S. aid to Africa. The Fund, an
affiliate of the Africa-based African Development Bank (AfDB), makes loans on highly
concessional terms to the poorest African countries. The AfDB lends on roughly commercial
terms to creditworthy African borrowers, but at the same time, it holds 50% of the voting
power in the AfDF.
Total U.S. Assistance
Table 3 lists most components of U.S. assistance to sub-Saharan Africa and indicates
that under the FY2006 request, assistance would rise to $3.6 billion, not including food aid,
up from $3.5 billion in FY2005. Table 3 includes an additional $674.4 million in FY2005
aid for Africa announced by President Bush in a June 7, 2005, press conference with
Britain’s Prime minister Tony Blair. This additional food, disaster, and refugee assistance
will be drawn from general funds already appropriated by Congress, including funds in the
FY2005 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations (P.L. 109-13), signed into law on May 11,
2005. The components of the additional aid are $90 million in International Disaster and
Famine Assistance, $94.4 million in Migration and Refugee Assistance, $240 million in P.L.
480 Title II food aid, and $250 million in food aid from the Bill Emerson Humanitarian
Trust, administered by the Secretary of Agriculture.
FY2006 Request and Congressional Action. The Bush Administration’s
FY2006 assistance request for sub-Saharan Africa, released on February 7, 2005, would
continue the pattern of increasing aid for the region, largely due to the expansion of the State
Department’s Global HIV/AIDS initiative. Aid through this program would grow by more
than 50%, to $1.2 billion, as compared to FY2005, while aid under the Child Survival and
Development Assistance programs would decline. Development Assistance funds totaling
$95 million for Ethiopia and Sudan have been shifted to the new Transition Initiatives
program for fragile, post-conflict states. Liberia, where elections are scheduled for October,
would receive $75 million through the Economic Support Fund. The Administration
requested $3 million for the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) worldwide, although
$5 billion in FY2006 funding had been anticipated under the original Millennium Challenge
Account program. (See below, Issues.)
On June 27, 2005, the House Committee on Appropriations reported the Foreign
Operations Appropriations bill (H.R. 3057, H.Rept. 109-152). As in previous years,
appropriations for most Africa-specific programs are not earmarked in the bill, but the
appropriators would provide more than requested worldwide for Child Survival and Health
programs as well as Development Assistance, suggesting that the Administration will have
ample resources for meeting its proposals for Africa through these programs. Bilateral aid
worldwide through the State Department’s Global HIV/AIDS Initiative (GHAI) would be
reduced by $100 million, which could affect Africa. At the same time, Africa could benefit
CRS-8
IB95052
06-28-05
from the $100 million added to the GHAI request for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria. (See CRS Report RS21181, HIV/AIDS International Programs:
Appropriations, FY2003-FY2006). The bill meets the Administration’s requests for the
African Development Bank and Fund, and provides $20.5 million for the African
Development Foundation. H.R. 3057 provides less than requested for the activities of the
Millennium Challenge Corporation worldwide.
FY2005 Request and Congressional Action. The Administration’s FY2005
budget request would have funded most Africa assistance programs at levels closely
reflecting those seen in FY2004. However, the budget proposed just over $1 billion in
additional spending in 12 African focus countries under the State Department’s GHAI
initiative. Some observers were concerned that aid under the Child Survival and
Development Assistance programs, administered by USAID, was slated to decline for several
countries. These included the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ghana, and Uganda,
among others.
Table 3. Assistance Designated for sub-Saharan Africa
($ millions)
FY2006
FY2005
FY2004
FY2003
FY2002
Program
Request
Estimate
Actual
Actual
Actual
Child Survival & Health Fund
325.9
356.8
477.3
541.1
424.4
Global HIV/AIDS Initiative
1,206.3
781.5
263.8
Development Assistance
428.5
547.4
466.7
490.7
454.0
Transition Initiatives
95.0
—
—
—
—
ESF
151.9
104.2
74.1
109.4
120.0
Peace Corps
68.7
75.7
62.2
63.3
53.7
African Dev. Foundation
18.9
18.8
18.6
18.7
16.5
Migration and Refugee Assistance
256.5
323.8
226.4
228.5
187.5
African Development Bank
5.6
4.1
5.1
5.1
5.1
African Development Fund
135.7
105.2
112.1
107.4
100.0
Liberia/Sudan in Other Appropriations
385.0
Millennium Challenge Account
—
—
—
—
—
Subtotal, Economic & Humanitarian
2,693.0
2,317.5
2,091.3
1,564.2
1,361.2
International Narcotics & Crime
4.2
10.5
6.9
6.7
7.5
Peacekeeping Operations
41.4
133.2
30.2
78.1
54.9
IMET
11.0
10.8
11.2
9.9
10.3
Foreign Military Financing
24.0
26.3
20.9
28.0
33.5
Contributions to Int’l Peacekeeping
823.5
954.3
580.9
366.7
513.0
Nonprolif., Anti-terrorism, Demining
30.4
31.5
25.8
19.7
12.1
DOD AIDS Education, Af. militaries
0.0
7.5
4.2
7.0
14.0
Subtotal, Military and Other
934.5
1,174.1
680.1
516.1
645.3
TOTAL
3,627.5
3,491.6
2,771.4
2,080.3
2,006.5
Food Aid
228.8
1,013.9
1,187.9
1,165.9
462.9
Total Including Food Aid
3,856.3
4,505.5
3,959.3
3,246.2
2,469.4
CRS-9
IB95052
06-28-05
The FY2005 Consolidated Appropriations (H.R. 4818/P.L. 108-447), as in previous
years, did not specify Africa’s portion of appropriations for major programs, such as Child
Survival aid, Development Assistance, and the GHAI initiative. Allocations from worldwide
appropriations were made by the Administration and released with the FY2006 budget
request, as indicated in Table 3. The legislation earmarks $311 million in bilateral economic
assistance for Sudan, and provides $93 million in other aid as well.
The conference report noted that funds for CSH and DA programs worldwide
significantly exceed the Administration’s request. It added that “managers therefore expect
USAID to restore cuts in African country allocations in those accounts to their FY2004
levels, consistent with proper programmatic considerations.” The Consolidated
Appropriations will provide $1.5 billion for the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC)
worldwide, as compared to the Administration’s request of $2.5 billion.
Comparison with Other Donors
According to figures compiled by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD), the United States was the largest bilateral donor of net bilateral
Official Development Assistance (ODA) to sub-Saharan Africa, in 2003, the most recent year
for which data are available, followed by France, Germany, and the United Kingdom.
However, the European countries and the European Communities together provided
considerably more to Africa than the United States. ODA includes a wide-range of non-
military aid disbursements. Many countries continued to give a larger proportion of their
assistance to sub-Saharan Africa than the United States. The region received about 32% of
U.S. ODA in 2002, according to the OECD, in contrast to 57% of French aid , 37% of British
aid, and 47% of German aid. Japan was the eighth ranking donor to Africa in 2003,
according to the OECD, providing about 8% of its aid to the region. On May 24, 2005,
European Union foreign and development ministers pledged that their governments would
reach the United Nations target of providing 0.7% of GDP in foreign aid in 10 years. As an
interim target, the Europeans would provide $25 billion in added annual aid by 2010. Some
cautioned, however, that these pledges could be affected by budget difficulties in some
European countries.
Recent Trends in U.S. Aid
U.S. officials continue to stress a strong commitment to assisting Africa. In a June 26,
2003, speech to a meeting of the Corporate Council on Africa, President Bush spoke of a
“partnership” with Africa, including U.S. help in establishing peace and security, making
advances in health and literacy, and developing free economies through aid and trade.
During the speech, part of the run-up to his July 7-12, 2003, trip to Africa, the President
announced $100 million in anti-terrorism assistance over 15 months to countries in East
Africa and $200 million over five years both to train teachers in Africa and to provide
textbooks through Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Secretary of State Powell,
addressing the Corporate Council on June 27, 2003, said that Africa’s “boundless potential”
could not be realized unless the continent moved against corruption.
In April 2003, Andrew Natsios, the Bush Administration’s Administrator for USAID,
told the House Committee on International Relations that during the next five years, his
agency would be “renewing its leadership in agricultural development assistance.” Focusing
CRS-10
IB95052
06-28-05
assistance on countries whose governments govern well and follow effective economic
policies has been another emphasis. In a speech at the Heritage Foundation on January 7,
2003, for example, Natsios said that apart from humanitarian assistance, U.S. aid should be
directed toward “good performers” with respect to democracy and governance reforms. The
speech echoed findings of a major USAID report, Foreign Aid in the National Interest,
released the same day. In House testimony on April 1, 2004, Natsios said that in accordance
with Administration priorities, his agency would be emphasizing peace in Sudan, ending
famine in Ethiopia, and fighting HIV/AIDS.
Democracy promotion has been a feature of the Africa assistance program for many
years. USAID began to develop programs for democracy support and introduce democratic
criteria for sub-Saharan recipients in 1990, anticipating democracy support efforts in Eastern
Europe and the former Soviet Union. The shift toward building democracy is reflected in
the changing identities of the leading U.S. aid recipients. In 1985, Sudan, Somalia, Liberia,
Kenya, and Zaire topped the list, and none of these had a democratic government. By 1995,
South Africa, where a democratic election took place in 1994, was the top recipient by a wide
margin, while the other leading recipients were all undergoing democratic transitions.
USAID officials have testified that the United States has had a number of successes in
promoting sustainable development, democracy, and conflict resolution. They point to
Ghana, Uganda, Zambia, and Mali, as examples of successful political and economic
transitions, while Mozambique and South Africa are cited as models of transition from
conflict to peace as well. Skeptics of USAID’s programs, noting, for example, widespread
reports of corruption and undemocratic practices in Zambia and a slow rate of economic
growth in post-apartheid South Africa, question whether economic and political gains are
genuine or will endure. With respect to conflict resolution, some note that two leading
recipients, Uganda and Ethiopia, have recently been involved in armed conflicts, as have
some lesser recipients, including Rwanda, Zimbabwe, Eritrea, and Angola. Supporters of
the program respond by acknowledging that problems inevitably arise within and among
countries that face serious challenges with deep historical roots, but insist that overall trends
in Africa are positive and that long-term development efforts cannot be interrupted every
time difficulties occur.
USAID also maintains that the DFA and CSD assistance have helped African countries
achieve increases in child immunization and the use of oral rehydration therapy, shift their
health policies towards an active emphasis on AIDS prevention, increase the prevalence of
contraceptive use, and boost primary school enrollments. In agriculture, USAID asserts that
DA has helped liberalize agricultural markets, increase smallholder production; and facilitate
the development of new seed varieties. DA has also been used to assist governments
undertaking macro-economic reforms, including reductions in the size of government
bureaucracies and the privatization of government enterprises.
The Clinton Administration launched several special development initiatives in Africa.
The Greater Horn of Africa Initiative (GHAI), aims at easing the perennial food insecurity
in a region extending from Eritrea and Ethiopia to Tanzania by promoting collaboration and
consultation on food security strategies. The Initiative for Southern Africa (ISA) reflect’s
USAID’s recognition of the region’s economic potential and its desire to reinforce South
Africa’s democratic transition as a model for the rest of the continent. The initiative includes
a Democracy Fund, to make grants in the region in support of democracy, and a Southern
CRS-11
IB95052
06-28-05
Africa Enterprise Development Fund (SAEDF), to promote indigenous business
development and ownership.
The Leland Initiative aims at connecting 20 sub-Saharan countries to the Internet. The
initiative is named for the late Representative Mickey Leland, founder of the House Select
Committee on Hunger, who died in a 1989 plane crash while on his way to investigate
conditions in an Ethiopian refugee camp. Technicians from several U.S. government
agencies are working to implement the project, which will make Internet access available to
“all sectors of the African development community,” including NGOs, government agencies,
“private developers,” and individuals. (USAID press release, June 6, 1996.)
South Africa has been a special focus for USAID for several years. After the
installation of a democratically-elected government in May 1994, President Clinton pledged
the United States to $600 million in aid to South Africa over three years. The United States
guaranteed loans for housing, electrification, and small business development. Resources
have also been used to support the growth of small, medium, and micro-enterprises
(SMMEs) in South Africa; strengthen the South African justice system; improve education;
promote primary health care; and foster majority involvement in business.
The Africa: Seeds of Hope initiative grows out of congressional action in 1998, when
the Africa: Seeds of Hope Act (P.L. 105-385) was passed. The proposal was strongly
supported by Bread for the World, which describes itself as “a nationwide Christian citizens
movement seeking justice for the world’s hungry....” The act supports USAID’s Africa Food
Security Initiative by encouraging a refocus on agriculture and rural development. A
presidential report on implementation of the act argued that even more could be done in
agriculture if more funds were available.
President Bush, speaking at the Leon Sullivan Summit in Washington on June 20, 2002,
announced a new Africa Education Initiative. The President promised to double U.S. aid for
education in the region, bringing total spending to $200 million over the next five years. The
President also announced that he would visit Africa in 2003. As noted above, Africa will
also benefit if two other Bush initiatives win approval: the Global AIDS Initiative,
announced by the President in his State of the Union Message on January 28, 2003, and the
Millennium Challenge Account (see below).
Counter-terrorism is the focus of other recent assistance initiatives. The Pan-Sahel
Initiative (PSI) is a joint Defense and State Department program that provides training and
equipment to the armed forces of Mauritania, Chad, Niger, and Mali. According to
Administration officials, the initiative has helped these countries respond to the threat posed
by Algeria-based Islamist guerrillas. The East African Counter-Terrorism Initiative (EACTI)
is training law-enforcement officers in Kenya and other countries.
Sustainable Development Initiatives. On August 23, 2002, the Department of
State released information on four initiatives or “signature partnerships,” which were
formally announced at the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in
Johannesburg on August 29. These initiatives were the Water for the Poor Initiative, the
Initiative to End Hunger in Africa, the Congo Basin Forest Partnership, and the Clean Energy
Initiative. The initiatives, which drew praise from the United Nations representative to the
conference, stress “public-private partnerships,” through which U.S. assistance funds would
CRS-12
IB95052
06-28-05
be used to leverage investments in Africa by other governments, international organizations,
NGOs, and the private sector. For example, under the West Africa Water Initiative, part of
the Water for the Poor Initiative, USAID would provide $4.4 million as a partner in a $41
million, five-year effort to supply potable water and sanitation to rural villages in Ghana,
Mali, and Niger. Other partners would include the Conrad N. Hilton Foundation and
UNICEF. Skeptics of the initiatives maintain that the amounts of U.S. assistance being
offered are modest and seem to come largely from funds that have already been budgeted or
promised. Some also complain that the funds might be used to promote private business
interests. (New York Times, August 30, 2002.) The initiative to end hunger aims at
harnessing science and technology to boost agricultural production and at strengthening
markets to assist small farmers.
In addition to the signature partnerships, USAID released documents at WSSD
reviewing U.S. actions intended to prevent famine in southern Africa and fight infectious
disease. Another document reported on a $15 million investment guarantee by the U.S.
Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) to support the construction of low-income
housing and associated infrastructure in South Africa. The guarantee would help a U.S. for-
profit company support a bank making construction loans to private developers and
contractors. (OPIC press release, August 29, 2002.)
Issues
Millennium Challenge Account. In a March 14, 2002 speech, President Bush
outlined a proposed Millennium Challenge Account (MCA), which would increase foreign
aid worldwide by $5 billion per year over three years, starting in FY2004. The account
would provide additional aid to countries whose governments promote good governance,
invest in people through education and health care, and promote open markets. Although the
promise of increased aid won praise from many observers, some worried that most countries
in Africa will not be able to meet the Fund’s eligibility criteria. In May 2004, the
Millennium Challenge Corporation announced that 8 African countries had been determined
to be eligible to receive grants: Benin, Cape Verde, Ghana, Lesotho, Madagascar, Mali,
Mozambique, and Senegal, and agreements have been reached with Madagascar and Cape
Verde for MCA programs valued at $110 million each. Nonetheless, the program has been
criticized for what some see as a slow disbursal of funds, and as noted above, overall funding
for the MCA is turning out to be less than President Bush initially proposed. For further
information, see CRS Report RL32427, The Millennium Challenge Account: Implementation
of a New U.S. Foreign Aid Initiative; and U.S. Government Accountability Office Report
GAO-05-625T, Millennium Challenge Corporation: Progress Made on Key Challenges in
First Year of Operations (April 27, 2005).
AIDS. The level of funding for HIV/AIDS programs in Africa remains a major focus
of interest. This issue is covered in CRS Issue Brief IB10050, AIDS in Africa. See also CRS
Report RS21181, HIV/AIDS International Programs: Appropriations, FY2002-FY2005.
NEPAD and the G8. In 2001, African leaders approved the New Partnership for
Africa’s Development (NEPAD), championed by the presidents of South Africa, Nigeria,
Senegal, and others. Under the plan, African countries are to intensify efforts to eradicate
poverty, strengthen democracy, deal with corruption, and resolve conflicts in exchange for
CRS-13
IB95052
06-28-05
debt forgiveness from the developed countries as well as increased aid, trade, and
investment. NEPAD includes a “peer review mechanism” intended to assure that African
governments are held accountable for their performance with respect to governance and
economic policy.
At the June 2002 G-8 summit at Kananaskis, Canada, attended by key African leaders,
donors launched an Africa Action Plan to be implemented as NEPAD reforms move forward.
Whether the G8 donors and Africa are living up to their Kananaskis promises is
controversial. Britain will host the July 2005 G8 summit in Scotland, and Prime Minister
Tony Blair intends to focus the meeting on Africa once again. Sweeping proposals for 100%
debt relief, sharply increased aid, and the removal of trade barriers are expected to be
discussed. For more information, see CRS Report RL32796, Africa, the G8, and the Blair
Initiative.
Other. The overall level of U.S. assistance to Africa could again emerge as an issue
in the foreign assistance debate, particularly in view of pressures from Britain and others for
a dramatic expansion of aid to Africa. Some observers express a number of frustrations with
aspects of the foreign assistance program, but these have had little impact on the
congressional aid debate to date. Some argue, for example, that reductions in operating
expenses have forced staff and mission cutbacks that complicate USAID’s ability to
implement the Africa DA program. Critics of this view maintain that USAID must deal with
budget constraints that affect other parts of the government as well. Some also maintain that
the Child Survival earmark has absorbed funds that might otherwise have been used to
promote long-term development, which in turn would promote better health among both
children and adults. Others argue, however, that the Child Survival program has channeled
funds to a critical, immediate humanitarian need, and that the American people strongly
support assistance that benefits impoverished children, funds HIV/AIDS programs, and
promotes vaccine research, among other objectives.
Meanwhile, a debate continues among scholars, analysts, and policymakers about
whether foreign aid is an effective means of spurring growth and poverty reduction in Africa;
what types of aid are most effective; and what role other measures, such as debt reduction
and the removal of trade barriers, might play. For a discussion of these issues, see CRS
Report RL32489, Africa: Development Issues and Policy Options.
LEGISLATION
S. 600 (Lugar). Foreign Affairs Authorization, Fiscal Years 2006 and 2007.
Authorizes $1.1 billion in FY2006 and such sums as may be necessary in FY2007for
Development Assistance worldwide, including the Development Fund for Africa; authorizes
$18.85 million for the African Development Foundation in FY2006 and such sums as may
be necessary for FY2007; affirms U.S. support for the Congo Basin Forest Partnership;
authorizes funds to strengthen judicial capacity in Africa and requires a report from the
President on this effort within six months of passage; authorizes $114.4 million in FY2006
for the Global Peace Operations (GPOI) program, with an initial emphasis on Africa;
authorizes assistance to expand access to clean water; authorizes $325 million in FY2006 for
CRS-14
IB95052
06-28-05
transition initiatives, including those requested for Sudan and Ethiopia. Reported in the
Senate (S.Rept. 109-35), March 10, 2005.
CRS-15
IB95052
06-28-05
Appendix: Selected Africa Assistance Acronyms
ACOTA
Africa Contingency Operations Training Assistance, successor to ACRI.
ACRI
Africa Crisis Response Initiative, which trained military units for peacekeeping.
ADF
African Development Foundation, U.S.-funded public corporation.
AfDB
African Development Bank, an Africa-based IFI.
AfDF
African Development Fund, affiliate of the African Development Bank.
ATRIP
Africa Trade and Investment Program, a USAID initiative.
CIPA
Contributions to International Peacekeeping Activities
CSH
Child Survival and Health Programs Fund.
DA
Development Assistance.
DFA
Development Fund for Africa, part of DA, not earmarked in recent years.
ERMA
Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance, administered by State Department.
ESF
Economic Support Fund, a State Department program for promoting U.S. interests.
FMF
Foreign Military Financing, funds equipment purchases.
GHAI
State Department’s Global AIDS Initiative, part of PEPFAR.
IBRD
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, The World Bank.
IDA
International Development Association, concessional loan affiliate of IBRD.
IFIs
International financial institutions.
IGAD
Inter-governmental Authority on Development, a Djibouti-based organization of
Horn of Africa states.
IMET
International Military Education and Training, a form of military assistance.
MRA
Migration and Refugee Assistance, a State Department program.
NEPAD
New Partnership for Africa’s Development, an African initiative.
NGOs
Non-governmental organizations.
OECD
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, an organization of
developed countries.
ODA
Official Development Assistance, the OECD’s concept of DA.
OFDA
Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance, a part of USAID.
PCVs
Peace Corps Volunteers
PEPFAR President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, a Bush Administration initiative.
PKO
Peacekeeping Operations account authorized by Part II, Chapter 6 of the Foreign
Assistance Act.
PVOs
Private and voluntary organizations
SAEDF
Southern Africa Enterprise Development Fund, a USAID program.
SMMEs
Small, medium, and micro-enterprises.
UNECA
United Nations Economic Commission for Africa, headquartered in Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia.
UNDP
United Nations Development Program
USAID
U.S. Agency for International Development
CRS-16