Dispatch, Volume 3: 1992

US Department of State

Dispatch, Vol 3, No 1, January 1, 1992


US Support for Direct Investment

Bush Source: President Bush Description: Statement released by the White House, Office of the Press Secretary, Washington, DC Date: Dec, 26 199112/26/91 Category: Speeches, Testimony, Statements Region: Whole World Country: United States Subject: Trade/Economics [TEXT] I am today reaffirming the unequivocal and longstanding support of the United States for a policy of free and open foreign direct investment among all nations. The United States' open investment policy is based on the principle of national treatment: Foreign investors should not be treated differently from domestic investors. This policy provides the means for economies to grow and prosper. All countries--both sources and recipients--benefit from foreign direct investment. The United States, the world's largest source and recipient of direct investment, has a major interest in fostering open investment climates. We are committed to our open investment policy in the United States, and we are aggressively seeking to open markets abroad. Like domestic investment, foreign direct investment stimulates growth, creates jobs, fosters competition, and facilitates the creation and exchange of goods, services, and innovative techniques. It helps our economy maintain investment, which is vital to our economic performance and international competitiveness. Since 1983, the last time the United States issued an investment policy statement, the world has witnessed enormous changes in the treatment of foreign investment. Many countries are dismantling inefficient economic systems and are actively seeking investment from abroad. As other nations around the globe join us in embracing the concept of free markets, it is important to reaffirm our commitment to an open investment policy. It is an essential element of our nation's effort to compete fully in the global economy and is a constant contributor to worldwide growth and the prosperity of nations. (###)
Dispatch, Vol 3, No 1, January 1, 1992 Title:

US Policy On Foreign Investment

Bush Source: President Bush Description: Statement released by the White House, Office of the Press Secretary, Washington, DC Date: Dec, 26 199112/26/91 Category: Speeches, Testimony, Statements Region: Whole World Country: United States Subject: Trade/Economics [TEXT} The United States welcomes foreign direct investment. Foreign direct investment is beneficial to the US economy. Like domestic investment, foreign investment creates jobs, promotes innovation, generates increases in productivity, and thereby raises US living standards. It strengthens US firms and makes them more competitive in the global economy. The United States provides foreign investors fair, equitable, and non- discriminatory treatment as a matter of both law and practice. While there are exceptions, generally related to national security, such exceptions are few; they limit foreign investment only in certain sectors, such as atomic energy, air and water transport, and telecommunications. These exceptions are consistent with our international obligations. Consistent with this policy, the Exon-Florio Amendment to the Defense Production Act provides the President with authority to suspend or prohibit foreign mergers, acquisitions, and takeovers, where there is credible evidence of a threat to the national security.
US Direct Investment Abroad
The United States believes that US investment abroad should also receive fair, equitable, and non-discriminatory treatment. The basic tenet of our policy is that US investors should be accorded the better of national or most-favored-nation treatment. US investors should receive the most favorable treatment offered by the host country to any investor, foreign or domestic, at the time of establishment and thereafter. Accordingly, the United States continues to seek the reduction and elimination of practices by governments which restrict, distort, discriminate against, prohibit, or place unreasonable burdens on foreign direct investment. Foreign direct investment can help ease the adjustment problems facing countries moving from centrally administered to market-oriented economies. For developing countries, particularly those that have embraced free market principles, foreign direct investment is vital to increase growth and reduce debt service burdens. The adoption by all countries of open foreign direct investment policies would contribute significantly to improved worldwide economic health and would diminish distortions in an increasingly integrated world economy.
US Initiatives
The United States has a number of initiatives underway to enhance the free flow of foreign direct investment in accordance with market forces. -- In the Uruguay Round, the United States is negotiating key multilateral agreements to eliminate trade-related investment measures; to protect trade-related intellectual property; and to promote trade in services, an area where many investment rules have prohibited highly competitive US service industries from doing business abroad. -- The United States, Canada, and Mexico are negotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement, in which we are seeking to liberalize investment principles consistent with US bilateral investment treaties. -- In the Enterprise for the Americas Initiative, the United States and its partner are working with the Inter-American Development Bank to help nations of Latin America and the Caribbean to liberalize their investment regimes. To assist in carrying out these reforms, the United States has spearheaded the formation of a multilateral investment fund for Latin America and the Caribbean, which will be administered by the Inter- American Development Bank. Japan, Canada, Spain, Portugal, and several of the largest Latin American countries have agreed to join the United States in contributing to this fund. Others are actively considering joining. -- The United States has signed bilateral investment treaties with 16 countries in Eastern Europe, Latin America, the Caribbean, Africa, and Asia and is negotiating such agreements with a number of other countries. These treaties represent important commitments to investment reform. They incorporate the principle of non-discriminatory treatment; affirm international law standards for expropriation, including the principle of prompt, adequate, and effective compensation; provide for freedom of financial flows; and permit investors to take investment disputes to international arbitration. -- The United States is also vigorously promoting the adequate and effective protection of intellectual property rights. Such protection is essential for the flow of investment into both developed and developing countries. -- At the initiative of the United States, member countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development are studying ways to strengthen multilateral commitment to open, non-discriminatory treatment of investment. -- The United States will continue to encourage Japan to remove its investment barriers as an important goal of the Structural Impediments Initiative talks.
Throughout our nation's history, foreign direct investment has played an important role in increasing economic growth and raising living standards. In order to meet the economic challenges of the 1990s, the United States will continue to implement its open, non-discriminatory investment policy at home and its policy of opening markets abroad. (###)
Dispatch, Vol 3, No 1, January 1, 1992 Title:

Fact Sheet: US Policy on Foreign Direct Investment

Source: White House Description: Released by the White House, Office of the Press Secretary, Washington, DC Date: Dec, 26 199112/26/91 Category: Fact Sheets Region: Whole World Country: United States Subject: Trade/Economics [TEXT] Book value of foreign direct investment in United States: -- As of December 1990 (latest available data), the book value of foreign direct investment totaled $404 billion. Countries with the largest investment: -- United Kingdom--$108 billion. -- Japan--$83 billion. -- The Netherlands--$64 billion. Foreign direct investment in relation to US economy: -- Foreign direct investment represented 5% of the value of US business assets at the end of 1990. -- Foreign direct investment is concentrated in manufacturing where it accounted for almost 15% of sales and 17% of assets in 1989. Foreign direct investment inflows: -- Inflows have fallen sharply in the past 2 years, following a rapid increase in the late 1980s. -- Inflows in 1990 declined 47% from 1989. Preliminary figures for 1991 suggest inflows are down as much as 70%. Investment income: -- In 1990, income payments to foreign direct investors on their investments in the United States were $1.8 billion. -- In 1990, receipts of income by US investors on their investments abroad were $54.4 billion. Some benefits of foreign direct investment for the United States (aggregate data): -- In 1989, employment by US affiliates of foreign companies increased 16%, to 4.4 million workers. -- In 1989, sales by US affiliates increased 17%, to $1,041 billion. -- In 1989, research and development expenditures increased 18%, to $9.3 billion. -- In 1989, foreign owned firms paid, on average, $31,664 per worker. -- In 1989, foreign-owned firms invested $11,769 in plant and equipment per worker. US direct investment abroad: -- In December 1990, the book value of US investment abroad was $421 billion. -- Much of this investment was made 10 to 25 years ago. If this investment is revalued at market value, US investment abroad was $7l4 billion at end of 1990. In contrast, the market value of foreign direct investment in the United States was $530 billion at the end of 1990. Countries with which the United States has signed bilateral investment treaties: -- Argentina, Bangladesh, Cameroon, Congo, Czech and Slovak Federal Republic, Egypt, Grenada, Haiti, Morocco, Panama, Poland, Senegal, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, Turkey, and Zaire.(###)
Dispatch, Vol 3, No 1, January 1, 1992 Title:

Individual Claims Against Iraq

Tutwiler Source: State Department Spokesman Margaret Tutwiler Description: Statement released by the Office of the Assistant Secretary/Spokesman, Washington, DC Date: Dec, 23 199112/23/91 Category: Speeches, Testimony, Statements Region: MidEast/North Africa Country: Iraq Subject: United Nations, Military Affairs [TEXT] The UN Compensation Commission, established pursuant to UN Security Council Resolution 687 (1991), has been working to develop procedures for providing compensation for losses that were sustained as a result of Iraq's illegal invasion and occupation of Kuwait. To that end, it has adopted criteria for the processing of all individual, corporate, and government claims. Claims of individuals for losses up to $100,000 will be processed on an expedited basis. This notice deals with such claims. On December 20, 1991, the commission approved and circulated the forms to be used by individuals to file their claims for losses up to $100,000. (Forms for other types of claims will be available at a later time.) Fixed amounts may be claimed for departure ($2,500 or $4,000, depending on whether the claimant is filing additional claims), serious personal injury ($2,500), and the death of a spouse, child, or parent ($2,500) without documentation of the amount of loss. Where adequate documentation is available, claimants may claim compensation in any amount up to $100,000. Individuals whose losses exceed $100,000 can file for the first $100,000 now and claim the rest at a later stage. Instructions on how to complete the forms will be sent with the claims forms. Claimants should note that since an expedited, simplified process is envisaged, the commission has decided that no compensation will be given to pay attorneys' fees or other expenses incurred in the preparation of a claim. In addition, any compensation, whether in cash or in kind, received from any source will be deducted from the total amount of losses suffered. A claim form must be filled out and returned to the Office of the Assistant Legal Adviser for International Claims and Investment Disputes, Department of State, regardless of whether claimants have already registered their claims with the Office of Foreign Assets Control in the Department of the Treasury. The Assistant Legal Adviser's office will then consolidate the claims and submit them to the Compensation Commission. The Department will submit the claims of US citizens and, as authorized by the claims criteria adopted by the Governing Council of the Compensation Commission, will be prepared to consider submitting claims of residents of the United States. As of July 1, 1992, the commission will begin processing claims submitted by governments up to that date. The final deadline for the submission of claims by governments is July 1, 1993, but it is in claimants' interest to have claims submitted as early as possible. The Department needs time to review the forms and documentation received, follow up with claimants where necessary, and prepare a consolidated statement summarizing the claims. Therefore, claimants wishing to ensure that their claim is considered as soon as possible should return completed form(s) and documentation by March 1, 1992. The Department urges claimants to file by this date but in any event no later than March 1, 1993. Individuals may obtain claim forms and additional information from the Office of the Assistant Legal Adviser for International Claims and Investment Disputes, 2100 K Street, NW, Suite 402, Washington, DC 20037- 7180, telephone (202) 632-5054. (###)
Dispatch, Vol 3, No 1, January 1, 1992 Title:

Yugoslavia: UN Peace Efforts

Boucher Source: State Department Deputy Spokesman Richard Boucher Description: Statement, Washington, DC Date: Jan, 2 19921/2/92 Category: Speeches, Testimony, Statements Region: E/C Europe Country: Yugoslavia (former), Serbia-Montenegro, Ashmore and Cartier Islands [TEXT] The United States strongly supports the efforts of the UN Secretary General, through his personal envoy Cyrus Vance, to establish an effective cease-fire and obtain agreement by all relevant parties to the terms for the deployment of the UN peace-keeping force they have requested. We believe that UN peace-keeping in Yugoslavia as envisaged in the Vance plan can make a crucial contribution to the European Community's [EC] CSCE [Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe]-mandated efforts to promote a political settlement to the tragic Yugoslav conflict. The United States welcomes the progress achieved by Mr. Vance. We commend the public commitments made to Mr. Vance on December 31 and January 1 by the Serbian, Yugoslav military, and Croatian leaderships to the unconditional implementation of a cease-fire and to the introduction of a UN peace-keeping force. The United States calls on all parties in Yugoslavia to fully observe their cease-fire commitments and to cooperate constructively with the UN Secretary General's envoy and to seize this opportunity to move toward genuine dialogue and a political settlement in the context of the EC- sponsored conference on Yugoslavia. The US reiterates its support for the efforts of the CSCE and the European Community to promote a peaceful, negotiated outcome of the Yugoslav crisis. (###)
Dispatch, Vol 3, No 1, January 1, 1992 Title:

Sub-Saharan Africa and the United States-- Part II

Source: Bureau of Public Affairs Description: Part II of series; Part I in Vol 2, No 52. Date: Jan, 6 19931/6/93 Category: Reports Region: Subsaharan Africa Country: South Africa, Namibia, Angola, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Cote d'Ivoire, Kenya, Lesotho, Mali, Malawi, Mauritania, Morocco, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Swaziland, Tanzania, Bahamas, Zaire, Zimbabwe, Ethiopia, Estonia, Madagascar Subject: United Nations, International Organizations, Development/Relief Aid, Trade/Economics [TEXT] The following feature is the second of two parts that are based on the publication "Sub-Saharan Africa and the United States." The first part (published in Dispatch, Vol. 2, No. 52), presented an overview of the history and the current situation in Sub-Saharan Africa. The second part deals with the US role in the region and challenges for future cooperation. The complete publication was released by the Office of Public Communication, Bureau of Public Affairs, in October 1991 and is sold by the Superintendent of Documents, US Government Printing Office (see order form on inside back cover).
US Diplomacy Since Independence
Sub-Saharan Africa is important to the United States chiefly for the following reasons. -- With its 47 nations, Sub-Saharan Africa plays an important, often decisive, role in international organizations and at multilateral meetings. -- The region possesses natural resources important to the American economy--oil, copper, iron, bauxite, uranium, cobalt, chromium, platinum, manganese, gold, and diamonds. -- While the United States needs to buy African raw materials, Africa requires capital investment, new technology, managerial skills, and markets to develop other products. -- The continent is strategically important, as the oil tanker routes from the Persian Gulf to Europe and the Americas pass through African waters. Thus, strategic cooperation with African states is important to the exercise of US global responsibilities. -- Continuing regional conflicts and economic instability make Sub-Saharan Africa a potential arena for rivalry and confrontation between external powers. -- Africa has a particular significance for the United States because of the many Americans of African descent who take a deep interest in the continent's progress. The guiding principle of US diplomacy toward Sub-Saharan Africa since 1960, the year in which so many countries achieved independence, is to promote political stability, economic reform, and democracy. None is possible without the others. And US interests are not served unless these goals can be achieved.
Economic Relations and Assistance
Development assistance has always been an important element in US diplomacy in Africa. Since the countries achieved independence, the United States has been a major contributor of economic aid in Africa, both bilaterally and through international financial institutions, primarily the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and the African Development Bank. Most bilateral assistance has been administered by the US Agency for International Development (USAID).
As the largest single-country market in the world, the United States has always been an important market for African exports. The largest multi- country market is the European Community which, since the 1974 Lome Convention, grants special trade preferences to former European colonies. But in 1990, with imports totaling almost $11 billion, the US market for African goods was more than twice as large as that of any other single country. Most African countries, except for members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries--Gabon and Nigeria--qualify for the US Generalized System of Preferences, which permits the import of more than 1,400 manufactured goods and products at zero tariff rates. Oil, however, supplied chiefly by Nigeria, accounts for more than half of US imports from Sub-Saharan Africa.
Emergency Aid
Sub-Saharan Africa repeatedly has required emergency aid, chiefly medical supplies, food, and refugee resettlement, because of drought, civil strife, and warfare. The United States is a major contributor of such humanitarian assistance and does not exact political concessions for such aid. Thus, food and medical supplies in the past have gone to countries--notably Ethiopia, Mozambique, and Angola--that rejected Western ideas of democracy, hosted Cuban combat troops, and granted military and naval facilities to the Soviet Union. US systematic food aid began in 1954 with Public Law 480 (Food for Peace), which authorized low-priced credit sales or outright grants of surplus agricultural commodities. The United States now is the largest single donor of aid in the Horn of Africa, where drought and civil strife have caused famine and displaced millions. The United States also contributes more than half the supplies distributed by international food aid programs. In FY 1990, the United States provided more than $61 million toward UNHCR's African programs and 20% of the relief efforts of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). The United States also provided food aid to African countries valued at $448 million and another $31 million in non- food disaster assistance.
Political Relations
The goal of US diplomacy is to promote political stability and democracy. The United States does not support one party over another in any intra- African territorial disputes, in accordance with the OAU position that the post-colonial borders must be respected and in support of African efforts to find peaceful solutions to such conflicts. US policy considers the interests and the special responsibilities of those NATO allies who were colonial powers and who have continuing connections and influence in Africa. Also of importance was the activity of the Soviet Union and its allies. The Soviet-bloc countries trained and equipped insurgent movements and sent them large stocks of arms and materiel, military technicians, secret police advisers, and, in the case of Cuba, field troops to bolster regimes that had come to power with a Marxist-Leninist program, as in Ethiopia, Angola, and Mozambique. The Soviet navy, in its quest for expansion beyond home waters, acquired bases or facilities in Luba (Equitorial Guinea), Dahlak (Ethiopia), Maputo (Mozambique), Luanda (Angola), and Conakry (Guinea). The Soviet Union also acquired a base at Mogadishu, Somalia, but the Somalians expelled them in 1977, when the Soviet Union supported Ethiopia in the Somalian-Ethiopian dispute over the Ogaden region. The United States assists countries threatened with aggression--emergency arms aid went to Somalia when Ethiopian troops began their incursion in 1982; to Chad, after Libya's aggression in 1983; and since 1985, after the removal of the restrictions of the Clark amendment, to UNITA, the only viable Angolan resistance to the Soviet- and Cuban-supported one-party regime in Luanda.
Southern Africa.
Southern Africa has offered a challenging test for US diplomacy. Four countries in the region only recently received their independence--Zimbabwe, Angola, Mozambique, and Namibia. Dominating the region physically and economically is the Republic of South Africa, the former self-ruling British dominion. Currently, US policy is to assist the peaceful transition to a non-racial democracy now underway.
South Africa.
The United States has had an official presence in South Africa since a consulate was established in Cape Town in 1799. The two countries cooperated in two World Wars and in the Korean war and have had important trade and investment relations. Relations have been troubled since 1948, when the South African Government adopted its policy of apartheid, which legally separated the various racial groups and imposed new restrictions on the non-white communities. US non-diplomatic relations with South Africa suffered a decline in response to outrage over apartheid. However, President Bush, on July 10, 1991, announced the termination of most trade and investment sanctions imposed by the 1986 Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act, in response to the progress made by the de Klerk Government toward constitutional negotiations with the black opposition. Looking forward to an end to apartheid, the United States began to provide special assistance to non- white South Africans--with scholarships for study in the United States, training for trade unionists, support for development of small business, and support for black education within South Africa. The President also announced on July 10, 1991, that US aid to blacks would be doubled and focused on additional education and housing. Through mediation and diplomatic influence, US policy aims to avoid violence and destruction. Thus, the United States, through the shuttle diplomacy of Secretary of State Henry Kissinger in 1976, supported UK efforts to persuade the white prime minister in Zimbabwe to agree to black majority rule (achieved in 1980). The United States also helped to bring about the February 1984 Lusaka accord, under which South Africa agreed to withdraw its forces from Angola, and the March 1984 non-aggression pact signed at Nkomati between South Africa and Mozambique.
A major diplomatic success was achieved by the accords providing for Namibian independence. Having administered the former German colony of South West Africa as a League of Nations mandate, South Africa refused to subordinate its control to the UN Trusteeship Council and treated the area as a South African province. Of necessity, the negotiations involved Angola, because of the presence of Soviet-bloc military personnel and some 60,000 Cuban combat troops--which South Africa wished to see removed--and the use of Angolan bases by the main Southwest African independence movement (South West African People's Organization--SWAPO). South Africa had made incursions in Angola, both to strike at SWAPO and to halt the Angolan regime's campaigns against UNITA. The negotiations, sponsored by the United States and led by former Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Chester Crocker, began in 1981 with US, Angolan, and South African participation. Cuban representatives joined the Angolan delegation in 1988 in Brazzaville, Congo. Finally, on December 22, 1988, in New York City, Angola, Cuba, and South Africa signed the Tripartite Agreement linking phased and total withdrawal of Cuban troops from Angola to implementation of UN Resolution 435 (1978) calling for Namibian independence following a UN-sponsored transition. Angola also signed an agreement for the phased withdrawal of Cuban troops to be monitored by a UN verification mission. Cuban troops began to withdraw in March 1989, and all remaining troops were withdrawn ahead of the July 1, 1991, schedule. In November 1989, democratic elections for a Constituent Assembly were held in Namibia. SWAPO emerged as the victor, with 57% of the votes. The Constituent Assembly, in less than 90 days, finished a constitution guaranteeing civil rights and proclaimed March 21, 1990, the date for Namibia's independence. The new government is committed to multi-party democracy and maintaining a mixed economy.
Toward the Year 2000: Six Challenges for the Future
US diplomacy toward Africa is committed to the achievement of the following goals: -- A continent of increasingly democratic states and, through democracy, a greater respect for human rights; -- A non-racial, democratic society in South Africa (through the dismantling of apartheid by peaceful negotiations); -- Cooperation among the southern African countries to secure political stability and economic progress in this region; -- Peaceful solutions to conflicts in the Horn and other regions; -- Relief of economic distress and stagnation through the establishment of market economies; and -- The adoption of sound environmental policies and practices.
Democracy and human rights recently have made great strides in Central and Eastern Europe and Latin America. African countries also are moving in a democratic direction. Democracy had a foothold in Africa even before the stunning changes in Eastern Europe. Botswana, The Gambia, Mauritius, and Senegal are longstanding examples of African pluralism. But over the past few years, African countries have been engaged in a process of democratic reform which some consider the most significant phenomenon since decolonization three decades ago. Significant developments include: -- Namibia's entry into independence under a democratic constitution; -- The repeal in South Africa of the remaining legislative "pillars of apartheid" and the "Pretoria Minute" agreement between the government and the African National Congress (ANC) on preparing the way toward negotiations; -- The holding of democratic elections in Benin, Cape Verde, Cote d'Ivoire, Gabon, and Sao Tome and Principe; -- Nigeria's continued progress toward restoration of civilian democratic rule, a process to be completed in 1992; and -- The announcement of plans to establish democratic political systems, and concrete steps toward their implementation, by Congo, Mozambique, Togo, Zambia, and many other African countries. The United States supports the democratic trend in Africa and welcomes the entry of African countries into the democratic ranks. One of the most important US contributions to the democratic movement is a series of projects, carried out under the auspices of the Human Rights Fund for Africa, to strengthen the values and institutions on which democracy rests- -the electoral process, a free press, an independent judiciary, and the rule of law, among others. These projects have included the provision of training and support to African judicial systems in numerous countries, including Guinea, Mozambique, and Namibia; assistance to private legal and human rights organizations in countries such as Burundi, Kenya, and Zaire; and the dispatch of constitutional experts and election observers at the request of countries such as Benin and Sao Tome and Principe. For fiscal year (FY) 1992, the Bush Administration has requested $10 million from Congress to establish an African Democracy Support Fund, intended to provide assistance to countries undertaking fundamental political reforms.
South Africa
US policy toward South Africa is based on fundamental opposition to apartheid (that is, the segregation of races and white political domination). It supports the process of peaceful change now underway. The US Government urges all parties to commit themselves fully to negotiations in establishing a new non-racial and multi-party democracy in South Africa.
Cooperation in Southern Africa
Cooperation among the countries of Southern Africa is essential to each country's welfare--the ties to South Africa with its industry, rail system, and ports must be revised and extended. The United States has been instrumental in lessening Southern African conflict. The most notable achievement has been the independence of Namibia consummated in March 1990. The United States played the major role in the negotiations that led to South Africa's agreement to give up control over the territory. The uninhibited formation of political parties and free elections in Namibia give hope for future political stability in that country. Part of the agreement on Namibia required the withdrawal of Cuban troops from Angola, lessening the possibility of continuing conflict with South Africa. US policy in Angola promoted a negotiated settlement to the civil war between the ruling party, the MPLA, and the opposition party, UNITA, as well as free and fair internationally supervised elections. US-Mozambican relations have expanded rapidly as the Government of Mozambique has moved to establish greater democracy and a more pro- Western orientation since 1986. The United States facilitates national reconciliation and peace talks, which are taking place between the government and the Mozambican National Resistance.
Other Conflict Resolution
Civil war has been raging in Ethiopia since 1962, in Sudan periodically since 1955, and in Liberia since early 1989. These and other internal conflicts, generating vast numbers of refugees and causing hunger and disease requiring food and medical assistance from international organizations and countries, have become global problems. With the end of the Cold War, there are new opportunities for the resolution of Africa's internal conflicts. The United States will help facilitate conflict resolution whenever it and the African parties involved believe US participation would be useful. The US Government is ready to do so because of its concern for peace and because these conflicts place a major strain on US assistance resources and retard Africa's development. However, resolution of Africa's internal conflicts is primarily the responsibility of the parties directly involved--with important roles to be played by the OAU and other African regional organizations. The United States was impressed by the emphasis placed on conflict resolution at the 1990 OAU summit and supports the OAU's current efforts to bring peace to several parts of the continent. In Liberia, peace-keeping forces from the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) have been deployed around the capital of Monrovia. The forces are drawn from and supported by six West African states. Their presence has allowed for the establishment of a cease-fire, food distribution, and negotiations on free and fair elections. As of August 1991, the conflict in Liberia remains unresolved, but ECOWAS cooperation to end the bloodshed is an important precedent in responding to African conflicts with African solutions.
Economic Reform
Faced with a steady decline in their economies, African governments, in the early 1980s, began to recognize that the centrally directed economic models adopted at independence were failing to bring about prosperity. Between 1979 and 1983, Ghana, Cote d'Ivoire, Madagascar, and Senegal all adopted economic reform programs under the tutelage of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. However, moving from a centrally directed economy to a market-oriented economy is difficult, painful, and therefore, politically hard to sustain. The reduction of subsidies and the removal of price controls required by such reform programs can mean a rapid decline in the standard of living of urban dwellers long before the benefits of higher prices reach the farmers, who are the majority in most African countries. For these reasons, most reform programs do not last more than a couple of years. In spite of these difficulties, some countries do manage to continue their reform programs. Ghana, for example, is entering its eighth year of reform and is exhibiting steady economic growth averaging almost 5% per year since 1983. Other African countries are seeing the wisdom of such reform programs, and there are now more than 30 Sub-Saharan African countries on various IMF-World Bank approved plans. The United States strongly supports these programs and has taken important steps to promote economic reform in Sub-Saharan Africa. For some 30 years, the United States has provided economic assistance to African countries. A special Development Fund for Africa (DFA) was established in late 1987 to channel all development assistance to the region. It was Congress' clear intent in approving this mechanism that Africa was to receive special attention. Funding for the DFA increased some 44% in FY 1991 to $800 million. While promoting policy reform, USAID emphasizes certain critical sectors in carrying out programs under the DFA: agricultural production in connection with preservation of natural resources, health, voluntary family planning, education, and income generation. The United States provides grants to bolster the economies of countries of special political or security interest (increasingly those undertaking political reforms), through the Economic Support Fund (ESF). The United States also provides grants to friendly countries to acquire certain American military equipment. And through the International Military Education and Training (IMET) program, the United States provides military education and instruction in technical skills to foreign military forces. In FY 1990, 659 African students were trained under IMET; 748 were proposed for FY 1991. The United States has joined the international effort to relieve the international debt burden of Sub-Saharan Africa. The agreement reached at the Toronto economic summit in June 1988 provides for generous rescheduling of official bilateral non-concessional debt (provided at market rates) for severely indebted low-income countries that have undertaken economic reform programs. In addition, following the 1990 Houston summit, agreement was reached to provide better rescheduling terms for lower- and middle-income countries. And as a result of the 1991 London summit, the developed countries are considering further action to improve the 1988 "Toronto terms." In July 1989, President Bush announced that the United States would forgive Sub-Saharan African debt resulting from official US development assistance loans. The program began in November 1989. To qualify for the relief, a country must be implementing economic reform programs endorsed by the World Bank or the IMF. So far, 15 African countries have been eligible for this relief: $755 million of this debt already has been forgiven.
African countries also have had to face the environmental consequences of economic activity. Population growth--the world's fastest--has forced food producers to take over forest and scrublands and further strain the delicate ecosystem. Where governments have embarked on development programs stressing industrial growth, little attention is paid to the problem of industrial waste. And a worldwide demand for ivory, hunting trophies, and animal pelts has endangered many wildlife species and threatened to reduce the continent's biological diversity. To confront desertification in the Sahel, several African governments, along with the United States and several European countries as members of the Club du Sahel,* have assisted affected countries with plans to alleviate this problem. In 1985, the African environmental ministers--all African countries have such ministries devoted to the environment--held their first summit, at which they agreed that the African countries themselves must bear primary responsibility for improving the environment. Many African countries have initiated local community action programs for planting trees and improving soil and water quality. But with limited financial and technical resources, African countries must depend on international development programs for technical and economic assistance. The United States is an important contributor to multilateral agencies and programs and long has made the environment a focus in its development strategy for Africa. The USAID's Plan for Supporting Natural Resources Management in Sub-Saharan Africa, initiated in 1987, aims to strengthen African capacity to manage natural resources in order to prevent soil erosion and declining soil fertility, loss of vegetative cover, surface and groundwater degradation, mismanagement of coastal resources, and loss of biological diversity. Wildlife preservation is an important US policy goal. The United States was an original party to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) signed in Washington in 1973. The convention remains the centerpiece of US conservation policy abroad, and it has special relevance for Africa. The United States has taken a leading role in protecting the African elephant. In 9 years, Africa's elephant population has fallen, due to poaching, from an estimated 1.3 million to 600,000. In October 1988, Congress enacted the African Elephant Conservation Act, establishing an African elephant conservation fund. In June 1989, the Administration banned the import of ivory. And in October 1989, all CITES members agreed to halt trade in ivory, providing for its resumption only under a secure system in the future for countries with a healthy and well-managed elephant population. Under the 1988 African Elephant Conservation Act, the Interior Department provides anti-poaching assistance to African elephant management programs. USAID, through its biodiversity program, also is involved in elephant conservation; FY 1990 funding for such activities exceeded the congressional earmark of $2 million. Congress provided $15 million in FY 1991 Foreign Military Financing grant funds to encourage African military establishments to become involved in anti-poaching activities, wildlife protection, and other efforts in support of Africa's environment. The United States also was instrumental in executing the Montreal Protocol, which established measures to protect the ozone layer by decreasing the production of chlorofluorocarbon chemicals. This is an important step regarding Africa, which--because of its growing population and less flexible economies--is more vulnerable to problems caused by climatic change. *The Club du Sahel, also known as the "Club des Amis du Sahel," is an informal association of the nine members of CILSS (Comite inter-etats pour la Lutte Contre la Secheresse au Sahel) and any other governments and multilateral development agencies that share in finding long-range solutions to the problems of the Sahelian zone countries.
Peace Corps
President John F. Kennedy launched the Peace Corps in 1961. The first 50 volunteers went to Ghana to teach secondary school students. The President, describing the purpose of the Peace Corps, stated: "We will only send abroad Americans who are wanted by the host country--who have a real job to do--and who are qualified to do that job." Today, the Peace Corps functions in 70 countries and has volunteers in 34 Sub-Saharan African countries. Above, in addition to teaching English, a Peace Corps Volunteer helps Nigerian students improve their gardening techniques at a school garden. (Peace Corps photo)
African Countries With Peace Corps Volunteers
Benin Ghana Niger Botswana Guinea Nigeria Burundi Guinea-Bissau Rwanda Cameroon Cote d'Ivoire Sao Tome and Principe Cape Verde Kenya Senegal Central African Republic Lesotho Seychelles Chad Mali Sierra Leone Comoros Malawi Swaziland Equatorial Guinea Mauritania Tanzania Gabon Morocco Togo The Gambia Namibia Zaire Zimbabwe
US Assistance to Sub-Saharan Africa, FY 1991 ($ million)
Country DFA ESF PL 480 Total Angola 5.2 15.2 Benin 16.2 1.3 1.9 19.4 Botswana 7.3 7.3 Burkina Faso 3.0 23.6 26.6 Burundi 15.0 15.0 Cameroon 20.0 20.0 Cape Verde 3.0 3.4 6.4 Central African Republic 4.0 0.6 4.6 Chad 15.0 13.1 28.1 Comoros 0.7 0.7 Congo 1.0 2.1 3.1 Cote d'Ivoire 7.0 6.0 12.3 25.3 Djibouti 0.0 4.1 4.1 Equatorial Guinea 1.0 1.0 Ethiopia 111.2 111.2 Gabon The Gambia 12.8 1.7 14.5 Ghana 25.0 15.9 40.9 Guinea 25.0 10.0 35.0 Guinea-Bissau 5.0 0.1 5.1 Kenya 26.0 13.0 39.0 Lesotho 7.3 2.1 9.4 Liberia 77.3 77.3 Madagascar 44.0 11.0 55.0 Malawi 55.3 29.6 84.9 Mali 33.0 11.4 44.4 Mauritania 2.8 2.8 Mauritius 1.5 1.5 Mozambique 60.2 45.4 105.6 Namibia 7.3 10.0 17.3 Niger 26.0 13.0 39.0 Nigeria 11.0 11.0 Rwanda 35.0 35.0 Sao Tome and Principe 0.4 0.6 1.0 Senegal 22.0 1.0 14.1 37.1 Seychelles 3.3 3.3 Sierra Leone 0.5 6.0 6.5 Somalia 4.6 4.6 South Africa 40.0 10.0 50.0 Sudan 104.1 104.1 Swaziland 6.3 0.4 6.7 Tanzania 30.3 30.3 Togo 9.0 3.9 12.9 Uganda 43.0 13.2 56.2 Zaire 23.0 23.0 46.0 Zambia 14.5 6.2 20.7 Zimbabwe 40.3 40.3 Regional/Other* 109.6 109.6 Total 806.5 35.7 592.8 1,435.0 *At the beginning of the fiscal year, the regional account also includes Southern Africa regional program and regional economic policy reform program funds which are later allocated to bilateral programs. It also includes some operating expenses and centrally funded and regional programs. Figures for ESF and DFA are from the Operating Year Budget. PL 480 figures are on disbursement basis and include transport costs paid. Source: US Agency for International Development(###)
USAID-Supported Projects
The Forestry Land Use Planning Project in Niger, designed to reverse the deterioration of the Guesselbodi National Forest, a 5,000-hectare tract near the capital city of Niamey. A plan of action for Madagascar's parks, conducted in conjunction with other international organizations and the Madagascar Government to preserve the ecosystems of this unique island. The Mountain Gorilla Project in Rwanda, which seeks to preserve the animal and its habitat. (###)
US Department of State

Dispatch, Vol 3, No 2, January 13, 1992


Visit to Asia-Pacific Nations--Building A Foundation for Increased Trade

Bush Source: President Bush Description: Remarks upon departure for Australia, Singapore, South Korea, and Japan, Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland Date: Dec, 30 199112/30/91 Category: Speeches, Testimony, Statements Region: East Asia, Pacific, Southeast Asia Country: Japan, Singapore, Australia, South Korea, United States Subject: Trade/Economics [TEXT] Today I leave on a 12-day journey to a region of critical importance to the interests of this nation. We'll be visiting four Asia-Pacific nations, home to some of the world's most dynamic economies. On my visits to Australia and Singapore, to Korea and Japan, I will get a first-hand glimpse of America's economic future--a world in which we will conduct more and more business and trade with partners in Asia, Europe, and Latin America. In this new world, old notions no longer apply. The sharp lines that once separated foreign and domestic policy have been overtaken by a new reality. If we want to put people to work here at home, we've got to expand trade and to open markets. These new economic realities have not eclipsed the security concerns that continued to demand our attention throughout East Asia. I'll make very clear to each country I visit that America remains committed to the cause of freedom and democracy [and] that America will remain engaged in the Pacific area economically, politically, and militarily. After all, we are a Pacific nation, and we should care about what our allies in that region have to say. Our Asia-Pacific friends will play a crucial role in helping us build a post-Cold War world defined by prosperity and trade, not poverty and isolationism. But let me make very clear the focus of this trip. My highest priority is jobs, and I want us to build a foundation for sustained economic growth and an ever-increasing supply of good jobs for American workers. Here at home, all of us are concerned about our sluggish economy. One way to get this economy growing again is to open up markets abroad for American goods and services. The goods we make here in America, the services we provide, are second to none. More exports mean new jobs. Each billion dollars in new manufactured exports supports 20,000 new American jobs. The markets of East Asia offer great opportunity. Last year, we conducted more than $300-billion worth of two-way trade with the nations of the Pacific Rim. That is more than with the nations of Europe. And, yet, we know that for many industries and sectors of our economy, the potential of our Pacific markets remains largely untapped. My message in each country I visit will be this: Free trade is a two-way street. Certainly, American companies ought to show greater commitment to these markets. And while nations such as Singapore have taken great strides to build a tradition of free and open trade, there are still too many countries where markets are closed to quality American goods and services. There are still too many countries whose consumers want but cannot buy American products. We seek no special benefits, no rules stacked in our favor--just open markets [and] trade that is free and fair. I'll have help driving this message home. Executives from 21 of America's leading companies and business organizations will travel with me. Some of them now do business in Asia. All of them are ready to work hard in these markets to blaze a trail other American companies large and small can follow. They are also realistic about what we cannot expect from this trip. We cannot expect to achieve complete accord. This trip won't solve all the trade issues that now concern us or produce a new export boom overnight. But we will do all we can to make progress [and] to drive down the barriers abroad that inhibit the creation of jobs and opportunity at home. Actions such as that taken yesterday by the Central Bank of Japan to lower the discount rate 0.5% certainly do help. America can meet the challenges of the new world taking shape around us. Some nations fear the future. They see chaos in change. But America is a nation drawn forward by what is new. I am certain--I am absolutely confident--that America can continue to lead and that in the new world Americans will prosper. Thank you, and may God bless our great country, and now we'll head off to Australia. Thank you very much. (###)