What (really) went wrong with the Africa strategy under Biden?

Mail & Guardian

05-05-2025

On Strategies
On Wednesday, Judd Devermont published a
Some serve as brutally honest indictments of the current state of national security and foreign policy planning in the US government. For example, Devermont observes that the US policymakers often
The essay has solicited responses from a few well-known commentators on African Affairs. One of the criticisms is that Devermont fails to answer the provocative question that inspired the essay. In other words, he never says what exactly went wrong with the Africa Strategy of the Biden Administration.
That criticism is valid. But, it belies the full story. The essay may dance around that important question, but it still provides insights that mark a valuable contribution to the literature on applied foreign policy.
Who is the author?
Devermont has a long record of public service. Under the Obama Administration, Devermont served as the
an American think tank based in Washington. Given that work history, Yinka Adegoke, editor of Semafor Africa,
'This is the most important consideration: what is the point? When you factor in all the consultations, interagency meetings, and hours it takes to put pen to paper, you should really know why you are doing all of this.' — Judd Devermont
What is the strategy?
The
'The strategy document lacks new ideas and basically restates the Obama administration's 2012 strategy.' (
'The new US-Africa strategy is a departure from previous Africa strategy documents and a novelty in US engagement in Africa, which has evolved little since the colonial era and the Cold War.' (
'In contrast with the Trump administration's approach to the region, which largely saw the continent as a 'great power' battleground between Russia, China, and the United States, the Biden approach is considerably more balanced and recognises that Africans live increasingly globalised lives.' (
'Although somewhat comparable to recently launched initiatives for Latin America and the Indo-Pacific, the Africa strategy stands out as an uniquely elaborate effort at a moment when the administration is working to revamp US relations across the globe.' (
'The new US Strategy Toward Sub-Saharan Africa is a good first step in improving America's position on the continent.' (
'If you aren't changing the policy in demonstrative ways, what's the rationale for writing a strategy at all? There is nothing inherently wrong with continuing with the status quo – just don't waste everyone's time by suggesting you are embarking on something new.' — Judd Devermont
What did it promise?
The
'The strategy was very status quo.' (
'The release of the Sub-Saharan Africa strategy is a demonstration of the Biden administration's commitment to re-engage with the African continent.' (
'This document laid out for the first time a modern, strategic, and comprehensive vision of Africa — not one defined by charity or geopolitics.' (
'The most exciting aspect of the strategy, by far, is its articulation of Africa's climate challenge in a way that acknowledges the continent's concerns and realities.' (
'The administration hasn't learned from past mistakes, is overly focused on great power competition, and can't quit the counterterror lens.' (
'The challenge lies in the implementation of the strategy, as it presents current initiatives that have not always delivered on their promises.' (
'Whether that influence will be positive or negative from a US perspective depends on whether in implementing its new strategy, the US matches actions with words.' (
'Biden must prove his Africa strategy is no 'tick the box' exercise.' (
'The final marker of a sound strategy is whether it has presidential support. It is not enough to have received interagency sign-off or to be announced by a secretary of state or national security advisor. It needs to have the president behind it and, eventually, the resources to fund it.' — Judd Devermont
Did it meet expectations?
Despite all of the rhetoric, critics have argued that the
'Anyone expecting major changes or big new programs will be disappointed — but also missing the point. White House strategies are not plans or roadmaps, but rather a top-line set of objectives, a signal to our partners, and a North Star for the direction of government policy.' (
'Commentary on the strategy has praised its lofty ambitions and purposeful rhetoric, while also underscoring the challenge of translating this into actionable and sustainable policy.' (
'We argue that there has been a mismatch between the rhetoric and practice of an equal partnership. For example, African leaders or the African Union were not consulted about the agenda of the 2022 US-Africa Leaders Summit. This was also the case with the US's Africa strategy.' (
'My fundamental philosophical critique of the strategy and the approach is that it was a lot of doubling down on policies that we have already been using that haven't really protected the US position in Africa.' (
'It's clear if you look at US strategy from about 2011 through the Biden administration that the guiding principle has been the pursuit of regional security and economic integration.' (
'US-Africa strategy has not received the attention and resources needed to manage deteriorating political and security developments on the continent. America's current Africa policy is being overtaken by events and is ill suited to adequately address the coup pandemic.' (
'In the United States Strategy toward Sub-Saharan Africa, the Biden administration declared transcending geographic seams to be a national security priority. However, this declaration does not appear to have spurred systematic changes in the production of research studies and expert commentary on African affairs within the United States think tank community.' (
'The Biden administration engaged the continent more than the previous Trump administration, but left several diplomatic engagement opportunities on the table.' (
'Biden's binary 'democracies vs. autocracies' ideology, defining a complex world by regime type, is fostering an intellectually lazy, yet familiar, landscape of antagonistic alignments.' (
'The Biden strategy document fails to take a 'whole of Africa' approach that Africans themselves embrace and instead reverts to the Obama-era billing of a 'Sub-Saharan Africa' focus.' (
'The US hasn't had a coherent strategy for Africa since the George Bush era.' (
'There's absolutely nothing new with the new approach.' (
'What's my problem? Well, for starters, we usually don't know what we want out of a strategy and what we are really trying to achieve by crafting it in the first place.' — Judd Devermont
What really was the problem?
The essay only scratches the surface of what actually went wrong with the
The document was based on some
The strategic narrative was never adequately translated into
The key stakeholders were never fully aligned with the intended strategic direction. Some actors even went so far as to
The National Security Council failed to adequately respond to major changes in the internal and external environments following the release of the document. As evidence, no new version was released after the
'During the Biden Administration, the strategy shifted U.S. rhetoric about Africa. Its ideas framed the US-Africa Leaders Summit in 2022 and almost 30 trips to the continent by senior leaders, including the president's visit to Angola in December 2024. We had message discipline, but it proved more challenging to meet the strategy's ambition with commensurate resources as well as consistent senior-level time and attention.' — Judd Devermont
Why should we care?
The
'What Biden's legacy is most likely to be measured against are his own sentiments and aspirations for Africa as expressed in his 2022 Africa Strategy.' (
'Judd Devermont's reflection of the Biden Administration outlined an ambitious approach to US-Africa relations – centered on strategic investment, regional connectivity, and expanded diplomatic engagement.' — Johanna Leblanc
What are experts saying?
The essay has caught the attention of both the
'A thoughtful essay by Judd Devermont on why Biden's strategy for Africa failed. The problem wasn't the 'strategy' [in my opinion] but the lack of leadership from the top – deliberate in Obama's case, inevitable in Biden's case. 'America First' > 'leading from behind.'' (
'Dervermont's reflections on strategy, especially his admonishment to not write if you don't have anything to say, ring true today. However, it also neglects the reality that one cannot put together a regional strategy without a global strategy, as regions are just theaters of a broader struggle in international relations. From the point of view of Africa, it did not really matter what the Biden administration wrote about its goals, with strategies elsewhere in shambles (Afghanistan, Ukraine), the best laid plans in Africa were never going to come to fruition.' (
'Initiatives like the US Africa's Leaders Summit and support for infrastructure corridors marked important steps toward elevating Africa on the global agenda. However, as Judd noted, it reflects a sobering reality that the administration at times struggled to match rhetoric with sustained action. As global competition intensifies, President Biden's legacy on Africa will be defined less by the symbolism of high-level summits and more by the permanence of institutional commitments and the extent to which U.S. policy truly advanced African priorities.' (
'In truth, (Devermont) doesn't really say what was wrong with the Biden Africa policy, but rather looks at the challenges of announcing a strategy in the first place — going all the way back to the Eisenhower administration to examine whether this is the most effective way of implementing US-Africa policy.' (
'Devermont offers a dual critique of Biden's Africa policy: while it successfully shifted from Trump-era negative rhetoric through strategic messaging and diplomatic engagement, despite good intentions, the policies lacked focus and consistent senior-level commitment.' (
'The personal reflection emphasizes the importance of clarity and purpose while challenging the idea that having a strategy is equivalent to providing a sound policy.' (
is a senior fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute (US), visiting researcher at the University of Granada (Spain), and visiting research fellow at LMU Munich (Germany). He is also the author of the
.