The attacks of September 11th dramatically altered U.S. priorities and perceptions, of itself and its relationship with the rest of the world. While it is too early to define the impact of that tragedy upon our relations with Africa, it is appropriate for us in the faith community-facing these new circumstances-to reflect upon our advocacy for a just U.S. policy toward Africa. The issues that cry out for action have not gone away.

Given the shifting priorities and preoccupations of Congress and this administration toward anti-terrorism initiatives, it remains a serious strategic question as to what advocates for Africa can effectively raise at this point.

But that said, it is important to note that though this administration claims that all is now different, it proceeds with its old agenda as if nothing has changed. Calls for solidarity ring hollow when the administration and Congress push solutions in Africa that undermine justice and human need.

Rather, we are the ones who are called, and we must continue to speak and challenge unwise policy and legislation. September 11th has not altered that calling.

For example, while the administration put considerable effort into getting the rest of the world on board with its anti-terrorism agenda, it rejected the African appeal for a fundamental review of intellectual property rights (TRIPS) provisions before the World Trade Organization (WTO). The very day that President Bush spoke to the nation in the aftermath of September 11th, U.S. government officials, almost alone, were in Geneva fighting to protect the interests of pharmaceutical companies against the cry for affordable AIDS medicines for Africans. (Some 6,000 African men, women and children die every day from AIDS; a number likely to reach 13,000 deaths per day by 2010.)

It would have been an excellent occasion to demonstrate our willingness to hear and address concerns that Africans and others have, yet we remain preoccupied with our narrow self-interest.

The compromise that came out of the WTO meetings in Qatar appears on the surface to be a sign that the U.S. is now listening to African leadership, for it does acknowledge the validity of public health concerns, but regrettably it is an African compromise to the U.S. agenda. In short, in the name of free trade we persist in imposing our economic policies upon the Global South.

Development aid is supposed to be funds that help to address the struggles of the world's poor, where nearly a fourth of the population live on less than a dollar per day, and another one billion people live on less than two dollars per day. While we are suddenly able to find billions for anti-terror- ism efforts and military expenditures, we have become the least generous donor nation in the world. Reasonable and adequate U.S. contributions to confront the global AIDS pandemic are now problematic.

Meanwhile, the Sudan Peace Act may be set aside because the Khartoum government is cooperating with the U.S. international agenda. Oil profits continue to fuel the civil war-where more than two million people have lost their lives, and tens of thousands are refugees or "internally displaced"- but the Bush Administration remains adamant that foreign oil companies should have access to U.S. capital markets to fund their destructive "contribution" to the Sudanese war. U.S. policy is thus prepared to ignore human rights abuses and the civil war itself on the grounds that we need to reward Khartoum. How is this acceptable?

The list goes on. By our actions we could ensure complete cancellation of multilateral debt owed to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund by many African nations, drawing upon existing resources at these financial institutions and thus avoiding additional appropriations, but we do not. Within the last year the United States has undermined international efforts to confront environmental disaster, racism and intolerance, small arms that sustain many regional conflicts, and nuclear holocaust. We have shown little interest in ratification of the child soldiers' protocol, and persist in our avoidance of the landmines treaty. The U.S. Congress may act on conflict diamonds this session, but if so, it would be a striking exception for the African agenda.

There is no question that the tragedy of September 11th demanded, and demands, a response, but President Bush's assertion that "every nation in every region now has a decision to make: Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists" is tragically ill-conceived.

Most of the world, certainly most of Africa, lives with the reality of insecurity and vulnerability every day, and has for years. What the U.S. is presenting to the world is an agenda to ensure that the U.S. is protected from such harsh realities. At some point, and soon, U.S. efforts to deal with its own vulnerabilities must be balanced by efforts to deal with the struggles of people living in poverty and grave crisis around the world.

It is similarly disquieting when President Bush, in his October news conference, expressed amazement "that there is such misunderstanding of what our country is about, that people would hate us…. Like most Americans, I just can't believe it. Because I know how good we are, and we've go to do a better job of making our case." That is not the task before us.

Certainly we have been, and are, a nation of wonderful generosity and compassion. We have shown openness to those who have sought new opportunities. We have offered a vision of freedom that has inspired many throughout the world.

But if we delude ourselves that we are simply misunderstood rather than that our policies are arrogant and insensitive, especially in relation to the Global South and to Africa, and have in many respects undermined the needs and hopes of Africans, then our present agenda will be nothing more than an articulation of narrow self-interest instead of common cause with the rest of the world.

We people of faith must keep before our government the fact that Africa matters, and that a just and compassionate U.S. policy toward Africa, expressed in concrete ways, ought to remain a priority.

General Assembly:

These conditions in Africa receive inadequate attention in the media, as well as inadequate attention and response by our elected officials and members of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.).

These wars and resulting human rights abuses rage on a continent where the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has given the lifeblood of mission workers and invested resources over generations, even as our members' commitment to love and care for sisters and brothers on the continent of Africa has diminished.

The 211th General Assembly (1999) of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) focuses heightened attention, advocacy, and compassionate response appropriate to the gravity and magnitude of the situation in Africa. These efforts will include resources of intercessory prayer, study and education, publicity, public policy advocacy, pastoral care, and generous dedicated giving. (Minutes, 211th General Assembly, p. 680.)

Written by the Rev. Leon Spencer, Washington Office on Africa