The Pentagon, in its effort to fight the so-called Long War, is contemplating standing up a new combatant command that focuses on Africa to counter it as a terrorist breeding ground due to abject poverty and rampant corruption. Some of the key missions of AFCOM would be to train border patrols to deny terrorists access to countries; to thwart corruption from indigenous security outfits; to build civic projects and critical infrastructure for sustainability; and to educate local populations. All of these goals engender good will and foster strong ties between US forces and local communities. Notably, AFCOM’s goal is not to station US troops throughout Africa.
Pluses
Should US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld give his approval, AFCOM would focus exclusively on transnational security issues on the heretofore unimportant continent. Rumsfeld’s attention to AFCOM was notable at a restructuring briefing on August 28 in which AFCOM was included.
As the US government, along with various other donors, pumps millions of dollars into Africa for stabilization and counter-terrorism projects, having a combatant command structure, AFCOM, in place might improve efficiencies and completion rates. It would also likely compel Pentagon-level attention and resources to decades-long crises, as witnessed in Sudan among many other nations.
Africa, thus far, has been split unceremoniously between European Command, Pacific Command, and Central Command. CENTCOM, which leads the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, established the Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa (CJTF-HOA) in Djibouti to focus exclusively on the region, but much more needs to be done to combat extremism that is likely to spill beyond the African continent, as was witnessed in Osama Bin Laden’s departure from Sudan and arrival in Afghanistan . CENTCOM General John Abizaid has long been a proponent of US attention in the region, saying: “The Horn of Africa is vulnerable to penetration by regional extremist groups, terrorist activity, and ethnic violence. Al-Qaeda [Group Profile] has a history of planning, training for, and conducting major terrorist attacks in this region?” (source). This is particularly so in eastern and northern Africa. He rightly emphasizes ” extreme poverty, corruption, internal conflicts, border disputes, uncontrolled borders and territorial waters, weak internal security capabilities, natural disasters, famine, lack of dependable water sources, and an underdeveloped infrastructure” as key issues affecting most African nations and threatening their stability. The successes achieved from the relatively small CJTF-HOA should portend successes from a larger outfit.
The creation of AFCOM would be a tremendous pro-active, strategic shift away from Cold War military campaigns by the US defense community apparatus. Its establishment would also underscore a unified defense policy and coordination between US government agencies with interests on the war-ravaged and largely lawless continent. Ultimately, Africa is gaining increased importance in countering global terrorism (source), and so a dedicated command in region is paramount. “?In the post 9/11 world we have a much better appreciation for (threats emerging from) ungoverned territories,” said a Pentagon spokesman (source).
Minuses
As has been seen with the stand-up of the US Department of Homeland Security, creating new bureaucracies may not be beneficial in the Long War campaign. Said one opponent of AFCOM: “The size and number of headquarters already is skewed too far in favor of ‘tail’ at the expense of warfighting ‘teeth.’ Want to increase ‘boots on the ground?’ Eliminate or downsize some of these staffs, don’t create more” (source).
Similarly, opponents believe that EUCOM adequately can handle the “modest military needs” of Africa that do not necessitate an entire new command (source). EUCOM General James Jones confidently said: “[EUCOM] has in fact been proactively engaged with an increasing number of African nations through low-level but consistent interface?And so we have been working with them on a consistent basis to help build up their capacity. I think that what we’re doing here is extremely important because it’s at the right time” (source). He went on to say that EUCOM’s activities in Africa would “remain about as it is now” for the foreseeable future: assistance to 9-10 countries. Jones did not believe AFCOM was a likely endeavor.
Possible Leadership
AFCOM may be headed up by General William “Kip” Ward , who happens to be the Army’s only four-star African-American general. He has experience in Africa, specifically in Somalia and Egypt . He is no stranger to crisis zones and stabilization efforts; further, he is no stranger to the presence of Islamist terrorism. His postings and commendations can be seen at: link. And, he oversees 43 African nations through his current EUCOM post.
Conclusion
The creation of AFCOM must be done in a systematic, methodological way so as to avoid redundancies, inefficiencies, and bureaucracies. To have an institution that focuses exclusively on the maladies of the continent, rather than having these issues be swept up in three separate COMS that do not have a mission to deal with Afro-centric concerns, may well help bring safety, security, and stability to the much affected region. However, even if Rumsfeld gives the nod for AFCOM, the recommendation must go through political channels to include presidential approval and is, consequently, unlikely to be stood-up in the near-term.
