And today, I'm delighted to be joined by Peter Pham, one of Washington's leading international affairs practitioners and arguably its leading Africa hand. During the first Trump administration, Ambassador Pham served as envoy to the African Great Lakes region and envoy to the Sahel region. And Dr. Pham is also the first Vietnamese American to reach the rank of ambassador. Isn't that right, Ambassador?
PETER PHAM: Yes. Thank you very much for having me, Elizabeth. And yes, one small milestone. But really a lot of building on the shoulders of other people.
ELISABETH BRAW: Well, a very significant one. And one that is very much deserved because, Ambassador, you have an incredible career looking at international affairs, specifically in Africa. And today, Africa is geopolitical center stage or is at the geopolitical center stage, which is evidenced not least by President Biden choosing Africa for his last presidential trip abroad. A very significant choice, I think.
And this matters because Russia is incredibly active in Africa, which no doubt influenced President Biden's decision to go there. China is also enormously active in Africa. And in each case, it's not just the government of these countries, but private companies linked to these governments as well.
And those companies include the Wagner Group, what was previously known as the Wagner Group that has now been rebranded. And Western governments are trying to figure out what to do because they realize that the West needs to be present and active in Africa, but it's not going to be in the way of the past, where it was somewhat uneven relationship.
They realize they need to build up new relationships if the West is going to have a productive engagement with African countries, both North and South of the Sahara. And the problem is they can't figure out how to position themselves or how to compete with Russia and China.
So with that, Ambassador, it feels like a crisis is erupting in every corner of the world. And on the African continent, what we are seeing are civil wars, wars, mass migration across the Mediterranean caused by man-made action. Or I should say we aren't seeing that mass migration yet, but it could very well happen. Now, where should the incoming Trump administration and all of us be looking to see what areas need attention in the first instance?
PETER PHAM: Well, thank you again for having me, Elizabeth. If we can take just a step back, if you were kind enough to mention my career, the arc of my career, in a way, has come full circle. When I was just beginning, when I was just a youngster dipping my toes in these waters, so to speak, I had a very rude awakening.
I was just beginning my career when, in 1995, the Clinton administration at the time published US Defense Department document called the "Strategy for Sub-Saharan Africa of the United States," which declared at that time, and I'll quote, it said, "There is very little strategic interest for the United States in Africa." Not a very auspicious start for someone like myself who wanted to make a career focusing on international strategic affairs, but with a particular emphasis on Africa. I was just told that I boarded a sinking ship.
We've gone from that to, as you said, President Biden's trip to Africa as his last trip abroad and the recognition-- and in a way, it's validate the intuition I've had, which has matured over the years, which is Africa is indeed the continent of tomorrow. And amidst all the crises and challenges that are the priority of any given day, we can't lose sight of that long-term geostrategic, geopolitical, and I would add, geo-economic importance of this continent.
Let me just throw a few data points out there. By 2050, which is not that long, most of us hope to still be around, by 2050, one in four working age persons on the planet is going to be in Africa, one in four. That's a tremendous boon for economic growth. It's also a tremendous challenge if those one in four are not gainfully employed or have a horizon of hope for economic well-being.
Strategic minerals. We're increasingly recognizing that Africa, which holds at least a third of the Earth's mineral resources, is absolutely critical to not just current technologies, but future ones that we've yet to discover. Just to cite one country that I worked very much on during the first Trump administration, the Democratic Republic of Congo. It holds roughly half of the world's total reserves of cobalt, and is responsible for the production of more than two-thirds of the cobalt supply in the world.
Last year, that same country edged off Bolivia to become the second-largest producer of copper in the world. And by the end of the decade, we'll be the number one because of declining production in Chile. And if we want to talk about electrification-- forget about green energy, although that's important. If you want to talk about electrifying things in general or renewing the grid, you can't do that without copper. We haven't discovered a substitute for copper yet.
And then, of course, as you mentioned, there is the geopolitical competition. China, but also Russia, Iran, other actors, some malign, some less so, but are active. So there's a lot going on there. And at the same time, some of the old colonial powers that had held sway over Africa even after the independence period, have increasingly lost their toehold on the continent. Just in recent weeks, France has been invited to wrap up its activities and yet two more West African countries.
So there's a lot of change going on, and it's incumbent upon not only the incoming Trump administration, but US policymakers in the years beyond that to focus a great deal more attention, and as necessary, resources on Africa.
ELISABETH BRAW: So it is an unfortunate reality that there is this colonial legacy that negatively influences minds in countries that were under colonial rule. And that's what we have seen, as you were saying, with France in recent years, where France has been edged out by Russia. Now, starting on, let's say, the minor scale, which countries should we and the incoming Trump administration be most concerned about both North and South of the Sahara?
PETER PHAM: Well, I think there are two lists I would draw, if you will. There are the countries that we need to engage with as we build the future relations with Africa and look at our own national interests. If we're interested in rebuilding the industrial base in America, we're going to need inputs into that industrial base. God has blessed America with an abundance of resources, but not every resource can be found here.
Cobalt, for example, just to stick with one example I've been using, if we somehow manage to permit and mine every last ounce of cobalt we have in the United States at current demand, that would last us less than seven years. So the reality is we're going to have to import it as a resource. So in our own interest, there's list of those countries.
But there's also a list of countries that, regrettably, are in crisis today, and those crises have to be dealt with. So in the first list of countries to be engaged, relations cultivate, certainly Angola, where President Biden has visited, the neighboring Democratic Republic of Congo, which is a mineral treasure trove for all humanity, as well as interestingly, also one of the major lungs, if you will, of the planet with the carbon sequestration in its forests.
But our key countries certainly Ethiopia is a country, powerhouse in the Horn of Africa, Kenya, Nigeria, Africa's most populous country. So there are a number that we need to engage in looking forward. But in the current crises, one cannot forget Sudan, which last few years has slipped into an atrocious civil war, which has generated more displaced persons than any other crisis currently on the planet.
Close to 12 million people have been displaced, of the remaining people in the country, more than half are on the verge of the largest famine that we've seen since the Ethiopian famine of the 1980s. But the opening, as you mentioned, Russia has come in first with the Wagner Group, and now the rebranded Afrika Korps, plus assorted other initiatives, influence operations.
But I think a more pragmatic policy in dealing with these countries could also, I think, yield some fruits. There are some real targets of opportunity and low-hanging fruit there. So the Sahel certainly countries. And then, of course, looking to North Africa on the Mediterranean littoral. Morocco is a major non-NATO ally, a bulwark of stability. But Libya still remains in crisis and needs engagement. So there's a lot going on the continent, and certainly more than enough to keep one administration busy and onto its successor.
ELISABETH BRAW: There is. And its concerns, not just those interested in foreign policy and those interested in the African continent, but a lot of Western companies as well, because what they are seeing on the ground is this increasing turbulence in some countries and Russia coming in.
So what does that mean for Western companies operating in African countries where, let's say, the Wagner Group, or the now called the Afrika Korps, arrives to prop up the regime, but brings with it the expectation of preferential commercial opportunities?
PETER PHAM: Well, I think we have to be careful to take things with-- everything occurs within a context. And without getting into specifics of companies, in a number of West African countries, especially in the Sahel, some Western companies previously had gotten deals that were quite frankly questionable. Mining is a very long-term play.
It requires investment of economic resources, which it's questionable whether Russia can actually invest the sums required, but I think it should be an alarm bell, a warning that we should pay attention more to these because there are certainly equities at stake, not just of companies but also of geopolitical and geoeconomic influence.
ELISABETH BRAW: Indeed. And that raises the question now that we are hopefully increasingly aware that it's a collection of countries with very different characteristics, but that all deserve more attention from Western governments, including the incoming US one, what is the most constructive way, in other words, of engaging with the African countries that we, the West, consider priorities?
PETER PHAM: Well, I think, first of all, we have to be pragmatic about this. And I think one also has to look at entry points, what are their priorities? One has to listen. If we do a little less lecturing and a little more listening, I think it would be good for all. And what are their priorities?
First and foremost, for many African governments, it's security. The reality is they face grave security challenges. It's the one area in the world where the so-called Islamic State is gaining territory and spreading. Last year, half of the terrorism fatalities in the world took place in the Sahel region of Africa. They have a half. And that's counting-- that's even with the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7 and all that has occurred in the Middle East, half of terrorism fatalities in the world took place in the African Sahel.
So security is here. Now, the African governments turn to Wagner. However, they've shown their shortcomings. This past summer, Wagner-led forces in Mali were ambushed during a sandstorm by a group of Islamists and secessionists operating jointly, and they lost several hundred veterans, some with track records of having fought for Wagner in Syria, Libya, Ukraine, as well as Africa. People who not replaceable.
This September, the first terrorist attacks in years took place in Bamako, the Malian capital. So the people they hired to help provide security aren't proving very effective. That provides an opening. We're not going to displace them immediately without offering some sort of substitution. So we have to think about those terms of engaging them.
And then on the economic development, the United States remains, and people tend to forget this, year in, year out through administrations, Democrat and Republican, the United States has remained Africa's single most generous bilateral donor of assistance. The question is, do we get the best return on investment for the American taxpayer with these programs?
And I think an honest answer is no. We spent a lot of money. Are they the most effective both in helping Africans on the things they need help with? And at the same time, advancing American and Western foreign policy interests. And I think that's an examination that the incoming administration would do well to prioritize because we spent a lot of money, but not necessarily certain we get the best return on investment.
And the example I would cite for that is South Africa. No country on the continent has benefited as much both from PEPFAR, the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, initiated 20 years ago under George W. Bush and continued over the years, more South African lives, more South Africans are on antiretrovirals, funded by the American taxpayer.
No country has benefited from trade preferences under the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act, AGOA, which was originated under the Clinton administration, renewed under Bush and renewed again under Obama, and is up for review next year.
And yet, no country in Africa arguably never misses an opportunity like South Africa to-- never misses an opportunity to poke the United States or its allies, whether it be in terms of supporting Russia's aggression in Ukraine, bringing a preposterous case of genocide against Israel, or engaging in military exercises with China, the list goes on and on. And so that's a good example perhaps where we don't get the return on investment.
ELISABETH BRAW: Just to finish on somewhat upbeat note, is there a country in Africa where you think there has been a good return on investment and where there are particularly productive relations at the moment?
PETER PHAM: Well, I think the fact that-- I think it's very telling that all the 54 countries in Africa, the one that President Biden picked for his first trip and last trip to Africa as president is Angola. Here's a country that has gone from being a Cold War in the Soviet camp to a market economy. And under the current president, Joao Lourenco, increasingly turning to the West, to the United States.
It started early in the Trump administration, when the current president of Angola, Joao Lourenco, then defense minister, signed the first defense cooperation agreement with the United States. And it's proceeded from there to Secretary Pompeo's visit to Angola in 2019. And now President Biden's trip, the investment the US has made in the Lobito Corridor, an integrated strategic corridor that facilitates not just rail transport for minerals to be exported toward the Atlantic, and thus more accessible to American markets, but also opens the interior of Africa to markets to American companies and other companies.
But also it brings in secure energy for processing of minerals to break monopolies on supply chains and help Africans capture the value added, but also secure telecommunications. It's an integrated package, and it's a country that's increasingly helping solve crises in Africa. Everyone talks about African solutions for African problems, and Angola's mediating the conflict between the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda currently.
So I think that's a good example. And I think it's a good return on investment that will probably be continued and hopefully replicated elsewhere on this critical continent in the coming Trump administration.
ELISABETH BRAW: It is almost incredible to think of Angola in such positive terms, and incredible only because I think many of us remember the absolutely devastating civil war during the Cold War. And thinking back to it, I remember the name Jonas Savimbi. Even though I was just a child at the time, it still stuck in my head because he was a rebel leader supported by the West, whereas the Soviets supported the other side, and it was such a destructive civil war.
And now, as you say, Ambassador, there are incredibly positive developments taking place. And that is one side of what we are seeing-- what the world is seeing in on the African continent. And it obviously ranges all the way over to highly destructive developments elsewhere.
So we'll be watching these very developments over the next few years and beyond. And I think one thing is certain to say Ambassador Pham will be present in some capacity. So with that, thank you, Ambassador, for joining Geopolcast.
PETER PHAM: Thank you for having me.
ELISABETH BRAW: And to get the episode as soon as they are released, make sure to subscribe. You can find us via your usual podcast players. And please recommend us to your friends and colleagues.
SPEAKER: Thank you for joining us for this WTW podcast featuring the latest perspectives on the intersection of people, capital, and risk. For more information, visit the insight section of wtwco.com. Willis Towers Watson offers insurance-related services through its appropriately licensed and authorized companies in each country in which Willis Towers Watson operates.
For further authorization and regulatory details about our Willis Towers Watson legal entities operating in your country, please refer to our Willis Towers Watson website. It is a regulatory requirement for us to consider our local licensing requirements. The information given in this podcast is believed to be accurate at the date of publication. This information may have subsequently changed or have been superseded, and should not be relied upon to be accurate or suitable after this date.
This podcast offers a general overview of its subject matter. It does not necessarily address every aspect of its subject or every product available in the market, and we disclaimer all liability to the fullest extent permitted by law. It is not intended to be, and should not be used to replace specific advice relating to individual situations, and we do not offer, and this should not be seen as legal, accounting, or tax advice.
If you intend to take any action or make any decision on the basis of the content of this podcast, you should first seek specific advice from an appropriate professional. Some of the information in this podcast may be compiled from third-party sources we consider to be reliable. However, we do not guarantee and are not responsible for the accuracy of such. The views expressed are not necessarily those of Willis Towers Watson. Copyright. Willis Towers Watson, 2023. All rights reserved.
