Internal Criticism for Bureau of African

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Somalia president 'talking to Terrorist Sheikh Aweys'

While most advocates for African issues and pundits were focused on other things such as the visit to Africa by Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, and a comprehensive policy review towards Sudan - an internal investigation by the State Department into the Bureau of African Affairs revealed some unique and chilling remarks.
What did this report reveal about what the Bureau that will be dealing with what will be the next test for US foreign policy? This department is underfunded, becoming understaffed, burdened with demands, and has a public diplomacy program that, in the words of the report, is "failed", and has questions regarding the priorities of long term planning. Despite these shortcomings, the report by the State Department Inspector General praised the work of the Bureau.
The evaluation into the Bureau took place between April 20th and June 9th of this year. It should be noted that Johnnie Carson, who was nominated by president Obama to this post assumed the position while the review was underway. Before Mr. Carson took over, Philip Carter III was the acting undersecretary. The review indicated that the time under the stewardship of Mr. Carter was a time of "renewal". The report showed Mr. Carson as a strong leader for the position.
Some of the low-lights that were also revealed in the report were that several unnamed embassies have significant morale, staffing and leadership issues. There was also a lack of communication from the regional desks to the front office and disinterest in all posts but those that deal with crisis situations. All in all, this does not bode well for the Secretary of State but could also adversely affect decisions made by the president.
The lack of foresight in planning affects several aspects of US - Africa policy. One glaring example was in Food Aid. Quoting the report" The United States feeds Africa, it is not focusing as it might (should) on helping Africans feed themselves." Another example was in the fight against HIV/AIDS.
The US funds programs that focus more on medication than on prevention of the spread of this deadly disease. The main function of most humanitarian programs centered around PEPFAR and little if any resources were allocated for education and combating HIV/AIDS.
Another point of controversy is AFRICOM. This newest command of the US military was resented by members of the Bureau. More often than not, the reason was that the military was getting more money allocated to it than their State Department counterparts. For example, a military information support team dealing with Somalia received $ 600,000 while the State Department got $ 30,000. It should be noted that the military has resources that state either dreams about or resents. The IG also suggested that the peacekeeping training and support programs be transferred to AFRICOM if funding does not increase. ..more,,http://www.senegambianews.com/article/Editorials_Opinions/Editorials_Opinions/Internal_Criticism_for_Bureau_of_African_Affairs/18885
Africa: Bush's Africa Hand Faults 'Tough Love'