OK George.

First I will agree with you that in certain parts of Africa the general population was better off under colonial administration than they are now. That much is beyond dispute.

However, I disagree with your assertions that Africans are somehow inherently incapable of the same levels of civilization as the rest of the world. While it is true that African civilizations have not been able to maintain long-term success as seen in Asia, the Middle East and Europe, the source of the problem is not to be found in any inherent inferiority. The source is mainly climate, geography and disease.

Africa is prone to periodic drought. Anthropologists believe that one such African drought reduced the entire Human population to about 10,000 individuals about 200,000 years ago. That’s pretty severe. More recently, drought has caused the collapse of a number of very successful civilizations that were contemporary with and on par with civilizations elsewhere in the world at the time. The original Zimbabwe is a good example.

Historically, the geography of Africa has made trade difficult and impeded economic and cultural development. The integration of much of Africa into the world economy continues to be problematical due to the difficulty of the terrain.

Africa also has disease problems that are far greater than other parts of the world. Because Human history in Africa is so much deeper than in the rest of the world, there are many more diseases and parasites that are adapted for Human hosts. These diseases and parasites continue to exact tremendous tolls on Human development.

Also, the legacy of colonialism is not all positive. The “national” boundaries left behind by the retreating colonial powers were drawn in the diplomatic salons of Europe, rather than being developed naturally on the ground. In other parts of the world, nation states developed through centuries-long processes of fluid boundaries, intermittent warfare, cultural assimilation and imperial domination.

Let’s look at a comparative historical example. The region of Europe now known as France was once a chaotic region filled with warring barbaric tribes. A more advanced neighboring empire (Rome) conquered it in a process involving well-organized and technologically superior armies, local allies and superior diplomatic skills. A century of economic exploitation followed, including the exportation of approximately 2 million inhabitants into slavery. After the Roman Empire collapsed, a period of post-colonial chaos followed involving wars and invasions, ethnic cleansing, plundering, kleptocratic dictatorships, private armies, religious wars and persecutions, cultural regressions and terrible famines and epidemics. Sound familiar? This period is known as the Dark Ages and lasted hundreds of years.

Africans are just experiencing a modern expression of the same processes. Nothing more than that. It has nothing to do with inherent inferiority, just a historical process.

It’s a developmental phase they are going through. Hundreds of years from now African scholars will study this period of African history in the same manner as European scholars today study the Dark Ages – with the view that progress was inevitable and the troubles of the time were just a process whereby their nations laid the foundations for future prosperity.

"ZZIM:
Not cool, George."

What is so "uncool" about the truth?

Prove me wrong.

And to the "Somali" who refers numerous times to the "stinking white man" whom he calls a "beast" -- Blacks should thank the "beast" every day for doing their best to civilize them and tame the dark continent.

Without contact with whites, Africans would still be running naked, cannibalizing and enslaving each other just as they're continuing to do so throughout much of Africa. Now that the beast is gone, Rhodesia is experiencing over 100,000 percent inflation and South Africa is the most dangerous place on earth known as the rape capital of the globe.

Yes, blacks should really hate the beast, the only thing he did was bring prosperity, civilization and productivity to the jungle.

George G. Manuelian
Atherton, CA

Ojoroge Wachai, you have being too naive to accept Bush as the best president ever to Africans than John .F.Kennedy who worked entirely for the unity of the world whether white,black,china and clour people, you Africans who believed in a white man that lures you in a house of God with the bible and steal all your belongings behind are the reason Africans are treated as fools, please don't make a mistake to appreciate a white man because they will never regards or accept your appreciation.

Ojoroge Wachai, you have being too naive to accept Bush as the best president ever to Africans than John .F.Kennedy who worked entirely for the unity of the world whether white,black,china and clour people, you Africans who believed in a white man that lures you in a house of God with the bible and steal all your belongings behind are the reason Africans are treated as fools, please don't make a mistake to appreciate a white man because they will never regards or accept your appreciation.

Reading you, Mr. Wachai, I did feel I was living on Mars for all this while when George Bush was busy aiding Africa! But I doubt if you too had been living on earth during this period! Otherwise, you wouldn't have wasted this space in singing paeans to Bush! Don't feel so happy with those few millions dollars given in alms. He had the power and resources to do much more substantially in Africa. After all, GW Bush is the president of the US.

Anyway, let's do a check on your claims. Sudan - Darfur, even Kenya, South Africa, and most recently Zimbabwe to name a few. What has been Bush's efforts in preventing the still continuing genocide and atrocities on innocent civilians? He could not even rein in Robert Mughabe. And you give him a Thumbs-up for his Africa legacy?!

God, save Africa!

The following has been censored from the commentary twice.

Why would that be?

Njoroge Wachai,
Your article leads me to believe that you are stupid, ignorant, immoral or a combination thereof.
I find your article offensive.
Please do not take this as personal attack - it is only my considered opinion.
Even so, your article does not rise to the level of contempt with which I regard censors.
Censors have no place within the United States of America.
July 9, 2008 10:19 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on July 9, 2008 22:19

The following that I posted was left unchallenged:

PC:

zimm writes: "So the fact that Bush is hugely popular overseas doesn't carry much weight here."

Zimm,

Even if your statement were true, no one would care.

July 9, 2008 10:36 PM | Report Offensive Comments

"Jim:
Bush is responsible for the deaths and displacement of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis."

The UN sanctions regime was responsible for the deaths of over 500,000 Iraqi children. At least now the Iraqi death count is going down.

Of course, you Bush haters would have prefered keeping the status quo in place and the body count going on forever with no hope of change.

Gosh, you are such humanitarians. You care so much about the Iraqi people.

Responding to Mohamed MALLECK:

I highly recommend the simple and rapid sleuthing I did via Google whenever one reads a piece that clearly has a strange or potentially under-the-radar-motivation, meaning it doesn't add up to reality and recent history as you know it. Find out exactly who the writer is and deduce why they may be writing the piece. When I read Wachai's comments about Bush's wonderful successes in Africa, knowing that Bush is a free mkt freak - off the charts - I had to research Wachai's background. Bush sadly does NOTHING for altruistic reasons. Nothing.

As I said in my earlier post:

Google these terms:"Njoroge Wachai " ABSF usaid gmo

It took me 5 minutes to winnow the possibilities down to those search terms to get to the bottom of Wachai's M.O.

In the short bio above on Wachai, they hide his corporate sponsored connections via USAID with entities aggressively dumping GMO's in Africa, though the WaPo mentions his THREE MONTHS with the W.H.O. Spinorama.

Don't think for a minute that Ignatius et al don't know about this stuff. Pro business all the way, baby. But if I'm wrong and Wachai snowed them , I challenge them to apologize for not researching what is clearly Wachai's motivation, and removing all related writings, concluding with a promise to never use him again. Maybe serve as a lesson to the next shill.

Else the WaPo is a willing and cogniscent purveyer of hidden (but feel-good), rampantly unregulated pro-corporate propaganda,
Lastly, I'm NOT a communist. If creative and enterprising corporations play FAIR, God Bless them, I'm all for them making big $$
and employing lots of willing workers. -

Mr. Wachai, I'm waiting for you to set me straight.... just keep in mind you can't remove all the docs/info that anyone in this forum can find via Google all over the net, so please be precise with your explanation. Thank you, Sir..........

DAVE D,

Thanks for the info you provided at 1:22 a.m. on 10 July. That explains everything, including why Wachai supports Kibaki.

David Ignatius, please take note. I won't for one second countenance anybody making any threats against anybody for expressing his opinions. You were right to feel VERY indignant when death threats, even though they might have been empty ones, had been made against Mr. N. Wachai. But, at the same time, if the info DAVE D. has provided is correct, maybe WAPO should also consider raising the standards for selection of commentators for its POSTGLOBAL forum.

The American President, George W. Bush’s legacy in fighting the AIDS / Malaria / Tuberculosis epidemics in poor countries is already recognized. The $50 billion pledged funds against the epidemic-infection diseases is expected to make considerable impact upon the existence, health, living environment and quality of life of African, Caribbean and other poor people.

What else is expected to be completed in his legacy is the fact that the twin, BREAST CANCER epidemic in the ‘rich’ countries of the West, resulting from the misconceived and uncritical, mass CONDOMIZATION of women’s sexuality, still runs unabated, surpassing the HIV/AIDS transmissions manifold greater, in number of cases and incidence and death rates.

President G.W. Bush was the only person on the face of Earth who was able to crack down the polar permafrost of the condom delusion, to introduce a condom-paradigm shift in favor of anti-condom health and reproductive policy, to terminate funds for condom promotion / distribution campaigns, and to request (temporary) abstinence behavior and protection against the “reproductive freedom” fallacy for the youngest generations of the American and other (including African) populations, the schoolgirls and other young women.

With the completion of the initiated at the outset of his presidency fight against the breast cancer epidemic (by information), together with the battle against the HIV/AIDS (by financial funds), the chances are that the legacy of President G.W. Bush will enter the annals of global medical history.

Arne N. Gjorgov, M.D., Ph.D. (UNC-SPH, Chapel Hill, NC)
Author of “Barrier Contraception and Breast Cancer,” 1980: x+164

The American President, George W. Bush’s legacy in fighting the AIDS / Malaria / Tuberculosis epidemics in poor countries is already recognized. The $50 billion pledged funds against the epidemic-infection diseases is expected to make considerable impact upon the existence, health, living environment and quality of life of African, Caribbean and other poor people.

What else is expected to be completed in his legacy is the fact that the twin, BREAST CANCER epidemic in the ‘rich’ countries of the West, resulting from the misconceived and uncritical, mass CONDOMIZATION of women’s sexuality, still runs unabated, surpassing the HIV/AIDS transmissions manifold greater, in number of cases and incidence and death rates.

President G.W. Bush was the only person on the face of Earth who was able to crack down the polar permafrost of the condom delusion, to introduce a condom-paradigm shift in favor of anti-condom health and reproductive policy, to terminate funds for condom promotion / distribution campaigns, and to request (temporary) abstinence behavior and protection against the “reproductive freedom” fallacy for the youngest generations of the American and other (including African) populations, the schoolgirls and other young women.

With the completion of the initiated at the outset of his presidency fight against the breast cancer epidemic (by information), together with the battle against the HIV/AIDS (by financial funds), the chances are that the legacy of President G.W. Bush will enter the annals of global medical history.

Arne N. Gjorgov, M.D., Ph.D. (UNC-SPH, Chapel Hill, NC)
Author of “Barrier Contraception and Breast Cancer,” 1980: x+164

The reason so many people detest and hate Bush is because he invaded a sovereign country using embellishment, innuendo and what seem to be outright lies. Bush is responsible for the deaths and displacement of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.

What we hear and read in the news about America’s consensus hatred of Arabs belies the fact that most American’s fear God more than they fear Bush, Arabs or anybody. America is a righteous country and I believe that Bush is a righteous person who made a terrible mistake and is paying a terrible price for his mistake.

I am happy that Bush is aiding Africa more than other presidents. But all the good that Bush does cannot remove the stain of the terrible thing that he did. Only 'I am sorry' for the mistake that I made will accomplish that difficult task.

Bush will never say I am sorry it is not in him and that is too bad because he, like most presidents, accomplished many good things during his presidency. Everyone including presidents make mistakes. Most people admit to their mistakes. Clinton could not admit he made a mistake and it nearly destroyed him. Bush has fallen into the same trap.

The terrorist They Call "president" Is The Enemy Of Humanity!!

Yes Mr Wachai. Continue kissing white ass untill your lips turn blue. What's wrong with you stupid African journalists? You will LIE just to get published and PAID? You are NOOOOOOOO better than those Africans who sold other Africans to Slave Drivers three or two centuries ago. And because of individuals like you, Africa will continue to be RAPEd by the stinkibng white man.

The Terrorist you just praised, Mr Wachai, has killed 10,000 Somalis by now and his work continues to kill thousands more Somalis. Millions of Somalis have been DISPLACED in their own country by the WAR that the cocaine-addicted Terrorist brought to our country. The city of Mogadishu, which was a bustling city even during war, has been UTTERLY destroyed and EMPTIED of almost ALL of its inhabitants, Thanks to the Terrorist you just praised, Mr Wachai.

It is because of LIARS and ASS Kissers like you, Mr Njoroge, that journalists get KILLED in some countries in the world. They are seen as SPIES, LIARS, ASS KISSERS of War Criminals and terrorists.

The Terrorist you just praised, Mr Wachai, is busy as we talk right now TRYING to militarise Africa LIKE NEVER before!!!!

Money isn't EVERYTHING Mr Wachai. WE in Africa don't NEED money or help from the stinking white man. What we want is for the white man to NEVER, EVER set foot in Africa again. The white man has been in Africa for CENTURIES now. What have we gotten from this beast Mr Wachai?

WE got slavery, Wars, Hunger, destrusction of our environment, etc. NOTHING good has ever come of the white man's presence in Africa, Mr Wachai. And don't you remember the 1990's Mr Wachai? The white man was DISRESPECTING Africans in the 1990s, bad-mouthing our continent. In the 1990's the white man was fond of attacking Africans as "lazy, good for nothings," and the white man vowed to NEVER help Africa anymore. I read many racist articles and books during the 1990's advocating cuts to "funds" to Africa.

But now the white man wants to go back to Africa because he has seen how China is benefitting fromTRADE with Africa. Unlike the white man, who only STOLE from Africa, China has benefited Africans in a very short time. Billions of Chinese dollars are being used to criss-cross countries in African, like Congo, with road networks linking the entire country of Congo. For centuries, the white man HAS BEEN in Congo, but what benefit did Congo get fronm the white man?

NONE!!!!

Look at South Africa. How long has the white man been there? many centuries!! But has the black man of South Africa benefited from the white man? NOOOOOOOO. On te contrary, the presence of the white man in South Africa IMPOVERISHED the black man, even now black people in South Africa are AMONG the POOREST in Africa despite all of the mineral wealth, which is being LOOTEd by the white man.

In short, Mr Wachai, the white man has ONLY stolen from Africa. The white man has NEVER benefited Africa!!!

Not cool, George.

Yes, Bush has given an inordinate amount to Africa in foreign aid. That's nothing original. Africa is a basket case that continually relies on foreign aid to survive. The people there cannot care for themselves, create, produce or organize themselves in a civilization on par with the rest of the 21st century planet.

The only countries that were productive until the latter part of the 20th century were Rhodesia and South Africa, but they foolishly ejected the whites, who were the only ones intelligent enough to lead. Until Africa welcomes back Europeans, the dark continent will continue to languish in famine, warfare, corruption and disease. Maybe the Chinese will have better luck, but the natives will probably try to kick them out eventually too.

George Manuelian
Atherton, CA

So - lots of folks you talked to felt direct personal benefits of GWB's programs, but their overall view was formed by foreign news broadcasts regarding what was happening to other people in other countries?

Sounds to me like the rational response is to cut these ungrateful wretches off.

Good thing GWB can be irrational. After all, helping ungrateful wretches is still the right thing to do. I'm glad he helped them.

Yes, Bush is responsible for giving significantly more funds and opening trade to Africa during his tenure, but I would argue that his legacy may still be up in the air.

I served in the Peace Corps in the West African nation of Mali from 2006-2007. During that time, I saw the US increase investment significantly into the country in several forms. Because an Al-Qaeda spin-off group has formed in neighboring Algeria, the US military has taken an interest in doing some development work and military training in the northern regions of Mali. Bush helped set up a program where the Malian government would give every mother of a new child a mosquito net for the two of them. Because of better funding, vaccination programs were expanded and more children were receiving the standard vaccinations for many preventable diseases.

However, (and I think this is still significant) is that many of the locals I often interacted with spoke ill of America and of President Bush - primarily because of the Iraq War and the prison at Gitmo. A lot of times they knew aid was coming from America (as well as from Canada and many European nations), but they did not trust the motivations of the US. For every radio story they heard of a vaccine drive in a village that had never had one before, they heard several stories about American bombs killing civilians in Baghdad or of America torturing prisoners for the crime of being Muslim.

Though I believe those with anti-American sentiments were only a vocal minority, Bush's reputation was a rather large speed bump in many circumstances to my work and my colleagues' work in Africa. In the end, I do think Bush's good deeds in Africa will last longer than his negative reputation on the continent, but I doubt many people will give him credit anytime in the near future.

Where do people get off claiming that Bush has nearly destroyed this country? For the life of me, I just don't get it. I understand that you can oppose his policies, not like him personally, and find fault with almost anything he does. But destroy this country??

Do we live in a dictatorship? What civil rights has the average, law-abiding citizen lost? (I'm not referring to would-be terrorists.) Are storm troopers taking away the innocent in the night? Has the Bill of Rights been repealed? Do we not have a Democratically-controlled Congress and a Supreme Court to still act as checks and balances on the executive branch? The hyperbole of the rabid, anti-Bush leftists is incredible.

For all of his faults, President Bush has kept this country safe since the dreadful attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. For that alone, this nation should be truly greatful.

Perhaps he would have governed this country better had he lived in Africa. We have been so busy trying to understand how in eight years, bush could have set America back 100 years and with the vetoes against domestic issues that favored American middle class and poor, more educational opportunities for returning service personal, as well as other opportunities for those below the level of big business and energy company's, we just probably didn't notice all the money he was sending you.

I guess everyone needs somebody, so, you can have him. Do you think you might find a spot for him to pitch his tent upon leaving Washington. I realize Texas deserves him, but since you appear to be his only legacy, you can have him.

Clearly Bush Jr has been an much better President to Africa and Mexico than the USA. Here he has nearly destroyed this Nation. When Obams or McAmnesty give Amnesty to the invading horde in a few short years we will be an Spanish speaking Nation with all the problems of Mexico and accelerate our slide into third world status!

He should move there...immediately. Oh, and he should take all of his supporters and Cheney with him.

It is also true that a great majority of the money made available for aid to Africa was used as payback to religious organizations that backed Bush in the elections. Much of these funds never reached the African people. It is also worth mentioning that Bush's tactics on affecting AIDS in Africa proved to be much a failure as he did not prevent any new cases of AIDS and did little to prolong the lives of those who had already contracted the disease. This again was due to the fact that much of the funds were provided to religious organizations bent on changing the African culture instead of providing a cure for the disease. Also, Bush should be the last person who should openly condemn a sham election in Zimbabwe as he was the force behind two sham elections here in the United States. (If you are unaware of the details behind these elections, I urge you to look into it.)

You say:

"it remains to be seen if Bush can do enough on these issues during his remaining tenure in office to leave a good legacy in the eyes of the American people. "

It is impossible for him to leave a good legacy. Nothing he has done has benefited the American people. His policies have ruined the economy, damaged the environment, destroyed our international image, broken the foundation laid by the Consitution, stripped Americans of their rights, and created a society built on not a love for one's fellow man, but on fear.

georgetowner1 wrote: "I worry about where all this hate (currently directed at Bush) will be directed next."
*******************

Agreed. Once W leaves office a whole lot of people are going to be choking on their own bile until they find the next victim to target. Oh, they'll find someone to target quickly enough. A hater is a hater, they don't keep quiet for long. I think they are incapable.

BTW, you made some good suggestions in your post.

I worry about where all this hate (currently directed at Bush) will be directed next. Instead of sitting around and hosting bile, why not send a contribution to Save the Children, ride a bicycle to work, work for the congressman of your choice, recycle, think good thoughts, and invest in Africa. I have spent years in Africa and it is amazing that after centuries of exploitation by people of all colors and countries, there is still so much there in terms of natural resources and peoples.

With all due respect, you might want to tell that to the Mountain Gorillas. I'm sorry; that's right, they can't talk (um, talk back...).Sorry, didn't mean to rain on the anthropomorphic parade. Speaking of deluges - and assuming Pascal's bet has any validity - what do you think "God," or the arc of evolutionary dynamics, or whatever rattle you wish to shake, would think about the action-through-omission of letting one of our closest evolutionary kin go down the drain? Oh, I know, throw up the hands, there's nothing to do, its so far away, I mean, tribalists, what's there to do with them, we have so much work to do projecting trans-national corporate interests that there just isn't enough time in the day...

The days grow shorter and the water can not be damned; it will always flow towards Mombassa.

Bush has been a Great President. Those who detract from him are too ignorant to realize it.

BuSh is an insult to the constitution. His proposals to strip gay/lesbian of their rights while complaining about China is hypocritical but typical of the Bush/Darth Vader era. Attack on 4th amendment via just passed legislation will be one of the first of many reversals once a new administration is installed in January 2009.

Selective release of NIE intelligence regarding Iraq purchase of yellow cake material begs for indictment against Cheney/Bush or outing a CIA agent.

Iraq? The single most DEAD WRONG foreign policy decision since America founded.

BuSh's legacy is confirmed. When people think of BuSh they will conclude incompetence, stupidity, stubborn, use of religion for politics, use of soldiers to promote a policy, the worst economy since the depression. BuSh is nothing more than a late night show joke.

OK, add up the score card:

1. Somalia - we've conducted raids into the country with our air assets and killed lots of what Bush called 'terrorists', but did they get a trial? How many innocents were killed along with them?

2. Darfur - How many have died under Bush's watch? Certainly hundreds of thousands.

3. Congo - No help there, but the civil war is finally burning itself out.

4. Nigerian Delta - Well, we in America are oblivious to the plight of the people there, but we are getting the oil pumped.

5. As for helping with 'African' diseases, we rate a zero. Did we come up with any medicines that could relieve suffering? No, but we do have some spectacular ED drugs now in the US.

6. Zimbabwe - humm, Bush jawboned the lack of fair elections, and called for sanctions. Yawn.

7. We still view Africa as some backward colonial hole. For example, instead of helping them setup their own medical schools, we send in doctors to 'help' them with public health.

So, I have to disagree with the author. We've done nothing for Africa other than ignore it, but take their raw materials such as metals and oil.

Njoroge Wachai is a pr front man, not a real journalist. This piece is one pile of unmentionable: tell me how cutting off funding for AIDS programs that mention contraception help Africa? Sudan? a nightmare. Zimbabwe? An international basket-case that Bush deserves no special credit for mentioning. What, exactly, has he helped? Trade? Oh, you mean the extraction of petroleum and other natural riches to the benefit mostly of a few rich white men, and a few African profiteers and apologists.

All the Bush apologist who are so eager to leap on a positive piece? Pathetic.

This is , so far, to say nothing of the main legacy of the Bush presidency: the takeover of American govt by Big Oil. Some in Africa become obscenely wealthy from oil, but most suffer horribly.

The pretend-journalist Njoroge Wachai benefits handsomely from Bush and Big Oil. Washington Post readers deserve far better than this apologetic drivel.

Njoroge Wachai is a pr front man, not a real journalist. This piece is one pile of unmentionable: tell me how cutting off funding for AIDS programs that mention contraception help Africa? Sudan? a nightmare. Zimbabwe? An international basket-case that Bush deserves no special credit for mentioning.

All the Bush apologist who are so eager to leap on a positive piece? Pathetic.

This is , so far, to say nothing of the main legacy of the Bush presidency: the takeover of American govt by Big Oil. Some in Africa become obscenely wealthy from oil, but most suffer horribly. This is what the pretend-journalist Njoroge Wachai is obviously benefiting from. Washington Post readers deserve far better than this apologetic drivel.

Does this great legacy in Africa include the Bush backed invasion of Somalia? I´m sure Somalians are very gratefull.

I am an African; and I strongly refute the allegation that Bush has been "generous and kind to Africa." Njoroge, I don't know whether you were being ironic, or deliberately provocative, by making that statement.
In my view, by instigating unnecessary wars in the world; the Bush administration has made the world a much unsafer place, including or especially for people in the developing world, a large part of whom are in Africa.
Regarding the specific example that you mentioned, I don't think much of US policy towards Zimbabwe, which I think is largely haphazard and forged at the last minute; timed to support a long-time ally, Britain.
Besides, it is difficult to take any President that labeles Robert Mugabe as a dictator seriously, when they linked to horrors such as Guantanamo Bay.
None of this takes away from what you wrote about the provision of aid etc. but, on the whole, it really doesn't even begin to make up for just some of the things that I have mentioned. Thanks,

G.W. Bush ever the favorite whipping boy of the loony left.
By any standard he will go down as one of the greatest presidents this nation has ever produced.

I remember G.W's statements after Katrina, and the same loony left called him a bigot while the right turned on him like a viper.

"there is also some deep, persistent poverty in this region as well. That poverty has roots in a history of racial discrimination, which cut off generations from the opportunity of America. We have a duty to confront this poverty with bold action."

Bush went on to say..

"You need to know," he said, directly addressing the dislocated and desperate, "that our whole nation cares about you, and in the journey ahead you're not alone. . . . And tonight I also offer this pledge of the American people: Throughout the area hit by the hurricane, we will do what it takes, we will stay as long as it takes, to help citizens rebuild their communities and their lives."

Bush is the 'real' straight talk express, the tests put before him allowed him to shine even in the face of the rhetoric and frustrated fantasy of the loony left. And I for one will miss his leadership.

I'm sorry, but sometimes I read news commentary and wonder how its author has "earned" the opportunity to access a powerful platform such as the Washington Post. This editorial is filled with sophomoric rhetoric that's plainly fallacious. First, to ask "What's one thing he can do to strengthen his legacy?" does not prejudge Bush's legacy as horrible. Second, selectively highlighting Bush's "achievements" and ignoring all else does not prove he will have a good legacy regarding Africa. Finally, even if Bush has a good legacy regarding African issues, this does not mean Africans should believe Bush leaves a good legacy. We can believe he has a good legacy on African issues while recognizing, overall, he does not have a good legacy. In fact we can still find his legacy horrible. Why would the Washington Post publish this?

I realized, maybe it would be instructive and add something to the conversation if Njoroge would like to explain his stance on potential deregulation and the free market approach Bush covets vis a vis Africa. I'd love to hear how the ideas that are continuing to ruin our own country are going to help his continent. This, though delivered with a little irony, is a very serious request, and would provide context for the piece that generated this forum.
It goes without saying that Mr. Wachai reads these comments, having been given space in one of the world's leading and influential papers - so, Mr. Wachai - how about it?

Spend 5 minutes Googling these terms:
"Njoroge Wachai " ABSF usaid gmo

You'll see that Wachai is a pr front man for an outfit (ABSF) paid for by USAID (your tax $$, folks) specifically to aid Monsanto and others in sinking their claws into Africa by deregulating their agricultural/business laws
to foist dangerous and untested GMO's on these new and huge markets. Once again. Bush's remaining fans and their ilk are those who smell profits and unfettered free mkts, and go after them rapaciously, regardless of the human outcome. The WaPo sells Wachai as a "journalist", neglecting his business front job. Does the bamboozling never stop?

Bush is an incompetent fool

I have no reason to doubt either the sincerity of this writers praise for President George W Bush nor that President George W Bush being a human being has had good intentions and caused some occasional good outcomes.

But Africa is a part of the world, and for merit to have a chance to rise anywhere in the world, human beings need to have confidence in a rule of law.

Without the rule of law trade becomes exploitation and advancement becomes a matter of knowing who to bribe or how to kill or damage ones rivals.

Under the United Nations Charter, human beings had made a beginning. Before George W Bush was even born the United Nations had been established as a hub of international law (it is that hub, because it says it is and the various nations that signed it and ratified it agreed to its terms).

Whatever incidental good Bush may have done in some places, whatever his intent, and I for one suspect that only impeachment hearings that lift the veil of executive privilege will allow a fair determination of his intent on matters such as his decision to order the invasion of Iraq, the most significant consequence of George W Bush's Presidency is an undermining of confidence in the global rule of law.

It is not enough for a President to throw a few bones and dispense a few favors a President is a global role model. On George W Bush's watch Africans along with the rest of the world have seen torture and aggressive invasion used as tools in a so called war on terror.

Some Africans may feel grateful for the Presidency of George W Bush, certainly some personal friends of his have benefited, but I suspect that what George W Bush represents to more people is a challenge to the proposition that the world is a just place in which merit can rise through merit.

Human beings need the rule of law modeled to have confidence in it not benevolent dictatorship with malevolent consequences. Terrorism, torture and aggressive invasion come easy to human beings - we have been doing it for ever. George W Bush's has not been a Presidency that has respected the law or that has valued the progress made by previous generations of men and women who established such social contracts as the US Constitution and the United Nations Charter.

The legacy of George W Bush's Presidency will be that people will look at the words and promises of nations and especially of the United States and wonder if they are worth the paper they are written on.

Give credit where credit is due. GWB has done a fine job on this front. Even Jimmy Carter will praise him. Now if he could only transfer some of that good will within our borders starting with New Orleans, post hurricane Katrina.

Bush has certainly done good in southern Africa, but I wanted to see him push much more fiercely for an end to the ongoing Darfur genocide. Additionally, I can't help but feel that the unrest created by his invasion of Iraq has led to hostilities and resentment in the Arab north, from which Al Queda recruits a good chunk of their support base.

It seems that any time anyone says anything positive about George W. Bush, a thousand Democrats leap out of their caves to beat him down, usually with inaccuracies, exaggerations, and downright lies.

Mr. Wachai's observations are accurate. Bush was received warmly on his recent tour of central Africa. He has emphasized trade as a way to help the impoverished people of Africa pull themselves out of their economic rut. Under G W Bush, the U.S. has been a good friend to the Africans. It also helps that the Chinese have expanded aggressively into Africa in search of minerals and oil, and their selfish policies of exploiting the local people and collaborating with the worst regimes contrasts sharply with those of the Bush Administration. No wonder the people of Africa tend to view Bush positively.

One commentator writes that Bush is a bigot--so, how do you explain the blacks and other ethnicities represented in the administration, including the Secretary of State?

Another writes that Bush's policies "stoked" Islamic radicals in north Africa. So al Qaeda was created by Bush, now? They didn't plan 9/11 all through the Clinton era? Islamic radicalism didn't exist until we invaded Iraq? I would say on the contrary, the U.S. has been fighting the Islamic radicals, including Iranian proxies, since 2001 and has killed many thousands of them. Bush took a stand against this movement and has damaged it greatly. The Taliban are no longer in charge in Afghanistan and al Qaeda no longer has a network of training camps where they could train openly to destabilize the Arab world. Their main base is now a God-forsaken place in Pakistan and sooner or later it will be destroyed.

Bush is the worst president ever? Talk about ignorance of history. There was this guy, John F. Kennedy, who took the U.S. into Vietnam, against the advice of MacArthur and other experts on Asia, and this other guy Lyndon Johnson prosecuted the war until 48,000 Americans had died, not to mention millions of Vietnamese. Good old LBJ also squandered the nation's wealth on his Great Society entitlement programs, and we are still paying for those excesses today. Harry Truman killed 37,000 American soldiers and millions of Koreans and Chinese in a pointless action in Korea that left us with a deadly enemy to this very day.

All Democrats. Let's see, then there was Jimmy Carter, who accomplished... nothing at all. He was completely devoid of leadership ability, despite his intelligence and idealism. Then there was the Democratic philanderer, Bill Clinton, who partied for 8 years while Al Qaeda plotted and attacked (the U.S.S. Cole for example) and had the great fortune to have the internet boom happen on his watch and then let it go bust just as GW Bush took office. So Bush gets blamed for the mistakes and excesses of the previous presidency. Some commentators even blame him for the mortgage meltdown, as though ten years of greed and dishonesty among both buyers and lenders can be laid at his feet. Gee, let's go ahead and blame Bush for the obesity epidemic.

No, I think the Africans got it right and many, many readers of the Washington Post website are either incredibly ignorant or are employees of the Obama campaign.

How much was this man paid for writing this drivel?

Bush actually had good intentions for Africa when he came into office. He was strongly in favor of grant money rather than loan money (cf. World Bank/IMF) to deliver aid to African countries. He had good intentions when trying to establish the Millenium Challenge Corporation as a counterweight to USAID, designed to promote good governance and other institutional groundwork as a prerequisite to receipt of aid.

Unfortunately, the MCC never really took off because they couldn't find enough countries able to meet the "good governance" criteria. After that, things were pretty much ignored in Africa for a number of years until the Chinese started making inroads and the U.S. suddenly woke up and saw the threat of competition. And they saw a threat of Africa becoming a base of operation for organizations like Al Qaeda.

So Bush has increased aid to Tanzania (I think) tenfold in the last year, has increased assistance to fight AIDS, etc. But underneath all this he's also increasing the U.S. military presence, contemplating relocation of the military command center for Africa from Europe to the African continent itself, and basically started tossing money around to win friends and influence rulers. I think the World Bank cut off Kenya from further funding because of the rampant corruption, but the U.S. is happy to keep spending.

Just like the Cold War, when the U.S. wasted untold billions on kleptocrats like Mobutu, just to keep them out of the Soviet sphere of influence.

Bush does what is needed and necessary. He has never ever gotten a fair shake from mainstream news because he does what is good for the American people, not what pleases the elites. Bill Clinton spent his entire career fawning over insiders and Hollywood and directing vast sums their way. Of course, all the pundits and polls show "us" missing Clinton. "We" don't miss Clinton, we like Bush. But those who were on the high end dole and getting all the perks while Clinton let American defenses decay to the point of allowing 9/11...and now there's Obama who wants to repeat the same thing. He's the media darling because they're salivating with all the free stuff and budget raiding Obama will enact.

I think that Bush will be looked at historically as the President who set the model for the next 10 Presidents to come.

Mr. Wachai's comments here are no more than fair. I am not an admirer of President Bush personally or of his administration's foreign policy overall, but he has put the weight of the American government into the fights against malaria and AIDS, two of the greatest killers on the continent.

His administration deserves credit for that. Moreover, though its leverage was greatly reduced by the enormous commitment of resources to Iraq, the Bush administrationw as instrumental in negotiating the treaty that ended the long civil war in Sudan between the Arab-dominated Khartoum government and the Christian-animist south. Its effort to stem the Khartoum regime's war against civilians in the Darfur region is also noteworthy, especially since it got little help from other governments that might have restrained Sudan. Administration tactics in Darfur and toward other crises in Africa can be criticized, but they did not create Africa's problems. Few administrations have worked harder to solve them.

While Shrub was procaliming "Mission Acclomplished" (not), Africa experienced one of the most heinous genocides in history - I guess it's too bad for them that they aint got no oil huh...but hey, who am I to complain, I'm only trying to recover from five-dollar a gallon gasoline thanks to "Mission Accomplished." And how is it that African women being raped daily while their children starve a good thing for the Shrub legacy? Shrub should go to prison and his henchman cheney should...well, let's just say that I'm going to party like a rock star for a month of Sundays when Dead Eye Dick dies and goes to Hades! (Shrub is such a pathetic piece of dog dung that his demise will only merit a day or two of revelry.) Done well by Africa my arse!

Let this man speak his mind. If he believes Bush's policies for Africa were fair and helpful, who are the bunch of juvenile American vandals and graffiti artists posting here to claim otherwise? Subversion is the only language these hacks know. Ignore them Mr. Wachai. These are the same people who would throw a bomb into a public gathering to make some kind of sick political statement.

Mr. Wachai seems to have a point here.

Whatever you think of Bush (and he will go down as one of the worst U.S. presidents ever), he has had the biggest impact on Africa -- bigger than any other U.S. president in history.

Even more than Bill Clinton, who, in my opinion, badly wounded himself during this election season.

The facts only seem to support Wachai's assertions. More info here: http://www.politicalarticles.net/blog/2008/03/11/president-bush-closest-thing-to-a-black-president/

"darker" hopes GWBush moves to Africa. Please! Africa has enough plagues as it is. Let's not burden it with another one.

Njoroge Wachai must be one of the Kenyan elites who is pilfering American 'aid' into his pockets to scribble nonsense on why GWB was a good president to Africa. Kenya is one of the top AMerican aid recipients and most of it lands into the corrupt Kenyan officials. So he must either directly or indirectly benefiting from so called American bonanza or is a plant to write good words on GWB presidency. True, Bush with a lot of fanfare declared 15 billion worth of aid to fight HIV/AIDS in Africa. However, I read only a fraction of it was delivered to Africa due to bureacratic sheningans in Washington. Africa does not need hands out from the west what it needs is a fair foreign policy by American Administrations that is pro people and protects its African citizens from African dictators that are patted on their backs by Washington becuase they serve a useful purpsoe for example to fight terrorism, or a specific country has abundant natural resource such as oil or is considered important American allies advancing American interests. In conclusion, GWB's presidency was a disaster be it for America or Africa not withstanding his half-hearted bonafide acts toward Africa. Africans do not need apologists to GWB such as Njoroge Wachai.

As President Clinton did nothing to stop the genocide in Rwanda, President Bush did nothing to stop the genocide in Sudan.
Positive things have been done in Africa by President Carter fighting river worms disease, Bill and Melinda Gates fighting malaria and other diseases, Bono obtaining funds to help the people in need, Doctors Without Borders treating the poor at no charge, while Bush closed clinics in Africa because the clinics tried to prevent AIDS with condoms. Some legacy.
Mr. Bush is NOT popular anywhere in the world, except in Crawford, Texas.

zimm writes: "So the fact that Bush is hugely popular overseas doesn't carry much weight here."

Zimm,

Even if your statement were true, no one would care.

Excuse me, how's he done well in Africa?

Somalia, Zimbabwe, the Sudan, Rwanda, the author's own Kenya? The list of distressed countries goes on.

The typical five minute Bush photo and autograph ops in a country in support of AIDS, malaria and poverty do not an achievement make. The true test will be after we finally see the back end of Curious George; then let's see how much he steps up to a cause.

Quite frankly, I don't see a Nobel on the horizon too soon.

What about North Africa where Bush's policies in the Middle East have created fertile ground for Al Qaeda recruitment? Algeria, Morocco, and Libya face great challenges due to this renewed threat.

Sorry Njoroge,
- Bush has done "well" by no-one, nowhere, nothing.

Sorry, Njoroge - Bush has done "well" by no-one, nowhere, and nothing.

For all his talk about democracy, Bush still allowed his Secretary of State to welcome one of Africs'a worst dictators to DC. For no reason other than that American oil companies are making enormous profits in EG, the third largest oil producer in Africa. Nor did he do much to help the Sudan situation.

We hope GWBUSH MOVES TO AFRICA.
We don't want Bush in America ANYMORE.

It's good to read something positive about our President. Thank you.

What a sad bunch of posters. When you resort to namecalling, eg, "negro" and "bigot" that means you blinked, yo can't come back with a real argukment. If some of you had read, say "The Economist" for the last couple of years, you might have known some of this information. Next time, come prepared to the table. I'm not fan of President Bush, but he deserves his due.

Wachai,

You desereve what Jorge had to tell you at 5:35 p.m., did you not?

Anyway, have you heard of a place called Diego Garcia? That's a micro atoll in the middle of the Indian Ocean, part of Africa, that the Pentagon uses to keep a military base and it is a "territory" that has the largest density of WMDs per square mile than any other place on earth. It was illegally excised from Mauritius by Britain at the country's independence, and leased to the US as a military base. It is regularly the subject of acrimonious debate in the British Parliament because of its use as a centre of illegal detention pretty much like Guantanamo Bay, although the American administration denies that.

I repeat: Diego Garcia is a 'territory' that was illegally excised from the African country of Mauritius.

But yes, overall, Mauritius has excellent relations with the admirable American people, and we want to reinforce those relations.

As for Bush, well, his term is essentially over and I want to forget him.

"Of course, you don’t expect Bush’s detractors --- and those who have political points to score by poking holes into his presidency – to paint him white. They’d rather paint him black."

I had to check the banner; I thought I was reading The Onion. Who IS this joker, and why did anyone publish this (mostly) nonsense?

You mean one child ever 30 seconds.

How does shutting an abortion clinic cause an increase in AIDS?

I an not against abortion, and the clinics should not have been shut down, but that doesn't cause AIDS.

Unprotected sex, sharing needles, tainted blood, those types of high risk behavior can expose a person to HIV, which can then lead to AIDS.

And remember, Slick Willy sat on the sidelines while people were slaughtered wholesale in Africa.

I suppose trade and relief to end malaria is a major blessing for Africa compared to issues affecting life in the United States.

Americans cannot and will not allow Bush's humanitarian gestures toward Africa to trumph the economic devestation and loss of life witnessed daily by the impact of his ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

History will no doubt write his legacy with much grief.

As I read Wachai's sad and wrong comments on how Bush has helped Darfur, I also read this headline and lede in the WashPost: "Seven peacekeepers were killed and 22 were wounded, seven critically, in a militia ambush on their convoy in Darfur, the largest hit on a struggling, joint U.N.-African Union force that took charge in January, officials said Wednesday." Now there's American leadership!

Where is Bush's leadership for his so-called concern for Africans. What a waste of time Bush has been. Oh and 1 trillion dollars in debt. Oh and the trashing of America's reputation. Oh and the shredding of the Constitution. Or and the torture. Oh and the killing across the world in the name of "freedom." Can't you find someone else to write up than Bush and his criminal friends?

is this some kind of a freakn joke? Are you kidding? Bush has cheerfully watched Darfur burn and people tortured because he lack moral courage and thinks that a few words of outrage will stop the killing of 550k people Oh and let's give it up for Condi, ah? The Ultimate House Negro. Her own black people are trashed and murdered and raped, and what's she got to say this last week? Nothing about Africa or Darfur. She says, "I'm proud to have invaded Iraq." Stanford, you got a PR challenge on your hand, as you dole out payroll checks to a war criminal.

Democrats are always badgered with the "tax and spend" bat. Bush, on the other hand, has set the Republican creed of "borrow and spend" in concrete. The $500B he's borrowed was spent to destroy Iraq.

What might have been if Bush had truly cared about Africa and spent 1/10th of $500B improving healthcare and infrastructure in the poorest African nations?

I'm glad you find silver in the lining. You won't have to clean up the mess this monster and his puppeteer are leaving in their wake.

Hasn't President Bush also done a lot to fight HIV/AIDs in Africa?

I did like the author to expantiate on the positives/results of these trade agreements...i am also not quite sure of his efforts in Darfur that cannot be 'underestimated,' in fact, I believe that if America's military forces are not tied up in Iraq, they might have helped forcefully in Darfur. Similarly, America's military might used to be a deterrent to dictators and corrupt governments like Sudan and Zimbabwe but Bush's foreign policy and the war in Iraq have undermined America's credibility...the same can be said for diplomacy. While there might be few positives to draw out of this administration, there is nothing to be proud of!

For the record I'm African American and I have to call it truthfully as it is factual. I agree with this assessment.

Thank you Mr. Wachai for bringing this truth to all Americans whether we accept it or not. If you believe and I believe Africa will be saved.

@Will: "Malaria kills 1 child every 30 seconds, according to your site, not every 1 second"

It's not surprising given the lack of accuracy in the rest of the article that even linked-to figures are wildly out.

It seems that the author is confusing `George Bush' with the
`Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation'. The withdrawal of funding for evidence-based AIDS countermeasures, and the growth of abstinence-based sexual health advice have been a real life saver in Southern Africa. Chalk up another few tens of thousands of deaths to W and his christian taleban hordes.

Malaria kills 1 child every 30 seconds, according to your site, not every 1 second.

In the context of everything else he has done which was either harmful or damaging to the position of the US and/or the world, this essentially becomes irrelevant even though it is wonderful what has happened in Africa.

Many African refugees appreciate him allowing them to come here.

I'm not a fan of sending ANY money to Africa. It always seems to end up in the pockets of some very despicable people over there.

But saying that, I've often wondered why the Bush administration has not received more credit for the unprecedented help they have sent to Africa.

It seems that people's personal, political agendas to slam everything our country does has usurped their ability to see the good this administration has done.

A LEGACY NEITHER PROUD NOR AFRICAN!!! The rapidly shrinking presidency of George W. Bush is in such comedic overdrive that the only thing any ham-sham-&-hackish journalist need do to obtain a 'respectable' newspaper space is to express a few kind words for the monkeyish President of USA. When Mr. Bush was riding the wave of undeserved popularity unleased by the patriotic tears of Americans after Sept 11, 2000 terrorist attacks, he COULD NOT BE BOTHERED WITH AFRICA EVEN IF THE ENTIRE CONTINENT WAS DUMPED IN FRONT OF THE U.S. WHITE HOUSE. For more than 6 years of his presidency, Mr. Bush displayed impish arrogance by refusing to even meet with the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) which is the oldest and most prominent organization that advocates for the interest of Black Americans. When Hurricane Katrina destroyed New Orleans in 2006 and nearly wiped out the city's entire black population, Mr. Bush refused to provide federal assistance but instead flew over the city in an airplane while Black Americans drowned and starved to death beneath his presidential jet. For years, Mr. Bush refused to release funds to fight HIV-AIDS in Africa. In a fit of manic religiousity that would have impressed the Taliban, Mr. Bush demanded that African nations first pledged not to use any part of the money to buy condom. The fact that condom is approved by World Health Organization or that only one of a married couple could be HIV-positive or that prevention is better than cure or that millions of Africans were dying/getting infected daily DID NOT MOVE THE DEAD CONSCIENCE of Mr. Bush to release the funds. NOW THAT HIS ENTIRE PRESIDENCY HAS BEEN EXPOSED AS BANKRUPT AND WASTED MR. BUSH IS SUDDENLY LOOKING FOR LEGACY - ANY LEGACY. First, he begs North Korea to blow up an empty long-abandoned nuclear tower and claimed it as De-Nuclarization Legacy. Then he went to The Czech Republic and muscled the tiny nation to sign a deal to allow him locate a Missile Tracking Station [to deterr Iranian missiles, he claimed] even though Europeans have repeatedly told Mr. Bush THAT IRAN DOES NOT POSE A THREAT TO EUROPE. I guess that could be called Europe Like-It-Or-Not Protection Legacy. Finally, Africa: after nearly destroying Kenya [yes, Kenya fell into self-destructive anarchy because Mr. Bush stupidly rushed to congratulate Kenya's President Wan Kibaki despite world-wide concerns that the election was flawed; Mr. Bush's attempt to legitimize Kibaki triggered riots by opposition leader Mr. Raila Odinga's supporters]; after failing to do protect Darfur, or to oust Mugabe of Zimbabwe or help secure stability in Samalia WE NOW HAVE U.S.A. VISA-SEEKING JOURNALISTS LIKE MR. NJOROGE WACHAI mouthing off that George. W. Bush has a proud legacy in Africa. You are hopelessly wrong, Mr. Wachai, Mr. Bush's legacy is neither proud nor pro-Africa.

Bush's policies thousands of family planning centres in Africa closed down because they offered abortions, leading to a massive increase in AIDS.

It would be helpful if you had provided a more meaningful assessment of the aid increase (tripled) than the passing reference in an article (which did so without attribution). Here is a Brookings Inst. piece disputing that number:

http://www.brookings.edu/articles/2005/0627africa_rice.aspx

Re Darfur, Zimbabwe or aids/malaria assistance, one has to presuppose as you do that if Gore were President e.g. that this would not have occurred...if not even more. George Bush as President has been a mitigated disaster. Enough of the lipstick please. Imagine the financing at his disposal if not for the war to help not just Africa but other projects around the world and indeed in his own country.

ps...you make no mention of the great work done by the likes of Gates, Clinton, Bono, Drs. without borders etc etc. nor the pratice issue of birth control as preached by G's admin.

This is an important piece, as the writer tries to highlight President Bush's efforts in Africa. I am not well-informed on the specifics, but I applaud the author for not letting the unpopularity of Mr. Bush at home and abroad deter him from recognizing the good he had done for many in Africa.

Good article Njoroge. I want to apologize on behalf my more-excitable fellow-posters. Americans tend to view all things through domestic politics and don't really care what foreigners think about our leaders. So the fact that Bush is hugely popular overseas doesn't carry much weight here.

Let's hope that Obama or McCain continues the Bush policies toward Africa for the betterment of all of us.

You might want to mention that thanks to Bush's policies thousands of family planning centres in Africa closed down because they offered abortions, leading to a massive increase in AIDS.

That you hurl the word "bigot" so casually is a symptom of political incivility and immaturity.

That you do nothing to back up your charge is even more irresponsible.

bush the great! what kind of trade? raw materials of one kind or another, e.g. oil, diamonds bought from corrupt leaders who spend not a penny on their people that own the national resources. so he condemn mugabe. big deal.

it is ironic, as he's a bigot and his policies have hurt black americans quite a bit.

Of course, being African nations heavily dependent on foreign aid (almost 90% compared to others) they need to root for those who provide the money, whether is China or the U.S.