Experts from the White House have probably misled about the potential enthusiasm of African capitals to host the headquarters of Africom. This new initiative of President George W. Bush wants a draft bulwark against terrorist groups which are beginning to worry the interests “Yankee” in the continent. Moreover, the problem of accommodation of this command is the only block that prevents the deployment of the system. Most African States remain concerned over the future implications of such an initiative.

“I am pleased today to share my decision to establish within the Ministry of Defence a Unified Command of the Armed Forces for Africa. “This is how the American president decided on the creation of Africom in a statement released on February 6. He describes it as a way which will serve to strengthen cooperation with Africa on security and we will offer new ways to enhance the capabilities of our partners in Africa. We will intensify our efforts to bring peace and security to the peoples of Africa and promote our common goals of development, health, education, democracy and economic growth in Africa. “.

The bright prospects as identified by the American president have, for now, not been sufficient to convince African heads of state on a possible acceptance of hosting the headquarters of the Africa Command (Africom).

The decisions of rejection and distrust have not been waiting on the African continent. It was at the northern continent, the Maghreb, an area that is currently most affected by terrorist movements, that the project will create the initial reluctance. The decision of the Libyan President, Moammar Gaddafi, has not surprised many people, particularly because of cold that freezes always US-Libyan relations since decades now, despite some attempts at rapprochement have been noted recently.

The Algerian president, Abdelaziz Bouteflika, also declined the U.S. offer. This declination is the result, according to him, a lack of information about the very existence of the American project. Also, the Algerian authorities accuse have not been made aware in time, which gives them a reason to deny the choice of Algiers as the seat of Africom. And even if it was informed in time, it is not certain that President Bouteflika is favourable to the proposal because as he said in an interview with the Spanish newspaper ABC: “we are not qualified to decide the place of Africa “.

This refusal may be regarded as major reasons for political strategy. Indeed, Algeria, refused this offer, seems to reiterate its desire to assert itself facing the major powers. Recall that recently, President Bouteflika made a serious criticism against French authorities he accuses of suffering from “mental blindness”.

At the strategic level, the presence of the GSPC (Salafiste Group for Preaching and Combat), which has become since January 2007 Al-Qaeda Organisation in the Islamic Maghreb (AQMI), does not facilitate the choice of Algiers as the seat of command. The acceptance of this proposal could aggravate the already worrying situation in Algeria.

Morocco, considered the country closest to Washington, also remains opposed to this idea. The Egypt has not been asked because it is already part of the command centre of the central USA.

The disappointment of emissaries from Washington may not last. After this failure in the Maghreb, is still exploring the Sub-Saharan Africa. And it is highly probable that this proposal is acquirer in this part of the continent if we consider the weight of Washington’s decisions on many of its African allies. But for the moment, most remain cautious and we wonder what good are the tools of pressure that Washington has in its armada in the event of widespread refusal. But the probability is very low and we can expect a transfer of command, currently in Stuttgart, Germany, to the tropics by the beginning of operations that are scheduled for September 2008.

According to some sources close to Washington, the runway of the decentralization of command of Africom would be under consideration. But this might not always ensure a favourable reception to the project if the provisions are not taken to allay fears of terrorist attacks and political interference which, presumably, justifying (or motivate) most of refusal.