CNAS Insights | Why the “Swing States” Approach Is Right for Africa

Africa watchers in Washington, D.C., were dispirited—though not surprised—when an email calling the continent “a peripheral—rather than a core theater for US interest” recently surfaced from the head of the State Department’s Bureau of African Affairs.

The current administration has slashed aid and development programs across the continent, defunded democracy and governance organizations, and left diplomatic posts vacant. Based on conversations I’ve had with officials and experts in the region, this drawdown is leading to concerns that the United States is abandoning the region.

The reality of U.S. Africa policy, however, is more nuanced. Some health aid to the continent has been revived with policy strings attached. And the same official who sent the email, Nick Checker, explained that the Trump administration is “being strategic about what areas and projects matter most” in Africa and attempting to dislodge “China from certain sectors.”

Remarkably, this sounds as though the Trump administration might pursue a version of a global swing states policy in Africa. If so, it’s the right strategy.

In a recent report that I published with Richard Fontaine, the CEO of the Center for a New American Security, we defined “global swing states” as countries that do not align fully with the United States or its adversaries. These countries have an outsized influence on the economic and political trajectories of their regions and the world and together possess the geopolitical weight to sway the future of global order. Crucially, when considering where to allocate the United States’ finite time and resources, U.S. policymakers see a higher rate of geopolitical returns on their investments in these countries.

It is essential that the United States allocates its limited resources dedicated to African countries with an eye toward precision and priority. Washington has begun to do so by narrowing in on commercial diplomacy as a primary vector of engagement across Africa, with critical minerals playing a star role. Officials from the continent recently attended a critical minerals summit in February in Washington, D.C., where Vice President JD Vance proposed a trading bloc to counter China’s control over the supply and export of rare earths.

But the administration’s approach remains uneven and needs to be refined further. Washington should more fully embrace a global swing states approach, identify those countries that are both most relevant to U.S. interests and at the greatest risk of being influenced by U.S. competitors, and pursue constructive relationships in key sectors with each of them.

In addition to countries that the Trump administration has already indicated interest in—including Angola, Kenya, and, in fits and starts, South Africa—Washington should look to adding Mozambique and Nigeria. Both countries are swing states that offer economic and security benefits for the United States and see significant Chinese and Russian influence.

Mozambique possesses several critical minerals and resources—including iron ore, gold, gemstones, and tantalite—and is a critical corridor for transporting key resources. The country also has vast natural gas potential. This year, the French company TotalEnergies and Mozambique agreed to relaunch a $20 billion liquefied natural gas project in the northern Cabo Delgado region, where a violent insurgency persists (and where Russia has previously deployed Wagner Group mercenaries). China is a premier trade partner, and the ruling revolutionary party FRELIMO looks to Beijing’s government as a model. To deepen its own engagement with Mozambique, Washington should start by offering an integrated economic and security package to Mozambique—commercial engagement on liquefied natural gas and critical minerals, paired with security cooperation in Cabo Delgado.

In addition to being an essential security partner, Nigeria offers substantial economic opportunities for the United States as one of the largest oil producers in Africa. Just last year, the American company ExxonMobil announced plans to invest $1.5 billion to develop its deepwater operations in the country. The country’s large size and economy will continue to make it a dominant player in the region—a fact that Russia and China, both heavily involved in Nigeria, are well aware of. In an effort to counter both countries’ influence and make itself the partner of choice, Washington should emphasize commercial momentum like ExxonMobil’s investment alongside increased high-level diplomatic engagement with Nigeria.

However, without a stable political environment for U.S. companies to operate in, commercial diplomacy can only take U.S. strategy in Africa so far. That is why the administration should also prioritize support for democracy and human rights across the continent. Improved governance, rule of law, basic rights, anticorruption efforts, and levels of democracy will facilitate more stable environments that are open to investment from and partnership with the United States and limit opportunities for Russia and China.

To support more robust democracies and human rights in African countries, U.S. policymakers could start by pursuing several actions: reinvesting in diplomacy across the continent, engaging with youth populations, prioritizing anticorruption efforts, leveraging economic engagement to promote good governance and U.S. interests, continuing to invest in counterterrorism cooperation, and supporting independent media and civil society.

Africa is not the Trump administration’s—or any previous presidential administration’s—priority region. That doesn’t mean that policymakers shouldn’t develop a strategy for a continent with the fastest growing population in the world, and where China and Russia are gaining firmer footholds every year.

Deeper partnerships with Mozambique and Nigeria, along with stronger support for democracy and human rights across the continent, are essential to long-term U.S. interests. They could offer the United States greater access to resources, critical minerals, and commercial deals; a more stable region; and an opportunity to counter influence from Russia and China. Policymakers need to continue developing a clear strategy to prioritize those counties and sectors in Africa that matter most to U.S. interests and are at greatest risk from its adversaries. A swing states approach for Africa is one answer to this challenge.

Gibbs McKinley is the research associate to the CEO at the Center for a New American Security