Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAMLAGER-DOVE. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the James amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAMLAGER-DOVE. Mr. Chair, I opposed this bill when it was considered in the Foreign Affairs Committee, and I oppose this amendment today.

South Africa is a key partner of the United States and has been critical to driving innovation and investment on the Continent of Africa.

It is also true that South Africa has taken a number of policy stances I do not agree with and don't believe are helpful to advancing further peace and prosperity, including an all-too-forgiving stance on Russia.

If our goal as the United States is to achieve an open and cooperative partnership with South Africa that advances both our countries' interests, this amendment will not accomplish that.

Almost 2 years ago, the Biden administration put out a U.S. strategy toward sub-Saharan Africa, noting it is impossible to meet today's defining challenges without African contributions in leadership. Underpinning that strategy is the concept that the United States can offer positive choices to Africans, for instance, as they determine their own future.

In other words, we have the opportunity and responsibility to present options to our African partners that they can judge to be worthwhile and in their best interest. We don't get to impose our ideas, and we should be making a compelling case for why it makes sense to partner with the United States and work together to achieve shared interests.

Any past disagreements with South Africa are reasons for us to double down through diplomacy to find productive pathways for U.S.-South Africa cooperation.

This amendment unnecessarily duplicates a review process already laid out in law under the African Growth and Opportunity Act, or AGOA. As an AGOA country, South Africa already receives a yearly review that takes into consideration any activities that undermine U.S. national security or foreign policy interests. This review is a requirement for any country to be deemed eligible to participate in AGOA.

The administration already has the power and responsibility to review whether South Africa has participated in any such activities as part of the country's AGOA eligibility review. It seems like a core purpose of this legislation is to undermine the AGOA eligibility of Africa's largest economy. Instead of doing this, my Republican colleagues should be trying to reauthorize AGOA.

Moreover, this amendment was made in order despite the original bill having no defense nexus, which was allegedly the criteria decided by the majority. Both myself and the ranking member submitted Africa amendments that could have attracted bipartisan support, yet those amendments were not made in order.

Finally, this amendment suffers from a bad case of timing. South Africans recently made their voices heard through a democratic election, and South Africa is in the process of forming a new government as we speak.

We need to give the parties in South Africa time to establish a government and pursue the course laid out for them by South African voters. To conduct a review at this point in the process would be premature and potentially damaging to our interest of being a partner of choice for South Africa.

This is a strange, counterproductive, and condescending amendment, and this is exactly what African countries accuse us of doing. They say: Why do you wag your finger at us and tell us what we can't do, but then you don't do that to any other country?

They are right. They are not colonies. They are countries, independent, and this tired approach is what they are asking us to stop doing.

We would not do this to any country in Europe or Asia, so why are we doing this to an African country, especially South Africa, a democratic country that just held free and fair elections and is one of the most strategic partners that we have on the continent?

We need to show up, and we need to show up in a different kind of way. This amendment is not how we should show up for Africa.

Mr. Chair, in closing I want to say what I already said. This is condescending, it is counterproductive, and it is not the way that we should be engaging with our our democratic African partners on the continent.

The best way to counteract Russia and China is to show up with a different approach that is dignified, that is respectful, and that recognizes that these countries are independent so that they see that we are serious and that we are using all of the tools in our toolbox: diplomatic, defense, and development; not finger wagging.

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAMLAGER-DOVE. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source