Trump Presidency Rhetorical Analysis
Title: Why a Trump Presidency might be a welcomed change in Rwanda
United States foreign policy in central and east Africa has remained relatively consisted since the 1990s. The Clinton, Bush and Obama administration worked with, as President Bill Clinton labelled ‘new generation’ of African leaders to help bring stability and Western oriented market-focused economic development policies. Western assistance composed on the premise of foreign aid for social development of schools, healthcare facilities and progression in human rights. It does not often cover when African states fall into chaos from wars, massacres and genocide, American presence is largely absent. The Mogadishu line, famous after eighteen U.S. soldiers died in a raid in 1993, still persists with America’s hesitation to use its military in Africa for missions beyond state interest and security. Rwanda experienced this first hand during its 1994 genocide.
A Trump Presidency throws into question the norm of America’s approach to east and central Africa. At Trump’s first speech as President at the inauguration was the slogan: ‘America First.’ While this rhetoric should not surprise anyone after running on the campaign slogan of ‘Make America Great Again’, it nevertheless introduces the question of what his American foreign policy to Africa will …show more content…
Despite scholarly writing that Rwanda uses international guilt to promote its interest and deflect criticism, the government does not want to be seen as the conflict-ridden country for the world to have pity. Trump will not care about Rwanda’s past. All he will be concern of is what Rwanda can do for the U.S. in return to what America can do for Rwanda. While this business-style relationship might seem cold and disheartening, it holds the prospects of how Rwanda wants to be perceived, as a state without pity or fall within the standard narrative of needing to be saved by the
United States foreign policy in central and east Africa has remained relatively consisted since the 1990s. The Clinton, Bush and Obama administration worked with, as President Bill Clinton labelled ‘new generation’ of African leaders to help bring stability and Western oriented market-focused economic development policies. Western assistance composed on the premise of foreign aid for social development of schools, healthcare facilities and progression in human rights. It does not often cover when African states fall into chaos from wars, massacres and genocide, American presence is largely absent. The Mogadishu line, famous after eighteen U.S. soldiers died in a raid in 1993, still persists with America’s hesitation to use its military in Africa for missions beyond state interest and security. Rwanda experienced this first hand during its 1994 genocide.
A Trump Presidency throws into question the norm of America’s approach to east and central Africa. At Trump’s first speech as President at the inauguration was the slogan: ‘America First.’ While this rhetoric should not surprise anyone after running on the campaign slogan of ‘Make America Great Again’, it nevertheless introduces the question of what his American foreign policy to Africa will …show more content…
Despite scholarly writing that Rwanda uses international guilt to promote its interest and deflect criticism, the government does not want to be seen as the conflict-ridden country for the world to have pity. Trump will not care about Rwanda’s past. All he will be concern of is what Rwanda can do for the U.S. in return to what America can do for Rwanda. While this business-style relationship might seem cold and disheartening, it holds the prospects of how Rwanda wants to be perceived, as a state without pity or fall within the standard narrative of needing to be saved by the