In the US, it is a common practice for every one who comes to the White House to draw new policies, different from his predecessors. The goal is usually different form the objectives presented during the election campaign. Ronald Regan was known for his military build up, Wilson was known for his advocacy of peace through collective action, Kennedy for his advocacy of human rights and invigorating the country via economic progress and Truman for his idea to contain communism to mention a few.

President Bush’s legacy, by many people, is explained by; terror, fear, economic recession. The president in his early presidential career engaged himself in a war against terror. For many, the war on terror can not be won for the simple reason that terrorism’s success is best measured by its ability to attract attention to its cause and by the psychological impact it exerts on innocent people. It differs in this respect from conventional warfare, where success is measured by the amount of military assets destroyed, the amount of territory seized, and the number of enemy killed.

These being the facts about terrorism, the president’s lack of patience and immature diplomacy led him to grave political errors that affected his eight-year of presidency negatively. Of course, we all know the catastrophe of 9/11. However the number of people who died in the Twin Towers compared to the number of people killed in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Somalia is relatively small. In Iraq alone, so far, more than one million and one hundred thousand people have died in five-years of American occupation. In Afghanistan the total number of deaths, since 2002 is almost 50 thousand. And the war in Somalia has claimed more than 10 thousand lives and more than 200 thousand have been displaced.

Similarly, in the arena of international relations and diplomacy the president’s legacy is not commendable. During the early years of his presidency, Bush described countries like Iran, Syria, North Korea and Iraq as ‘Axis of Evil’, which in turn made these countries develop antagonistic policy towards the US as the case in Iran. The president’s speeches aggravated the Iranian nuclear crisis. It is also during the reign of this president that anti – American governments are emerging in a greater number in Latin America. In the Israel - Palestine conflict, President Bush, after following a wait-and-see-policy for eight years, recently touched up on the volatile issue in order to appear trying.

These being the economic, political and diplomatic legacies of the president, last week he visited some African countries. For many, the president’s visit to Africa is part of his plan to create the Global American Empire. As AFRICOM, military command of America in Africa is due to be formally established after a few months, the president’s new move is to pave the way. After all, the president has left only months to step down from office, so what miracles can he do to strengthen relations between Africa and the US? And if he does, what can Africans expect from the president who spent his entire political career in instilling fear, terrorizing innocent peoples, bombing civilians with cluster and bunker bombs, toppling governments elected by their people, imposing democracy as a prescribed medicine on free peoples? Most probably, he is now in Africa solely for that reason.
As usual, President Bush used the ‘carrot and stick diplomacy', during his six-day visit to implement his strategies in Africa. During his visit to the African countries, the American president first pledged to spend $15bn on tackling Aids across Africa over the next five years, and secondly, he warned that terrorists would not be allowed to operate out of the continent. But the president should know that Africa’s main problem is not terrorism.
As far as cooperation is concerned, what Africa needs is a fair trade with the rest of the world. What Africa needs is debt cancellation. The West spends $300 billions a year in agricultural subsidies. African farmers can compete with their US/EU counterparts but not against grains grown for 'free.' The World has seen how the dumping of US maize in Malawi has deprived poor farmers in Niassa in Northern Mozambique of their natural market. What actually the president is doing is marketing the genetically modified foods on behalf of American corporations.

For the American government, the president’s visit is very crucial. If he can get a source of oil from Africa which is relatively peaceful for foreign investors, why should he waste his time and efforts by going to the volatile and insecure Middle East?

For Africa, Bush's visit is part of the US's drive for global dominance. And equally important, Bush is here to burnish his foreign-policy legacy. No one should expect that President Bush has a magic solution to the chronic problems like corruption, mismanagement and bad governance. It is high time that African leaders consider putting the interest of the people as their number one priority, and not building mansions and opening fat accounts in foreign countries. Change in Africa, either economically or politically, should come from Africa. Not the US or other Western countries

I blame African leaders for handing over the continent's future to the new colonial masters. The South East Asian countries, with whom many African countries gained independence almost at the same time are now enjoying the fruit of real independence both in political and economic fronts. President Clinton, Queen Elizabeth and even Kofi Annan had been to Africa and what difference did they make? Unless the leaders and people of Africa change their mentality and put on the coat of hardworking at the same time stripping off the clothes of laziness and ignorance we will never have anyone to save our continent.