Linking scholars to the Congress is difficult primarily because of the weakness of Congressional interest in Africa, but also due to the low levels of interest among academics in both Congress and its Africa foreign policy and the poor resources of African studies in the U.S. to build a foundation of knowledge useful to the Congress.

Two articles in the last Issue (Winter 1990) and an accompanying article in this Issue examine the relationships between U.S. Africanists and U.S. policy-makers from the perspective of “players” in the policy process. All these articles are based mainly upon interviews with current and former U.S. government officials and with experienced scholars who regularly participate in policy affairs.

Late in the 1980s, several major U.S. private foundations concluded that the concern for Africa in the country was weak. This weakness was reflected in the faint focus on U.S. foreign policy toward Africa in all three branches of government, in the halting voice for Africa or for U.S. interests there in the non-governmental organizations (think-tanks, religious organizations, lobbies), and in the small concern for U.S. policy or for affecting it in the African studies scholarly community. Indeed, the voice for Africa in the United States was neither strong nor effective.

Over 300,000 Sudanese perished primarily from hunger during 1988-89 in one of the most avoidable human tragedies in recent history. Mostly from the war-torn southern part of the country, these civilians were deliberately starved by central government, and to a lesser extent the insurgent Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA), which used the deprivation of food as a tactic of war. The threat of further genocidal actions by the Islamic fundamentalist junta in Khartoum and the private militias allied with the government continue to daily threaten the lives of millions of internally displaced people. Due to these man-made causes and nature’s lack of rain, up to ten million Sudanese are at risk of malnutrition, hunger and starvation in 1991.

Sudan today is confronting the possibility of preventable human death on a massive scale. The framework for responding has dramatically deteriorated in the last year. The scope of the disaster is essentially nationwide with 9 to 11 million people in jeopardy of starvation. About half of the at-risk population is war-related, and half drought-related— but the two forces are interacting to produce the level of vulnerability. This contrasts somewhat with the at-risk population in 1988, which was made up primarily of war affected southerners, of whom a quarter-of-a-million died.

The conflict in the Gulf has understandably overshadowed events in sub-Saharan Africa. But we believe the crisis overtaking many countries on that continent warrants our meeting here today.