 Thank you. First of all, Elliot Cohen, Professor Chidu Manko, all the distinguished panelists, ladies and gentlemen. I'm very honored to have the opportunity to say a few words on the topic Africa-US re-engagement, a new foreign policy agenda. At this year's John Hopkins African Studies Programme conference. And I really like to thank the African Studies Programme and Professor Chidu Manko in particular for this very kind invitation. The timing of this conversation is auspicious for a number of reasons. First, President Biden's speech in February to African leaders at the AU summit signaled a new, more robust partnership to quote him in solidarity, support, and mutual respect. Second, at the top of the new administrations foreign policy agenda are two topics of crucial importance to African states. The COVID-19 pandemic, the fallouts, and what to do going forward, and climate change. Third, the positive signals from the US Congress, the chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, George Mix. In his first public statement, called for a new Africa policy, which he said would be his top priority. And fourthly and more broadly, perhaps as a view expressed by many who have given the matters of thought. That the 21st century will be the African century. In other words, for good or ill, the fate of Africa will impact on the rest of the world in this century. Because of its increasing share of humanity, and because of its indispensable contribution to managing the global commons, be it to improve human security, to avert pandemics, or indeed to tackle the crisis caused by climate change. Let me expatiate a bit on this. It's estimated for instance that Africa will account for 25% of global population by 2050, up from about 17% today. So that's an 8% increase. Indeed, my own country, is projected to be the third most populous country in the world by that day, by 2050, after India and China. If this increasing share of global population is reflected in economic productivity and increased material well-being, then it surely augurs well for the world. If, however, it brings about increased poverty and misery, then Africa could become a hotbed of resting youth that are vulnerable to the negative promptings of maniacal populace and religious radicals. And also for the other global concerns such as climate change, distractions such as worsening poverty, violent extremism, dysfunctional governments, can only worsen matters. So I think that a resetting of US foreign policy agenda with Africa should promote a partnership that brings about economic prosperity, increases security, combats disease, improves governance, and mitigates the effects of climate change. Africa is in many ways, and I'm sure that most will agree, the last frontier for economic development. And it has the potential to be a global growth pole. Indeed, as other parts of the world are looking inwards, Africa is moving confidently to integrate its economies through the Africa Union agenda in 2063, as well as the recent establishment of the African continental free trade area agreements. As Asian countries move to produce more sophisticated goods and services, and of course as labor becomes more expensive there, Africa has a good chance to become the factory of the world. This will require investments in machinery, skills, and technologies to improve productivity and increase returns. So I think the US is well placed to lead trade and investment ties with Africa. And it already has a good leg in with the African Growth and Opportunities Act of GOA. The legislation, this legislation of GOA removed all tariffs on 6,400 products available for export to the US. And it saw some African countries, a few though, benefiting considerably. South Africa's auto exports to the US under GOA have created thousands of jobs in that country. And in the auto supply value chain in several neighboring countries, export of garments from other countries, such as Ethiopia, Mauritius, Lesotho, Eswatini, and Kenya have also created a large number of jobs. But a GOA's challenge, aside from the fact that only a small number of African countries have actually benefited, are also the changing dynamics of trade within Africa since GOA was passed 20 years ago. So for example, the EU, the European Union, has signed several EPAs with several countries, several African countries, which have implications for tariff disparities that may need to be reviewed in order to create a more level playing field. Also, the African continent of trade agreements are set to kick in, and a GOA must now be implemented consistent with the AFCTA. A GOA expires in 2025, but I believe that the new and improved GOA that takes these challenges into account can be negotiated well ahead of 2025. Now the COVID-19 pandemic has shown the need to coordinate actions to prevent and tackle pandemics, while also building up public health infrastructure in developed and developing countries alike. The reality, however, is that Africa still bears a disproportionate burden of communicable diseases like malaria, tuberculosis, HIV, meningitis, to mention a few. The US has helped to improve healthcare outcomes in Africa, including through the Presidency Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, PEPFAR. And I think that that same spirit of collaboration with regard to making COVID-19 vaccines available to African countries is now called for. This is not a time for vaccine nationalism and export plans, which we've seen here and there, but it's a time for working together towards universal vaccination against the disease. And I believe the US can lead in that effort to ensure that all countries and their peoples can access vaccines irrespective of the resources available to them. And quite frankly, already some support, we've seen quite a bit of support. The US has rejoined COVAX, of course, rejoined the WHO. All of this is very helpful in creating at least the right environment for more cooperation towards increasing vaccine availability and solving some of the problems associated with the difficulty in getting vaccines today. I believe that and go to conflicts. All too often, I think people outside the continent, outside the African continent, tend to see Africa as a contradictory continent to be set by insurgencies and wild-eyed terrorists. There has undoubtedly been increased restiveness in certain parts of Africa, which is driven or aided by poverty, alienation, environmental degradation, and poor governance. In truth, though, the troubles in the main are due to an encroachment of globally known terror groups or their franchises in different parts of Africa. The US has had counterterrorism presence in Africa, in about 15 African countries, in the Sahel and the Horn of Africa in particular, combating the jihadist terrorist groups who operate largely in the Sahel, especially the sub-Saharan Sahel region and the areas farther south-west around the Lake Chad, Nigeria, especially northern Nigeria, Somalia, and also Mozambique. The US-Africa command, you know, Africa has been, of course, a very active force in all of the activities of the US in this region. So why is it evident that the threat of violent extremist organizations is growing? It's very clear that that threat is growing. It will appear that US policy has since 2020 shifted from the strategy of degrading violent extremist organizations in West Africa in particular to simply containing their spread. But the escalation of their attacks and the synergies being created among these extremist groups calls for a review of that provision, of that position. I think that provision of containment, you know, needs to be reviewed. It may be the moment for a more robust intervention along the lines of US backed operations in clearing terrorists and insurgents in the Middle East. I think that we have a moment now where I just thought a count of the escalation of insurgencies, especially in the West African region, of course, is a help for a more robust US intervention. I think this is something that US foreign policy, along with African partners, we should take a second look at. A key tenet of US foreign policy has been to uphold the values and principles of democracy, human rights, rule of law, and public accountability. These issues resonate very strongly with ordinary Africans who believe that improved governance is crucial in ensuring that their votes count, that their rights are protected, and that state resources are used for the common good. And United States engagement with Africa, I think, should naturally take these matters on board. However, I must say that it should not take the shape of finger wagging, but rather a balanced and joint endeavor to achieve these objectives. To paraphrase President Biden, one that is based on mutual respect. Whatever the case, there should be no rush to join, but an effort to hear the other side. And I think we should create more opportunities to hear the other side, not through lobbying firms and that sort of thing, but more direct governmental types of meetings and interactions that enable both governments to better understand what their points of view are. And I think we have a perfect opportunity for doing so now. This does not imply, in my view, turning a blind eye to gross interactions of international law and human rights. But it does require, in my view, a broader and more nuanced perspective of issues as well as an understanding of local dynamics before taking a stand. As I had said earlier, climate change, including the risk of a perfect storm of population pressure, environmental degradation and pandemics pose a serious threat to African development in particular, and the world in general. It seems to me that the United States and Africa must then work together to tackle climate change and moderate global warming, including through an energy transition from fossil fuels to renewable energies. African countries have already made commitments in this regard towards implementing the Paris Climate Change Agreement targets, and we all have targets, our NDCs, and we are working hard towards achieving them. However, the commitment to net zero emissions by 2050 has led to a growing trend among development finance institutions to withdraw from fossil fuel investments, including the World Bank's decision to seize funding for upstream and oil and gas development, for upstream oil and gas development, and the new restrictions on financing downstream gas developments, which is currently being considered and in fact being implemented by some European Union countries. The United Kingdom and the US have also been considering the defunding of gas projects. While these may be well-intentioned, I think that this move does not take into account the principles of common but differentiated responsibility and leaving no one behind, which are enshrined in the global treaties around sustainable development and climate action. These are principles that we all agree to, these are principles that we all accept, you know, a shared responsibility leaving no one behind. I think that the move to defund gas projects disregards the importance of gas as it means to urgently address energy poverty in a technologically and economically viable manner. And furthermore, increasing the use of gas, which of course is a cleaner fossil fuel, in power generation, gives African countries the opportunity to phase out more polluting fuels, such as coal, diesel and heavy fuel oil, while bringing on board more renewables. I think the US should lend its weight to stopping these manifest beyond fair trend that can undermine the sense of collective responsibility we all have towards mitigating climate change. What is required is a just transition to zero emissions, and that expression is becoming increasingly popular. One where, in our view, one where the developed economies meet the commitments made at COP15 in Copenhagen, or the 100 billion US dollars yearly to assist development economies to transit to zero emissions. US-Africa relations need not be unidimensional, and the United States, of course, is the economic and military terms, as well as through its contributions to the norms that shape the global order. So I think that the US could work with Africa, either under the auspices of the Africa Union, or indeed through individual countries like Nigeria, to build a better world. Africa should not be seen or used as a form in the great power games, nor as an arena in the context to secure strategic minerals and natural resources, but rather as a partner in building a more secure, a more peaceful, and prosperous world. Indeed, rather than view every interaction with Africa from the competitive ends, I think that the US can work with other countries to support Africa in the efforts to meet infrastructural needs. Infrastructure in the form of power stations, ports, rail networks, roads will spur growth and reduce the time and cost of doing business. The fiscal constraints of African countries means that there is a scope for private capital to fund, operate, and own some of these things. So given their technical know-how and financial resources, US companies should engage or could engage in the provision of infrastructure in Africa. And we do expect that the US international development and finance cooperation may support some of these efforts. So cooperation and partnership rather than competition with other global actors, I believe can complement these efforts. And I also think that the US could work with partners, including the G20, to establish an international economic system that works for Africa and other developing countries. It's a very encouraging sign in this regard that the US has signal support for the 650 billion increase in special joint rights at the IMF, which will go a long way in providing much liquidity in African countries, given the fiscal constraints caused by last year's economic downturn. Similarly, the recent initiative of the US to ensure that businesses are taxed where they make their sales is a major step forward in bringing about a fairer international tax ratio. To be effective, I should apply not just to a few more national companies, but should be truly global in nature, otherwise African countries may be excluded from getting their fair share of such taxes. I think I'll just stop here so that I can take a few questions before my time completely runs out. So thank you all very much for listening.