Bill Overview
Title: Countering Malign Russian Activities in Africa Act
Description: This bill requires the Department of State to report to Congress a strategy and implementation plan outlining U.S. efforts to counter Russia's malign influence and activities in Africa. The State Department must also report to Congress annual updates on the strategy and implementation plan.
Sponsors: Rep. Meeks, Gregory W. [D-NY-5]
Target Audience
Population: People affected by Russian activities in Africa
Estimated Size: 5000
- This bill targets Russian activities in Africa, which implies it aims to influence entities that interact with or are affected by Russia in Africa.
- Russian influence can affect international relations, economies, and political dynamics within African nations.
- The bill is predominantly focused on Africa, affecting both governments and populations who are involved with or influenced by Russian actions.
- Secondary stakeholders would be U.S. diplomatic and military personnel involved in implementing the strategy.
- Individuals in other countries involved with foreign policy and international security, such as policymakers and analysts, might also feel indirect effects.
Reasoning
- The policy is mainly focused on countering Russian activities in Africa and has a budget that limits direct impact in the U.S. to individuals working on related areas.
- A small number of U.S. citizens are directly involved in Africa-related work, such as diplomats, aid workers, and academics.
- The limited budget and focus suggest that the immediate direct impact on average U.S. citizens is negligible, whereas those involved in international relations might feel indirect effects.
- The Cantril wellbeing scores are designed to gauge perceived personal and professional impacts over time, which will vary greatly between individuals.
Simulated Interviews
Diplomat (Washington D.C.)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is crucial for stabilizing African regions influenced by Russia.
- It may bring more focus and resources to our efforts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
International Policy Analyst (New York City)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy provides a structured approach to counter Russian influence, which is much needed.
- However, the budget seems inadequate for long-lasting impact.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Researcher at NGO (San Francisco)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am encouraged by the U.S. taking a stance, but it seems overly focused without sufficient groundwork in African nations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
College Professor (Atlanta)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy is an opportunity to increase awareness among students about geopolitics and diplomacy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Entrepreneur (Houston)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act could stabilize my business ventures if it effectively curbs Russian influence in the regions I work with.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Journalist (Chicago)
Age: 53 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy may provide new coverage narratives and sources.
- Its real impact might not be measurable immediately.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Public Policy Advisor (Boston)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could enhance our collaborative efforts with African governments and create more strategic advantages.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Retired Military Officer (Los Angeles)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's good to see the U.S. countering foreign influence, even if my personal impact now is indirect.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Graduate Student (Miami)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is an excellent case study for my course, but personally, it just adds to my academic load.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Software Engineer (Seattle)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy doesn't seem relevant to my work or personal life.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Year 2: $21000000 (Low: $16000000, High: $26000000)
Year 3: $22000000 (Low: $17000000, High: $27000000)
Year 5: $24000000 (Low: $19000000, High: $29000000)
Year 10: $28000000 (Low: $23000000, High: $33000000)
Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Key Considerations
- The effectiveness of the strategy against malign influences is crucial to the policy's success.
- Coordination among various U.S. government departments and international partners may influence outcomes.
- Potential geopolitical repercussions and how they affect bilateral relations with African nations and others involved in countering Russia's influence.
- Monitoring and adaptability of strategy to changing geopolitical dynamics will be essential.