Raila, Ruto clash not surprising at all

Deep ideological differences between Prime Minister Raila Odinga and Agriculture Minister William Ruto are responsible for the split in the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM).

In their eagerness, or perhaps desperation, to win power in the 2007 General Elections, Raila and Ruto disguised their personal differences to unite under the ODM party. Both men knew that they could not get into government by themselves. This was more the case when Kalonzo Musyoka left ODM in mid 2007.

Immediately after Kalonzo’s exit, Raila and Ruto got into a very strong alliance that helped bring the Luo and Kalenjin votes directly to Raila’s presidential candidacy. Come the elections, the Luo and Kalenjin voted for Raila en-masse. When President Mwai Kibaki was declared the winner, the Luo and Kalenjin were at the forefront in protesting the election results. The Prime Minister himself has acknowledged the role of Kalenjin warriors in forcing Kibaki to the negotiating table.

Today, that alliance lies in tatters. Raila and Ruto have inevitably parted ways and are both seeking alternative allies in readiness for the 2012 elections. While Raila is an obvious candidate, Ruto sees himself as presidential material for Kenya’s future. He will either run for the office or support somebody else in exchange for the Vice Presidency or the Premiership. Those mentioned as Ruto’s possible allies in 2012 are current Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka and Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta. Meanwhile, Raila is talking to politicians from Central Kenya in a bid to woo Kikuyu, Embu and Meru votes.

Raila and Ruto come from opposing schools of political thought. Raila is a socialist who learnt politics from his father, former Vice President Jaramogi Oginga Odinga. Due to Communist leanings, Jaramogi fell out with President Jomo Kenyatta in 1966 and became a perpetual opposition to the Kenyatta and Moi administrations until his death in 1994. Jaramogi inculcated socialism in Raila by sending him to study Engineering in the former East Germany which was a Communist state. In the 1980s, Raila was tortured for involvement in the 1982 coup attempt. It was almost as though President Daniel arap Moi was deliberately targeting Raila in order to cause psychological anguish to Jaramogi.

Ruto, on the other hand, was an ardent student of the Moi brand of politics. Picked from obscurity before the 1992 General Elections, Ruto was appointed second in command of a new organization called “Youth for KANU 1992” or YK92 in short. YK92 had only one goal: to use any means necessary to ensure the victory of Moi and the KANU party. YK92 received an unlimited amount of funds to buy support for KANU. The source of the cash was a mystery but it is believed that the government engaged in massive printing of money. The Goldenberg scandal could have provided more slush funds.

Moi and KANU managed to win the 1992 elections but, needless to say, the operations of YK92 had flooded the economy with paper money. The years 1993 – 1994 witnessed the highest inflation in Kenya’s history as prices of basic commodities doubled and trebled. This was when the Shs500 currency note was introduced.

Come the 1997 elections, Moi supported William Ruto’s candidacy in Eldoret North constituency against the late Reuben Chesire. The interesting angle is that Reuben Chesire was related to Moi. However, friendship counts for little in politics and Moi is the master of use-and-dump strategies. With Moi’s backing, Ruto won the elections and was appointed to the cabinet. By 2002, Ruto was a powerful Minister for Internal Security and an ardent defender of Moi.

In a sense, Ruto symbolized the arrogance and corruption of Moi’s last years of office. He displayed a great deal of single-mindedness when defending Moi’s choice of Uhuru Kenyatta as successor in the 2002 elections. Ruto virulently opposed the constitutional review process led by Professor Yash Pal Ghai and which culminated in the Bomas conference. Often, Ruto appeared on national television frothing at the mouth as he dismissed constitutional reforms as an attack on the Moi presidency. To Ruto’s credit, Kibaki ally John Michuki confirmed in 2003 that constitutional reforms were meant to remove Moi and KANU from power.

Ruto has never subscribed to Raila’s populist approach to politics. Ruto is a hardcore conservative more comfortable with Mwai Kibaki than with Raila Odinga. It was naked opportunism that brought Raila and Ruto together. Raila needed the Kalenjin vote and Ruto wanted to get back into government after KANU’s loss in 2002.

Ruto is among politicians who believe that Raila is a reckless activist who cannot be trusted with leading Kenya. Ruto is certainly not a socialist. He is an extremely wealth man who made lots of money through his connections to Moi. Apart from unlimited access to YK92 funds, Ruto was allocated government land which he afterwards sold to state-owned corporations at a huge profit. For instance, Ruto made hundreds of millions of shillings selling land to the National Social Security Fund (NSSF). Ruto’s companies won tenders to supply government departments and state corporations.

In 2007, Moi decided to support President Mwai Kibaki’s candidacy and told Ruto to follow suit. Ruto was convinced that Raila had the best chance of winning and refused to heed Moi’s calling. Now, it looks like Ruto is going back home to Moi and Uhuru Kenyatta as Raila’s political fortunes dwindle by the day.

One final point to consider: Did Ruto really fall out with Moi in 2007 or was it part of Moi’s political strategy of ensuring he had a stake in government regardless of who won the election? The hard fact is that if Raila had won the presidency, Ruto would have taken care of Moi’s interests.

Today, with Moi firmly on Kibaki’s side, Ruto doesn’t seem to be doing badly either. Early this year, Ruto survived a no-confidence motion in Parliament thanks to support from pro-Kibaki legislators.

Kibaki creates 20 provinces; ethnic clashes now feared

UPDATE – 22nd July 2009:

The Standard has reliably learnt that the number of sub-provinces is now 22 after two were added, reportedly to accommodate interests of certain communities in Nyanza and Rift Valley.

Southern Nyanza, which was initially lumped together with Eastern Nyanza, will now have its headquarters in Homa Bay. Eastern Nyanza will be administered from Kisii town and cater for the Gusii and Kuria. Also added to the list is Western Rift, to be governed from Kericho town. It was originally part of Western Rift Valley, which will now be called Eastern Rift with offices in Eldoret.

Read more on this story from the Standard daily >>

*********************************************

After he was warned against splitting Kenya’s provinces, President Mwai Kibaki has resorted to deceptive tactics to impose 20 new provinces through a bizarre concept of “sub-provinces.”

The new provincial units created by President Mwai Kibaki

In an unexpected political maneuver last week, the President made far reaching changes in the Provincial administration. Not only did he replace at least 6 Provincial Commissioners, but he also introduced 20 deputy provincial commissioners to be in charge of the 20 “sub-provinces.” Meanwhile, all 210 constituencies have been declared as districts but the final district tally is 254, meaning that some constituencies have more than one district!

The interesting fact is that the President’s Party of National Unity (PNU) had earlier proposed splitting the country into 20 provinces. The proposal was however rejected by majority of legislators. Even ex-President Daniel arap Moi, who lately supports Kibaki, rejected the proposal arguing that it will worsen ethnic tensions especially in the Rift Valley Province.

There are now fears of a resurgence of ethnic clashes as the new provincial borders appear aligned on ethnic lines. For instance, the larger Nyanza Province was split into Kisumu and Kisii sub-provinces. Western Province has been split into Bungoma and Kakamega sub-provinces to separate the Bukusu community from the rest of the Luhyas.

In the Rift Valley, the Maasai have been given Narok sub-province, the Kikuyu have Nakuru sub-province while the Kalenjin have been allocated Eldoret sub-province. The pastoral communities of the Pokot, Turkana and Samburu will be administered from Lodwar sub-province.

Central Province has been split into three: Thika, Nyandarua and Nyeri sub-provinces.

The Kamba ethnic group now have the Machakos sub-province.  Embu sub-province will administer the Embu, Meru, Tharaka and Nithi ethnic groups. The nomadic communities in the northern sector of Eastern Province now fall under the Marsabit sub-province. Likewise, the Somali dominated North Eastern province has been split into Wajir and Garissa sub-provinces.

At the coast, the Taita have a sub-province at Voi, while the Mijikenda will have Mombasa sub-province. The rest of the Coastal communities, including the Pokomo and the Bajuni have been clustered under the Malindi sub-province.

Districts with a mixed ethnic composition will experience ethnic tension as controversy emerges over which sub-province will administer those districts. For instance, will the Kalenjin prefer Nakuru sub-province or Eldoret sub-province? In Western Province, which Luhya sub-tribes will want themselves under Bungoma sub-province and which ones will prefer the Kakamega sub-province?

Some districts in Nyanza Province have a mixed Luo and Kisii ethnic composition. Will such districts be placed under the Kisumu sub-province or under the Kisii sub-province? Where will the Kuria ethnic group be placed? Will they demand a sub-province of their own?

In Eastern Province, there will be tension over Isiolo District. The Meru will want it placed under their Embu sub-province but the nomadic groups will want it under Marsabit sub-province. The presence of significant Somali and Samburu populations in Isiolo will complicate the equation.

North Eastern province is ethnically homogeneous but clan affiliation among the Somali is very strong. Which Somali clans will prefer the Wajir sub-province as opposed to the Garissa sub-province?

It appears that President Kibaki does not understand the danger of what he has just done. Everybody – including the international community – warned him against splitting provinces but he has thrown caution to the wind and implemented his diabolical plan. How can a leader get things so wrong?

Should clashes arise from the creation of sub-provinces, Kibaki must bear full responsibility for deaths, injuries and the destruction of property. The beneficiaries of this sinister political strategy should likewise share the blame.

Ethnic violence culprits escape justice again

One and a half years after the devastating violence that followed the December 2007 elections, not a single person has been prosecuted and jailed for the deaths of at least 1,500 people during a three month orgy of killing, looting and rape.

Lack of political will among Kenya’s ruling elite has bogged down the prosecution process, meaning that those behind the killing and destruction will not stand trial any time soon. Meanwhile, the desire among western powers for stability in Kenya explains why the International Criminal Court at The Hague gave one more year for Kenya to establish a tribunal to prosecute those who planned, financed and participated in the clashes.

Kenya’s ruling elite were behind the violence whose victims were mostly slum dwellers and impoverished peasants. There is clear evidence of top politicians making hate speeches, administering oaths and paying youths for the mayhem. The two leading presidential candidates in 2007 – President Mwai Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga – kept silent as fighting raged in their names.

Even today, inter-ethnic relations in Kenya are fraught with tensions, as politicians are not eager to unite the people. Politicians have boycotted peace meetings called to reconcile warring tribes because it is easier to campaign on a platform of ethnic nationalism rather than a campaign of unity. Indeed, majority of Kenyan leaders are mere ethnic warlords with no interest in national unity. They want to isolate their tribes in order to enhance their own power and eventually pass the baton of leadership to their children. In effect, what we are seeing in Kenya is the rise of a feudal class that wants to monopolize political and economic power for generations to come.

For sure there is more-than-enough evidence to begin criminal prosecutions against those involved in the political and ethnic clashes. Thanks to the media, there are acres of tapes showing looting and actual killings taking place. Politicians were recorded preaching ethnic incitement to their followers. Others were taped threatening those ethnic groups that they thought would vote for rival candidates.

The Majimbo (federalism) debate stoked ethnic tension prior to the 2007 elections. Anyone with a political knowledge of Kenya would have known how the concept of Majimbo was used to perpetrate ethnic killings in the 1990s at the Rift Valley and Coast Provinces. To bring up the same debate in an election year was not only naive but extremely reckless. The consequences were easily predictable, especially with millions of unemployed youths eager to take over the properties of people perceived as “outsiders.”

Kenya’s politicians are split among themselves over whether to establish a local tribunal or to let the International Criminal Court do the work. And it all has to do with the 2012 Presidential elections when President Mwai Kibaki will be stepping down.

On the one hand, Kibaki and Raila want a local tribunal because they think that they can manipulate judges and intimidate witnesses, resulting in acquittals and light sentences. On the other hand, a second group of politicians led by William Ruto and Uhuru Kenyatta fear that a local tribunal will turn them into sacrificial lambs. Ruto led fighting in Eldoret on behalf of Raila while Uhuru organized retaliatory attacks by the Kikuyu ethnic group on behalf of Kibaki.

Ruto is loudly complaining that Raila has abandoned the youth who fought for his premiership. Ruto says that both Kibaki and Raila should face trial as everybody else was fighting for either of the two men. Ruto believes that Raila has a soft spot for Deputy Prime Minister Musalia Mudavadi, and having Ruto in jail would automatically clear the path for Mudavadi to succeed Raila sometime in future.

On his part, Uhuru believes that his political rivals want him jailed. His rivals in the Kibaki camp for the 2012 presidential elections are Internal Security Minister George Saitoti and former Justice Minister Martha Karua. It should be noted that Karua and Uhuru’s rivalry grew because Uhuru thought that Karua as Justice Minister was going to ensure that Uhuru was knocked out of the presidential succession race.

Uhuru and Ruto want the International Criminal Court (ICC) to take over the cases for several reasons:

1. They perceive that the ICC will be much more fairer as it does not have a vested interest in the 2012 elections in Kenya.
2. Court cases at the ICC take years to conclude. By 2012, the cases will not even have began and when they do, it is possible that either Uhuru and Ruto will be president and will therefore use state resources to escape prosecution.
3. It will not be possible to take the thousands of internally displaced persons (IDPs) to The Hague to testify whereas a local tribunal will easily be accessible to IDPs.
4. If the worst comes to the worst, Ruto and Uhuru can implicate both Kibaki and Raila at the ICC. Should we have a local tribunal, it will be very difficult to bring charges against the President and Prime Minister but the ICC is not intimidated by titles. After all, the ICC currently has a warrant of arrest for President Omar al Bashir of Sudan.

As for the Kenyan people, what do they want?

Kenyans want the entire political class to be taken to The Hague as this will ensure justice for the hundreds of thousands still suffering the effects of post-election violence. There are fears that, unless something is done stop to ethnic warlords, the next General Elections of 2012 will be the end of Kenya as we know it.

Just to show that Kenyans want The Hague Option, the Standard daily reports that the National Council of Churches of Kenya (NCCK) is questioning how a Parliament housing the perpetrators of the 2008 violence can agree on a law to incriminate itself. Many in the House have been named as purveyors of ethnic strife.

The NCCK’s Secretary General, Peter Karanja, has scoffed at the one year extension given to the Kenyan government by the ICC saying the repreive is a delaying tactic against justice.

Moi makes comeback as Kenyans yearn for sober leadership

Despite contributing to the mess in Kenya, former President Daniel arap Moi has wormed his way into the public confidence by carving a niche as the only sober politician around.

Former President Daniel arap Moi (right) with his ministers in this 1999 photo. William Ntimama can be seen at the centre pointing something out to Moi.

He is not called the Professor of Politics for nothing: Moi has an amazing ability to revive his political fortunes long after everybody has written him off. During the 2007 elections, it appeared that Moi’s Kalenjin ethnic group ignored his advice and followed his former protege William Ruto into Raila Odinga’s ODM party. Political analysts talked of the end of an era in Kalenjin politics, where youthful personalities led by William Ruto had forcibly snatched the mantle of leadership from the old order.

For sure, Kalenjin politics – and that of the Rift Valley at large – has irredeemably changed. Moi is no longer the only voice but, as the younger politicians are beginning to realize, it would be foolish to dismiss him entirely. Moi has been in politics longer than most of the current leaders have been alive. Indeed, most – if not all – Kalenjin political leaders owe everything they have to Moi.

As Kenya’s second president for 24 years, Moi molded and transformed politicians into his own image. The fact that the same personalities now claim to have rebelled against their Grand Master is laughable. They simply do not know any other political ideology other than Moism. The likes of William Ruto, Isaac Ruto, Franklin Bett, Margaret Kamar, Zakayo Cheruiyot, Hellen Sambili, the late Kipkalya Kones plus many others are Moi stooges.

What is Moism? Moism is a political system characterized by a permanent state of intrigues that involve shifting alliances that never result into anything tangible. The behaviour of Moi’s proteges best illustrates the lasting effects of Moism on the political landscape. Political bigwigs and greenhorns alike are constantly forming alliances with each other but nothing ever comes out of those moves.

You will hear of a Ruto – Uhuru alliance, then an Uhuru – Kalonzo movement, followed by Raila – Karua talks. Within a matter of weeks, these alignments cease to exist and you hear of Kibaki – Uhuru alliance, Ruto – Mudavadi ticket and so forth. None of these alliances succeed in the long-term.

Since the violence of 2008, ex-President Moi has traversed his Rift Valley region preaching peace. The Rift Valley was worst affected, with hundreds killed and thousands of homes destroyed. Entire trading centres were razed to the ground in an orgy of looting, killing and rape. Tit for tat ethnic killings sparked worldwide fears of a Rwanda like scenario forcing the international community to intervene.

However, Moi is largely responsible for ethnic clashes in Kenya and especially in the Rift Valley and Coast provinces.

For thirty years after independence, Kenya’s people had lived peacefully with each other. Migration within the country was so common it was taken for granted. The fertile lands of the Rift Valley attracted settlers from all over Kenya. People from different ethnic groups intermarried and did business with each other. All this came to an end with the return of multi-party politics in 1990.

As Moi had predicted while opposing multi-partyism, every ethnic group supported a candidate from its own party. Naturally, Moi had the full support of the Kalenjin ethnic group while the Kikuyu, Luo, Luhya and Kisii had their other preferences. Political differences among ethnic groups in the Rift Valley turned into violent clashes that worsened in the period before and after the 1992 General Elections.

Moi supporters, led by William Ntimama, the late Kipkalya Kones, late Paul Chepkok and late Francis Lotodo demanded that non-Kalenjin ethnic groups in the Rift Valley either vote for Moi or leave. Militias intimidated non-Kalenjins by burning homes, looting and killing. The Luo, Luhya, Kikuyu, Kisii and Kamba were attacked mercilessly.

Because the violence was largely state-driven, there was little that the victims could do. Security forces were accused of shielding the perpetrators instead of stopping the clashes. In one notorious case, trucks of the Kenya Police forcibly removed families from a conflict zone and took them to their “ancestral homes.” The families were dumped at a football stadium in Kiambu. Eyewitnesses reported seeing government helicopters assisting the raiders. There were reports that the militias had received specialized training in North Korea.

Ethnic clashes in the Rift Valley and Coast raged for much of the time between 1992 and 1999. There is no way that Moi could fail to know what was going on. Moi was a micro-manager of government affairs who used to call Provincial and District Commissioners in the middle of the night for security updates. During the Moi era, cabinet ministers used to rubber stamp Moi’s decisions. Therefore, Moi is responsible for the ethnic clashes of the 1990s

Nobody was ever prosecuted for participating in the Moi era ethnic clashes. This impunity largely contributed to the 2008 post election violence. Many of the people implicated in the Waki Inquiry into Post Election Violence had also been mentioned in previous inquiries into tribal clashes, including the Akiwumi Commission.

Moi corrupted Kenya’s political system through patron-client relationships that ensured that his loyalists got state funds, government contracts and top jobs. As an entire generation of leaders matured under Moi, these corruption networks came to be seen as normal in politics.

Kenyans are famous for short memories. It is less than seven years since Moi left office but most people have forgotten the kind of person he was. These days, Moi gets cheers whenever he attends public gatherings. Moi has become a celebrity speaker at university graduations, weddings, funerals and state functions. As a keen manipulator of human emotions, Moi knows the right things to say to leave the crowd roaring in applause.

Kenya’s current politicians, led by President Mwai Kibaki are to blame for Moi’s growing popularity. The coalition of President Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga is so inept that it makes the Moi years look like the “good, old days.” Kibaki and Raila can hardly give a coherent speech without tearing into each other.

This is why Moi seems like a much better alternative.

Dangerous Kikuyu – Luo ethnic duopoly

Thanks to the intense rivalry between President Mwai Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga, small tribes in Kenya feel left out as government and private companies fill their ranks with Kikuyus and Luos in a bid to have a “diversified workforce.”

President Mwai Kibaki

With politics and resource allocation in Kenya defined along tribal lines, it is generally assumed that the tribe of whoever is at the top will enjoy priviledges in terms of jobs and development projects.

It is these perceptions that largely contributed to the violence that erupted after the December 2007 Presidential elections that pitted President Kibaki, a Kikuyu, against Prime Minister Raila Odinga who is Luo.

After 1,500 people died in the violence, there has been an effort by government and the private sector to have a tribally diverse work force. However, this has not quite worked out.

The reason is simple. Majority of government ministries, churches and private companies think that diversity is merely putting a Kikuyu and a Luo to work together. Which would be fine if Kenya only had the two tribes. But then, it is lost on those implementing “diversity” that Kenya has at least 42 tribes. Therefore, if only Kikuyus and Luos are getting jobs in the spirit of “diversity,” what happens to the other 40 tribes?

A case in point is the recent elections for the Students Organization of Nairobi University (SONU). The elected Chairman is a Luo, while his deputy is a Kikuyu. But then, is it a coincidence that a similar pattern is repeated across all elective positions in SONU? Is it also a coincidence that the outgoing team had a reverse composition, that is, the Chairman was Kikuyu deputized by a Luo?

Within the military, diplomatic corps and state corporations, the Luo – Kikuyu dichotomy is taking shape. In trying to appear fair, top positions are allocated to people from the two tribes. The same pattern is reflected in corporate circles. Companies are appointing Kikuyus and Luos to boards and management so as to appear neutral. A Kikuyu CEO will be assisted by a Luo, or vice versa.

Similar trends are emerging in social circles, as Kikuyus and Luos embrace each other in a show of “tolerance.” Much is made of weddings between Luo and Kikuyu families, as though Kikuyus and Luos cannot marry people from other tribes.

The ethnic dichotomy reached ridiculous proportions in a national radio game show held by one FM station. Out of six winners, three were Kikuyu and three were Luo. Does it mean that only people from the two tribes participated in this NATIONAL game show?

Consequently, the Kalenjin, Kamba, Mijikenda, Turkana, Taita, Somali, Maasai, Samburu, Kisii, Luhya, Pokot, Ogiek, and other communities are feeling left out in this new power dispensation. The sad reality is that if you are not a Kikuyu or a Luo in today’s Kenya, you stand little chance of making it in government and the private sector.

This is the exact situation that led to the formation of the Kenya African Democratic Union (KADU) back in 1960. KADU was led by the late Ronald Ngala. Other members included the late Masinde Muliro, former President Daniel arap Moi, and the late Sharif Nassir.

KADU was formed because the Kenya African National Union (KANU) was dominated by the Kikuyu and Luo. KANU’s leadership included the late Jomo Kenyatta and the late Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, Raila’s father.KADU’s aim was to defend the interests of smaller tribes whose voices were ignored in KANU. In KADU was Ronald Ngala’s Mijikenda tribe, Moi’s Kalenjin and Masinde Muliro’s Luhya. Other tribes that shifted to KADU included the Maasai, Turkana, Samburu, Pokomo, Taita, Somali, among others. KADU wanted federalism, or Majimbo, to ensure that the Kikuyu and Luo did not eclipse the smaller tribes.

KANU won the independence elections and Jomo Kenyatta became Prime Minister. Kenyatta became convinced that KADU had a valid argument and negotiations began that brought the party into government. In 1964, KADU was satisfied with the talks, dissolved itself and joined KANU. It was a fortuitous move for Daniel arap Moi. He became Minister for Home Affairs and was later appointed Vice President by Kenyatta. In 1978, Kenyatta died and Moi took over in accordance with the constitution.

Back to the issue at hand.

The attempt to create diversity by favouring only Kikuyus and Luos is generating a lot of resentment among other tribes. Unless measures are taken to bring on board all communities, inter-ethnic relations in Kenya are likely to remain fraught with tension.

Obama’s dilemma in Kenya politics

US President Barack Obama must be in a dilemma when it comes to preventing an explosive situation in Kenya.

Barack Obama

It is obvious that Obama would rather concentrate on rebuilding the American economy than associating himself with the Kenyan political soap opera. However, the fact that Obama’s father was Kenyan means that any repeat of the 2008 post election violence will inevitably draw the US President into the mess.

A Rwanda style genocide in Kenya is a nightmare that Obama must be dreading. As close to a million people were killed between April and July 1994, US President Bill Clinton said that American interests were in danger and therefore his intervention was not necessary.

The situation in Kenya is different both because of Obama’s parentage and because of the Rwanda genocide. The fact that Obama has dozens, if not hundreds, of relatives means his involvement is inevitable. Indeed, most people in Nyanza, where Obama’s father hailed from, already expect some sort development assistance now that Obama is president.

The Rwanda genocide of 1994 made the world to vow that, “never again will genocide be allowed to thrive.” As the world’s leading military and economic powerhouse, the US will have no choice but get sucked into the Kenyan quagmire whenever it happens.

Kenya’s pro-Western leanings since independence in 1963 further means that the US and Britain must get involved. “The US has a strong interest in the political stability of Kenya … Kenya is too important to fail. It is not me saying this, this is shared by the highest level of my Government,” said America’s ambassador to Kenya, Michael Rannerberger last week.

In order for Obama to ensure stability in Kenya, he must engage with the current political leaders. The question is, who?

If Obama gets too close to President Mwai Kibaki, it will be seen as an endorsement of Kibaki’s controversial victory in the 2007 General Elections. A Commission of Inquiry declared last year that the presidential results were inconclusive. Co-operation between Obama and Kibaki will not be taken well by the Luo ethnic group where Obama’s father came from and which also happens to be Prime Minister Raila Odinga’s ethnicity. Kibaki comes from the Kikuyu ethnic group and the rivalry between the two men has resulted in ethnic tension between the Kikuyu and the Luo.

President Kibaki’s government is tainted with massive corruption scandals involving maize, oil, drugs and kickbacks. A United Nations report implicated the government in the abduction, torture and killings of thousands of youths. The military, acting under Kibaki’s orders, killed thousands during a counter-insurgency operation in Mount Elgon. Obama will not want to be seen condoning impunity and human rights abuses.

The 44th President of the United States could choose Prime Minister Raila Odinga as his pointman in Kenya but this will antagonize the Kikuyu, who constitute at least 22% of the population.

Prior to the 2007 General Elections, Raila ran his presidential campaign on an anti-Kikuyu platform. Kenya has 42 tribes and the unofficial slogan of Raila’s ODM party was “41 against 1”. The campaign is blamed for the ethnic chaos that erupted with President Kibaki’s victory.

Large numbers of Kikuyu settlers and business people were killed and evicted from ODM strongholds at the Coast, Rift Valley, Western and Nyanza provinces. In order to win votes from these provinces, Raila had promised to establish ethnic federalism, where each tribe could have autonomy in its own province. This was an indirect attack against the Kikuyu who happen to live in all parts of Kenya and whose commercial activities are resented by other ethnic groups. Unfortunately, Raila still persists with his federalist campaigns.

Raila allied himself with Moi era ethnic nationalists in order to win votes. These are the same elements responsible for ethnic clashes against the Kikuyu since 1992. Ironically, the Luo were at one time victims of the same elements but the 2007 political equation spared them from attack.

Obama’s involvement, or lack of involvement in the Kenyan situation, will be exploited by his domestic opponents in the United States to ruin his chances of winning a second term in 2012. If he works closer with President Kibaki, he will be accused of condoning undemocratic practices. If he chooses to work with Prime Minister Raila Odinga, he will be accused of supporting ethnic cleansing in Kenya.

Indeed, Obama’s opponents from the Republican Party tried linking Obama with the ethnic violence in Kenya during the 2008 US Presidential campaigns. Obama’s visit to Kenya in 2006 and the pictures he took with Raila were widely publicized on the Internet. Raila’s claim that he and Obama are cousins certainly did not help Obama’s image.

Obama’s 2008 campaign team made sure that the Kenyan political links did not become an election sticking point. Up until his inauguration on 20th January 2009, Obama’s argument was that there could only be one US president at a time and therefore only President George W. Bush could make foreign policy decisions. Obama let President Bush and former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice take the lead in forming the Grand Coalition.

Certainly, the global economic crisis that began in September 2009 played a key role in Obama’s victory. As Americans found themselves homeless and out of work, Kenya completely disappeared from the electoral radar screen. American voters were determined to get rid of the Republican government which they blamed for their woes.

Next time, there might not be an economic crisis to distract the attention of American voters from Kenya. There is no doubt that Kenya is facing a dark future with its current leaders. Obama is trying hard to avoid getting involved but it is just a matter of time before something happens.

Fate has already decided.

Census should be postponed as political schemes rage

Having forgotten the near civil war they caused in 2008, Kenyan politicians are scheming to manipulate this year’s national population census leading to calls for its postponement.

People in Nairobi.

The national census is scheduled for August 24 and the government has already allocated personnel and finances for the exercise. With politics in Kenya assuming an ethnic dimension, there are fears that the census could spark fresh clashes.

Political forces could engage in ethnic cleansing of their areas so as to portray ethnic homogeneity. Immigrants who have settled into farming and commerce away from their ethnic homelands could be hardest hit with arguments that they don’t “belong.” Some devious politicians are already misleading the public that if immigrants are included in the population count of a particular district, they will have a right to resource allocations for that district.

Politicians want to get as many people as possible counted within their constituencies. This writer, who lives in Nairobi, has been approached by aspiring political candidates from her home district who are “advising” that she travels to be counted with her kinsfolk back there.

Politicians not only wish to inflate the populations of their constituencies but also that of their ethnic groups in general. This will not only determine how much development cash they will get, but could also increase their bargaining power during political negotiations. A politician who is seen as the head of a bigger tribe could get a more prominent government position compared to those politicians from smaller tribes.

A year ago, a member of parliament usually associated with progressive politics was quoted urging constituents to have more children so as to increase the population. Not surprisingly, there was little mention of how those children were going to be fed, educated, clothed and housed.

As signs indicate the possibility of ethnic clashes because of the census, there are calls that the activity be shelved until national stability is restored.

Just this week, former chairman of the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights, Maina Kiai, warned against the census due to growing conflict between President Mwai Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga. “We can all see the rising political tension. In Kenya, whenever political tension rises, ethnic tensions also rise,” said Kiai.

Kiai dismissed the August 24 census, saying communities will be trying to manipulate their numbers. “Every community will want to outdo the other. And it is the enumerators who will be trying to increase the numbers of their people. I don’t know how the tallying centre will be managed,” Mr Kiai said.

This is exactly what happened with the December 2007 General Election. Though the actual voting was fair and credible, returning officers and clerks changed the vote count in favor of their preferred political candidates. One returning officer from Mombasa told an Electoral Commission of Inquiry that he decided to create his own figures because he was exhausted from three days of counting.

For these reasons, there are those who want the national census supervised by an international body such as the United Nations in order to ensure the credibility of results. What will happen if the census shows some tribes having surpassed others in population? What will happen if proved that some ethnic groups have a higher living standard than others? Or that some tribes have lower living standards than others?

Clearly, the government has not thought about the consequences of the census amidst the volatile political climate created by cruel and corrupt politicians.

Political earthquakes as Uhuru and Ruto get cosy

Though there have been rumours about it, there’s now confirmation of an alliance between Agriculture Minister William Ruto and Finance Minister Uhuru Kenyatta in readiness for the 2012 General Elections.

Uhuru Kenyatta

By any standards, campaigning three years before an election is premature at best and callous at worst. It does appear that Kenyan politicians learnt nothing from last year’s near civil war and the political chess game continues.

Amidst these moves, the plight of Kenyans is hopelessly forgotten. Alignments are shifting like the ocean waves as political heavyweights weigh their options. Millions of shillings are exchanging hands as people who struck billions in previous administrations gear up for the big race.

The likes of Martha Karua, high in ideals but low in finances, can only hope to cut a deal with the big boys. Will she be satisfied with the post of Prime Minister or Vice President in a Uhuru-Ruto or Saitoti government? Or will she link up with current Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka?

Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto were on opposing sides during the 2007 General Elections. In reality, they have more in common with each other than with anybody else. They were both mentored by ex-President Daniel arap Moi in the KANU party. They are both approaching middle age and wish to seize the reigns of power before old age catches up. And to achieve their goals, they are willing to do whatever it takes.

Bearing in mind the enmity between Ruto’s Kalenjin tribe and Uhuru’s Kikuyu ethnic group not so long ago, the alliance has been received with disbelief. Both Uhuru and Ruto are implicated in ethnic massacres, with Ruto linked to Kalenjin warriors and Uhuru accused of planning reprisal attacks in Nakuru and Naivasha. Both of them are likely to face the International Criminal Court to answer charges of crimes against humanity. Today, the move by the two not-so-youthful politicians to join forces has rocked the country’s leadership from State House to the grassroots.

Luo Nyanza, long considered Prime Minister Raila Odinga’s backyard, has not been spared the onslaught of the Uhuru – Ruto alliance. Already, several Members of Parliament from Raila’s Luo tribe have responded amiably to overtures from Uhuru – Ruto. Politicians who lost their seats in the last election, and who blame Raila for their predicament, have seen an opportunity to hit back at the Luo titan.

The rapprochement between Uhuru and Ruto has perplexed ordinary people from the Kikuyu and Kalenjin tribes. It was just the other day that the two tribes were butchering each other with machetes, bows, arrows and stones. Churches were burnt, homes looted, women raped and children killed. In some places, hostility is so high that the two tribes dare not live together. This may frustrate the works of Uhuru – Ruto.

It is highly unlikely that Ruto can get Kikuyu votes because they believe Ruto incited the Kalenjin against them. Hundreds of Kikuyu were killed in Ruto’s parliamentary constituency as he insisted that there would be no peace until his preferred candidate, Raila Odinga, assumed the presidency.

While the Kikuyu have a vast array of presidential candidates to choose from, including Uhuru, Prof Saitoti, Vice President Kalonzo and Martha Karua, the Kalenjin can only choose between Raila and Ruto.

Though they voted massively for Raila in 2007, the Kalenjin are disappointed. Grievances include the Mau Forest issue, failure to shield Kalenjin militants from prosecution and failure to provide top jobs to the Kalenjin elite. Rising costs of farm inputs coupled with plunging prices for farm produce have forced the Kalenjin to explore other leadership options. Currently, they have Ruto, or a person close to Ruto such as Uhuru Kenyatta. However, Uhuru does not inspire much confidence among Kenyans.

As the Uhuru – Ruto axis of evil shapes up, other presidential candidates are not taking chances. Professor George Saitoti is currently on a behind-the-scenes campaign to recruit leading politicians from Central, Eastern and Coast provinces. With immense financial reserves, Saitoti has no problem inducing followers with gifts. His current position as Minister for Internal Security is also serving him well, as it grants him access to President Mwai Kibaki.

Martha Karua is however not doing well. She simply lacks the financial clout of Uhuru, Ruto and Saitoti. She is fighting a brave campaign traversing all provinces in Kenya but, short of cataclysmic change, the most she can expect is to bargain for a seat from the top guns.

As events unfold, where is Kalonzo Musyoka?

Kalonzo is said to be playing it cool. Despite vilification from Raila’s ODM, Kalonzo’s cards are looking pretty good. Kalonzo is not tainted with corruption scandals or ethnic massacres. A trained lawyer, Kalonzo is diplomatic, smooth talking and amicable. In the 2007 campaigns, Kalonzo talked of getting to the presidency through a miracle that will take him past every other challenger. Perhaps, Kalonzo is taking a back seat knowing that in Kenya, anything is possible.

After all, if Uhuru and Ruto can come together in spite of everything, who knows what the future has in store?

*****************************************************

Previous article: Why Uhuru and Ruto will face The Hague

*****************************************************

A violent lesson lost to history

After the deaths of over 1,300 people in election violence in early 2008, there was widespread expectation that the brief civil war experience would sober up Kenya’s leadership style.

With the effects of ethnic hatred exposed for all to see, it was assumed that nobody would be foolish enough to play similar games in future. National dialogue would chart a fresh approach to Kenya’s government and management of national resources. Former US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice said that it would no longer be business as usual in Kenya.

Alas, the world was mistaken. Even Kenyans themselves did not know how far deep our politics had sunk. Hardly had the grand coalition been formed than it became business as usual in terms of corruption, tribalism, nepotism and sleaze.

If anything, we are witnessing today the worst looting frenzy in Kenyan history. Never before have ruling elites sought to enrich themselves so quickly. Perhaps, only Nigeria provides some precedence. The cruel, corrupt leadership in Kenya is fully aware that the country will explode at any time and are busy engorging themselves on the fat of the land as hunger pangs ravage 10 million of their subjects.

Meanwhile, the running of government is marred in leadership squabbles that have rendered it weak and incompetent.

Legislators cannot agree on the simple matter of forming an electoral body. As a result, Kenya today lacks an organization to supervise elections and if a situation were arose necessitating an election, the country would be caught in utter helplessness.

A clearly defined selection process agreed by all parties was disrupted by a politician who nominated his college buddy as head of the Interim Electoral Commission. The nominee, lawyer Cecil Miller, did not submit his name to the nominations panel but still made it to the top of the list. Not surprisingly, the nomination was rejected by parliament but legislators were more upset by Miller’s ethnicity than the manner of his nomination.

The country’s politicians are split on firing the Minister for Agriculture, under whose watch millions of bags of government maize went missing. The minister has refused to resign even after his close allies were implicated in the scam. As a result, maize is in short supply and it’s price becoming unaffordable to the majority.

Instead of looking at the scandal as a criminal case, politicians have tribalized it in a manner that could re-ignite ethnic clashes. Last week, as Parliament debated Agriculture Minister William Ruto, there were reports that his kinsmen were sharpening the knives ready for war. It is said this alone played a major role in “convincing” legislators to vote “wisely.” The other factor is the millions of shillings spent by Ruto in bribing parliamentarians.

Scandal after scandal is wrecking Kenya from within. Apart from the disappearance of maize from government stores, fuel worth billions of shillings is missing from government-owned storage tanks. The Minister for Energy, a close friend of President Mwai Kibaki, has refused to resign.

Politicians cannot agree on the formation of a tribunal to prosecute those who incited, planned and funded the post election violence. The key persons are top politicians close to President Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga. Some have vowed not to go down alone, hence procrastination by the President and Prime Minister. Ironically, the crimes-against-humanity suspects now want to be sent to the International Criminal Court. Why? In their calculation, it will be years before The Hague collects enough evidence against them.

Hundreds of thousands of people displaced by post election violence remain in camps because politicians simply do not want them back. Since the 1990s, Kenyan politicians have used ethnic violence to drive away groups that oppose them. It is ethnic cleansing designed to guarantee friendly votes. None other than Prime Minister, Raila Odinga, has been quoted supporting the ethnic evictions.

Last weekend, in a desperate bid to revive his declining public ratings, Raila revisited the ethnic issue. He reiterated his support for a federal republic of ethnically distinct regions. Anyone familiar with Kenyan politics knows what ethnic federalism portends: evictions, looting, rape and killings.

A plot to help the government of South Sudan break a United Nations arms embargo was exposed when a ship carrying Russian made tanks was hijacked in the Indian Ocean by Somali pirates. Apparently, this was not the first shipment.

Stuck with a grotesque caricature of government, Kenyans are wondering what it will take to bring about a people-friendly and visionary leadership. If the deaths of 1,300 Kenyans could not restore sanity in the country’s governance, what will?

How many people must die from hate speech before Kenya’s rulers are full to the brim in the blood of innocents? How many children must die of hunger before the government can respond? How much must be looted before thieving politicians eat rotten beans in jail?

More importantly, how much more can Kenyans take?

Why Uhuru and Ruto will face The Hague

They both started out in the same political party. They were both mentored by the same man: Daniel arap Moi, Kenya’s second president. They are regarded as the youthful vanguard of Kenya’s politics and who will chart a new course when the old autocrats leave the scene.

The two parted ways in the months leading to the 2007 General Election, with one supporting his baptismal godfather. The other supported the arch-enemy of his political godfather.

Now, Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta and William Samoei Ruto find themselves on the same boat once again. They will soon find themselves facing war crime prosecution at the International Criminal Court in the Dutch city called The Hague.

Uhuru and Ruto will share the dubious distinction of being the first Kenyans subjected to an international judicial process. At The Hague, they will be joining the likes of Charles Taylor, Radovan Karadzic, Slobodan Milosevic and Jean Pierre Bemba.

Interesting how fate turns out. Uhuru and Ruto are victims of a geriatric political system that seeks to use and dump the youth and thereby frustrate the rise of fresh leaders.

There is no doubt that Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto are capable leaders in their own right. Though coming from opposing backgrounds – Uhuru the son of a former president, Ruto comes from a rural family – they seemingly found common ground in Moi’s KANU party.

With Moi’s guidance and bulldozer tactics, the two rose up the ranks of KANU to become presidential contenders within a very short time. In 2002, Moi settled on Uhuru as his successor, much to the chagrin of the KANU old guard. Ruto bought into Moi’s plan and backed Uhuru to the hilt. Had Uhuru beaten Kibaki in the 2002 elections, Ruto would obviously have become a major player in his administration.

Back in 1992, faced with an opposition onslaught in Kenya’s first multiparty elections since the 1960s, Moi made Ruto the deputy leader of Youth for KANU 92. YK 92 was a campaign outfit that had access to unlimited funds and had only one goal: Moi’s victory at any cost. YK 92 corrupted the Kenyan political system in ways that had never before been seen. The opposition was too broke to compete and Moi won the election.

The face of YK 92 was its leader, Cyrus Jirongo, assisted by Ruto. After the polls, public outrage and diplomatic pressure forced Moi to disband YK 92. Of course, Jirongo and Ruto took the flak while Moi pretended to be unaware of what had taken place.

A similar scenario replayed itself in the controversial 2007 polls, only this time, the stakes and the body count was much higher.

What are the charges against Ruto and Uhuru?

William Ruto joined Raila Odinga’s faction of the ODM Party, where he mobilized his Kalenjin ethnic compatriots to vote for Raila. In this, he came into sharp conflict with his political mentor, Daniel arap Moi, who wanted the Kalenjin to vote for President Kibaki.

Thanks to Moi’s machinations in the years 1992 – 2002, the Kalenjin had developed a heightened sense of ethnic nationalism, especially against the Kikuyu ethnic group. With the Kikuyu supporting President Kibaki, it was just a matter of time before an ethnic conflagration erupted. Ruto, apparently, did not sense this and played into the hands of Kalenjin ethnic purists from the old Moi administration.

In December 2007, violence began in the Rift Valley between the Kalenjin and pro-Kibaki ethnic groups, notably the Kikuyu. Though Moi was now supporting Kibaki, the old purist networks he had established among the Kalenjin re-emerged on the side of Ruto and played a leading role in the clashes. A leading light of Kalenjin nationalism is one Jackson Kibor.

In January 2008, Kibor openly told BBC Radio of his involvement in the ethnic cleansing of Kalenjin land. The recording is widely available on the internet and forms part of the key evidence against Ruto.

During his 2007 presidential bid, Raila visited the Rift Valley on numerous occasions and promised to enact ethnic federalism, or Majimbo, if elected. This is the same rallying call that the Moi networks had used when ethnic clashes first erupted in 1992. Raila could not have been that naïve.

After post elections violence in 2008, Raila went back to the Rift Valley and told the Kalenjin that he did not support the return of ethnic groups evicted during the violence. Raila’s ally, James Orengo, specifically said that migrant communities evicted during post election violence should seek land elsewhere, and not among the Kalenjin.

Was Raila aware that he was playing with fire by courting Kalenjin ethnic purists? Of course he was! But he now pleads ignorance, leaving Ruto to become the scapegoat. Ruto has been left holding the short end of the stick. He will face war crime and genocide charges for the deaths of hundreds of Kikuyu, especially in his hometown of Eldoret.

Ruto is currently grappling with a corruption scandal in his Agriculture ministry. He is accused of allocating his close allies government maize, which they sold for a huge profit while millions of Kenyans starve. Among the names that keep coming up is that of … hold your breathe … Jackson Kibor.

The case against Uhuru Kenyatta is not so clear-cut. Uhuru is accused of financing and planning Kikuyu revenge attacks against the Kalenjin, Luhya and Luo tribes.

In late January 2008, after a month of ethnic victimization, the Kikuyu armed themselves and launched retaliatory attacks in Naivasha and Nakuru. It is said that Uhuru held a meeting at State House with leading Kikuyu personalities to plot the attacks. It is, however, not clear whether President Kibaki (himself a Kikuyu) attended the meeting or if he was aware of the plans.

Unlike Ruto’s case, there are very few witnesses to testify on Uhuru’s involvement in ethnic clashes. If established that Uhuru is guilty, he can plead self defence and provocation. By the end of January, state authority had collapsed in Kenya and the Kikuyu were being attacked from all directions. It was under those circumstances that Kikuyu leaders decided to take matters into their own hands.

The revenge attacks in Naivasha and Nakuru drew the attention of the international community of impending civil war in Kenya. Within days, intervention by regional and world leaders brought to an end most of the violence. The coalition agreement between Kibaki and Raila was signed a month later.

Like Ruto, Uhuru is both a beneficiary and victim of Moi’s political tricks. In 2002, Moi was due for retirement and was determined to prevent KANU leaders including Raila and George Saitoti from assuming the presidency. Moi had spent 5 years wooing Raila into the party with the promise of handing power to him but, in reality, had no intention of doing so.

As it turned out, Moi’s Vice President in the 1980s happened to be opposition leader in 2002. Moi felt he could be comfortable as a retired president with Mwai Kibaki at the helm. What better way of doing this than by destroying KANU’s chances of winning? And what better way of ensuring KANU’s loss than by introducing an unknown, untested candidate with no prospects of winning? This is how Project Uhuru came to be.

Kenya’s youthful leaders cannot take over the mantle of leadership if they continue playing to the tune of the old guards. It is obvious that the likes of Moi, Kibaki and the Odingas have a monopoly over power that they do not wish to relinquish. They will continue to use and dump young politicians in the same old power games of ethnicity and exclusionary politics.

It is time that the young turks rose up and defined their own rules in the power game. Emerging leaders should learn from the experiences of Uhuru and Ruto and never allow themselves to be seduced by money and high office. Of what use is all the wealth in Kenya when you are an international criminal?

As for Uhuru and Ruto, their fates are sealed. To The Hague they must go.