POLITICAL SCIENTISTS ARE SUPPOSED TO ANALYSE, NOT PREDICT
Making predictions, any predictions, is a tall order. One needs a crystal ball that doesn’ t just outshine other balls but also possesses innate qualities superior to its competitors. Until I read my friend, Chweya Ludeki’ s piece in the East African Standard issue of Friday May 11th, it had never occurred to me that making political predictions was the specialty of political scientists. But then again, Kenya has undergone rapid changes recently. It is possible that our political scientists nowadays moonlight as tarot readers.
It pains me to have to respond to Ludeki because he happens to be my friend. However, given the serious sweeping assertions he has made in his article on important matters affecting virtually everyone in Kenya, I feel duty bound to refute some of the most egregious arguments he has posited. If I were to provide a detailed point-by-point rejoinder, we would be here until next year. I don’ t want to inflict that pain on my readers.
Ludeki began his article with an audacious prediction. Despite the recent (but acknowledged dubious) opinion polls, last week’ s stupendous launch by Raila Odinga and what the majority of political analysts now generally recognize as a foregone conclusion –that Raila will face Kibaki at the polls in December – Ludeki has come up with a nebulous theory in political calculations.
He says that Kenyans prefer leaders that are subtle, unconfrontational, respectful, statesmanlike and polite. Let’ s give it to Ludeki. These are attributes that are considered virtues all over the world. And since many of us would desperately not want Kenya to be viewed as an island on matters of morality, we would grant Ludeki his wish and embrace these characteristics as the defining character traits we are looking for in our next president.
The first major problem Ludeki runs into is his over-simplification of complex issues. Leadership does not just depend on misconstrued perceptions or what the leader wants people to believe or see. Leadership, at its core, depends on a person’ s verifiable background, character, commitments and contributions for the public good.
I am amazed that Ludeki used more than 1200 words but not once did he mention the most important attribute any leader must have: that is integrity. Do Kenyans believe Kibaki has integrity? Do Kenyans truly consider Kibaki a leader they can trust? Does Kibaki have a background, character and record that make Kenyans trust or believe him?
These are the key questions that Ludeki avoided but on which Kenyans will most certainly anchor their decision in December.
Now to Ludeki’ s nebulous details in support of the sweeping predictions. This is where he runs into very serious trouble. As the wise people of yore stated: the devil is always in the details. Still very true today as it was before Jesus confronted the Pharisees and Sadducees of the second century.
Ludeki claims that Kibaki’ s strength is in his non-confrontational manner. He asserts, as truth, that Kibaki is a respectful old man who does not hurl insults against his opponents. That Kibaki is a polite and polished gentleman who “concedes defeat,” and “concentrates on development.” And what examples does Ludeki present in support of these conclusions?
Well, he dangles before us Kibaki’ s “concession” of defeat at the November 2005 constitutional referendum.
It is possible that Ludeki was absent from Kenya during the referendum. If that is the case, then perhaps we may forgive him for misrepresenting so recent a history. But for one who occupies the position of “senior political science lecturer,” one would at least have expected Ludeki to have checked his facts carefully before presenting a false picture to the public.
In any event, did Kibaki have any options other than to concede defeat? Is Ludeki implying that Kibaki could have refused to accept the results of the referendum after he forced it on Kenyans? The refusal to concede defeat would not just have been illegal; it would also have depicted Kibaki as a dictator.
First, with the notable exception of Mzee Jomo Kenyatta, Kibaki has exceeded the boundaries we have come to accept with presidential lexicon. While Kenyatta was fond of challenging those who were saying that he had grown senile to ask Mama Ngina about his virility and challenged those bent on bringing “nyoko nyoko” to a duel, even the grand old man never deteriorated to a point where he used presidential podium to hurl insults at Kenyans.
However, Kenyans have become used to watching Kibaki call his opponents and ordinary Kenyans he disagreed with pumbavu and mavi ya kuku. Is this what Ludeki calls polite, gentlemanly and statesmanlike? Is it possible that a political scientist of Ludeki’ s qualifications would consider these utterances polite and non-confrontational? And is it possible that Ludeki has conducted some research, even among his students at the University of Nairobi, and established that calling people these names ingrates rather than repel Kenyans? For if indeed those are valid findings, then we must devise new vocabularies and means of communication – even new syllabi – to recognize this new linguistic development.
After Kibaki’ s referendum Waterloo, didn’ t he fire all his ministers that had differed with him, but who actually emerged popular with the people? Instead of admitting that he was wrong to try and force an unpopular constitutional draft on the people, Kibaki fired members of his cabinet that had told him that he was wrong! Is that the behaviour of a statesman and who avoids confrontation?
We may have different standards of judging Kibaki’ s performance. We may genuinely disagree on whether a 5.8 economic movement Kenya has realized should be called “recovery” or “development,” especially in view of an inflation which stands at 9%. In fact, we may also legitimately disagree on whether or not Kibaki played any role on this economic “movement” at all. It is quite possible to have different opinions on Kibaki’ s popularity index because the Steadman Group has refused to disclose who funds their polls and have never shown us the questionnaires they have relied on in tabulating their numbers.
However, one thing most Kenyans recognize, regardless of the deep political divide, is Kibaki’ s inability to take criticism. He refused to listen to the LDP over the Memorandum of Understanding. He brushed aside the views of Kenyans during the Bomas process. Ludeki may not remember, but many Kenyans still vividly recall the tantrums that Moody Awori, Kiraitu Murungi, Makau Mutua, Kivutha Kibwana and other staunch Kibaki supporters during Bomas. Later, the entire Kibaki cabinet boycotted the proceedings.
Kibaki’ s obstinate, arrogant and dismissive attitude became worse during the referendum. We continued to observe it when the ghosts we call the Artur brothers invaded Kenya. It never diminished when the Anglo Leasing scandal erupted. Rather than treat John Githongo with respect, Kibaki cast him asunder.
Kibaki’ s much touted “delegation” of responsibility only seems apparent in the midst of scandals and missteps either by members of his immediate family or of his cabinet. Of course, Kibaki would not respond when the First Lady invades a major media house and assaults journalists. He would be as quiet as a lamb when his ministers are alleged to have been caught with their fingers inside the cookie jar. Kibaki is an expert on deflection and deception. He tries to turn scandals into assets.
But how does Ludeki justify overlooking Kibaki’ s disobedience of court orders? Kibaki issued title deeds in Nakuru in 2005 even after the High Court has specifically ordered his Government not to do so. Recently, he defied an order issued by the East African Court sitting in Arusha regarding his nominees for members of that regional assembly. He has conveniently and repeatedly disregarded, disobeyed and breached electoral laws during by-elections throughout the country. As Ludeki’ s article hit the stands, Kibaki was trying to bribe Magarini voters by dishing out title deeds.
Are these the conduct of a statesman? Is it possible that Ludeki does not fully comprehend the terms he is misusing?
And now to Kalonzo. Ludeki claims that Kalonzo is more popular than his opponents purportedly because he “does not respond to insults.” But he does not tell us why responding to insults is not statesmanlike. Some of the most celebrated statesmen like Mandela and Churchill are better known for their quips and responses than for major policy statements.
Ludeki seems to think that calling someone “non confrontational” is a badge of honour. Similarly, he believes that calling someone a “troublemaker” is equivalent to “unpopular.” Ludeki forgets that positive changes have historically been brought by those deemed to be troublemakers. Wasn’ t Kenyatta supposed to be a troublemaker just before becoming president?
How about courage, forthrightness and the ability to deliver? Does Ludeki think these are positive attributes for national leadership? Or is Ludeki suggesting that all Kenyans want is a Pope for president?
My friend Ludeki has deliberately avoided mentioning Kibaki’ s refusal to deal with corruption and tribalism as significant factors that would fatally undermine his candidature. That’ s quite unfortunate for a political scientist. After all, scholars are paid and installed atop our Ivory Towers to deliver to us logical, objective and reasonable analysis; not voodoo concoctions in the name of analysis.
There is absolutely nothing in Ludeki’ s article that qualifies for analysis. Words and phrases are used so loosely and carelessly to the extent that it is impossible to assess whether to call this writing political tarot reading or political mumbo jumbo. Either way, Ludeki has dishonoured political science. If this is what nowadays passes as political analysis, then Kenya truly needs some thorough shake-up. That’ s why we should reclaim troublemaking as a virtue in political discourse.
Miguna Miguna
*Miguna Miguna is a Barrister & Solicitor; Mediator & ADR Consultant; political analyst; prolific commentator on social, cultural and political issues; and a published author.
About the Author
