Mr. Okoth Osewe was quite right in his recent Youtube video when he mentioned that we lack ideology in Kenyan politics. Many Kenyans are fixated on politicians and not their vision for the country. A case in point is the recent signing of pre-election pacts which are viewed through tribal prisms. “Oh, Peter Kenneth is our savior because he resembles Obama; Uhuru rescued us (we Kikuyus) from the Kalenjin warriors in 2008; Ruto is the Kalenjin hero for fighting the Kikuyus; Raila is the only Luo leader; Luhyas are tired of being vice presidents and so Musalia must now be president, etc.”
This obsession is based on ethnicity and the need for different ethnic groups to have “one of their own” in leadership (the presidency) without questioning why they want to lead. There is basically no articulation of concrete issues by politicians for the well-being of Kenyans. Maybe the planned TV debates will be an eye-opener for Kenyans to know and understand the policies of their future president. Kenyans should also question the contents of manifestos distributed by politicians.
During the 2008 post-election violence, Kikuyus demanded Ruto’s head and prayed that he should be convicted and jailed for allegedly planning the violence in Rift Valley. Come 2012, he is a hero among many of them: the king-maker who will seal Uhuru Kenyatta’s ascendancy to the presidency.
When was Ruto ‘sanitized’ from his political sins? Is it the blessings he received when Mama Ngina (Uhuru’s mother) laid her hands on his head before their first hearing at The Hague? Is he any better now because he will bring ‘Kamwana’ Uhuru the much required Kalenjin votes to make him president? This impunity-laden duo is up to no good for Kenya, since they had already said their political union is a referendum against the ICC charges.
The Kikuyu elite are blind to the fate of fellow brothers and sisters languishing in IDP camps in Rift Valley – a reality never mentioned by Uhuruto, who now claim to be ambassadors of peace and that their political marriage will be worthy for the Kikuyu and Kalenjin. Of course, if the two “brothers-in-crime” will use their tribes to advance personal ambitions, then so be it, because some communities are so entrenched in their cocoons, they will never consider others for the presidency. If the duo takes power, their supporters are already boasting of a 20-year rule; meaning that Kenya’s presidency will have rotated between two tribes for 70 years. When then, will other tribes lead?
As for Musalia Mudavadi, his quest for the presidency has taken a weird twist since it is alleged he was bought out of ODM for around 3.5 billion shillings, to destroy Raila. Being visionless, he swallowed the bait hoping that Uhuruto would automatically bequeath him leadership since they are Hague-bound and would have him to protect their interests. It means that Uhuruto, if jailed, will pull shots from their jail cells to control Kenya. Ruto actually said he would use information technology to lead Kenya, in case he is elected, but must attend ICC proceedings. At their recent pre-election launch, they reiterated that foreigners should not interfere in Kenya’s domestic matters. To them, foreigners are those within the international community who have questioned their interest in leadership despite the ICC accusations. Kofi Annan, who is currently visiting Kenya, has once again mentioned that Kenyans should not vote in leaders who are facing criminal charges at the ICC.
Mudavadi and Wamalwa are clueless Luhya leaders
Musalia had a guaranteed vice presidency in ODM (if the party wins in 2013), but he decided to quit claiming unfounded bias in presidential nominations and dictatorship. He ended up in UDF which is a Kikuyu-led party where he has no say, and uses tailor-made wording/scripts at public rallies. In his earlier campaigns, he demonized Raila by calling him a dictator, then went to Othaya in Kibaki’s turf and mentioned he would protect him in retirement…all in the name of wooing Kikuyu voters. He also said a few times that Raila should retire from politics as he winds up the Grand Coalition Government with Kibaki. He has a few ODM-hating Luhya MPs as followers and who, after so much initial name calling on Raila, are now quiet since reality is sinking in that Musalia may not be the next president after all. He toyed around with Kalonzo’s Wiper Party to have a pre-election agreement, but this did not work.
When Musalia recently realized that Uhuruto have allocated themselves key slots in the next government and were not about to drop him any juicy portions, he changed his campaign tune and mentioned that Kenyans should not elect leaders who will block them from international partners due to criminal charges. This angered some Uhuruto followers who castigated him. The latest gossip is that Musalia met Uhuru last week and the most he got was a lot of food and booze. He left the meeting infuriated because there was nothing more to share in the TNA-URP deal.
Mudavadi misled the larger Luhya community because he had left ODM to become a formidable presidential candidate. However, the way things are at the moment, he has been marginalized. Had he played his cards right, he would have bargained using their numbers; almost 5 million in population, and the second largest tribe after Kikuyus. But he is not tagged ‘Weak-Leaf’ for nothing. He is not aggressive and cannot marshal Luhya votes in-toto, given that they are always divided. One school of thought claims Kibaki will still reward him with the presidency after Uhuruto get ‘shipped’ to the ICC. But the reality is, during Tuesday’s deadline for submitting pre-election agreements, Musalia wanted to join Peter Kenneth who is already seriously dimmed by Uhuru in Central Kenya. However, after dilly-dallying for days, he ended up signing a last minute pre-election pact with Uhuruto to form UhuRutoM. He may end up as Majority Leader in Parliament, way below his presidential ambition. Due to his cowardice, the process has thus ended up as a two-horse race between Raila and Uhuru, with confirmed wannabes remaining ‘pundas’. Musalia had the best bargaining chip, but was lured into the wilderness by Kikuyu elite.
Luhyas are currently angered by Mudavadi’s self-demotion and many have sworn not to elect him even for the lowest political position available in his Sabatia constituency, come 2013. How will he sell the Uhuruto ticket among his people and how will he be the Majority Leader when he cannot marshal more than his few Maragoli MPs? Musalia was viewed as a Statehouse project with ‘safe hands’ to protect the Kikuyu elite’s interests if Kamwana gets whisked to serve his projected 50-year jail term in The Hague. As it stands now, there are no signs that Uhuruto will surrender power to him and the so-called battle with Uhuru for the presidential nominations in their newfound alliance is a complete sham to help ‘Messi’ save face, because of the shame he has brought to the Luhya community for being indecisive. Can he honestly beat Uhuru who has serious clout in Central province? Messi has messed up big time.
Eugene Wamalwa, another Luhya (Bukusu), was equally played like a yo-yo by Uhuruto in the G7 which has now become G1, led by Mr. Moneybags Kenyatta. Before Wamalwa could wake up and smell the coffee, the elephant had already been ruthlessly carved 50:50 between Uhuruto. He then ran to yesteryear political pariah Total Man Biwott, to form an alliance; pure desperation galore. Biwott has no political clout in Rift Valley, which is predominantly a Ruto-URP zone. Wamalwa is a first-timer parliamentarian and was already awarded the Justice ministry by Muthamaki Uhuru, to bark at the ICC. Furthermore, apart from sharing the last name with his late brother Kijana Wamalwa who was Kibaki’s first vice president, Eugene has nothing to offer in the murky political games of the big ‘mboys’. He has picked Cyrus Jirongo, a fellow Luhya, to be his presidential running mate which is amazing, because they have all headed for a major failure. It will be interesting to see how Luhyas will shape the presidential election, now that Wetangula is in the Raila-Kalonzo axis.
Kenyans should vote wisely
During the ongoing campaigns, all the presidential candidates claim they will give youths employment and improve their living standards if elected, yet they have been in Government for the past 10 years in various high-calibre positions. Which one of them has ever done anything for them?
Listen to the plight of young girls being sold for sex to ‘Mzungu’ tourists and local men at the Coastal towns of Kenya, yet we have free education.
As we grapple with the need for ideological politics, Kenyans must register as voters amidst the confusion by tribal chieftains. They should vote independently, without manipulation or bribery. Vote wisely for the next president in 2013.
Jared Odero
About the Author
About 40 MPs allied to The National Alliance on Thursday said Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta will not step down in favour of Musalia Mudavadi and threatened to support Prime Minister Raila Odinga if he (Uhuru) does not contest presidency. The MPs met and threatened to support Raila should Uhuru be denied the opportunity to be the Presidential candidate in the alliance. “If it is not Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto then all roads would lead to Bondo,” said Agriculture Assistant Minister Kareke Mbiuki. Prime Minister Raila Odinga’s ancestral home is Bondo hundreds of kilometres away from the lake side town of Kisumu. The MPs accused a group of powerful individuals of working behind the scenes to have Mudavadi as the alliance presidential candidate, saying they will not succumb to that pressure.
“We are giving them notice that we shall not entertain blackmail. Uhuru is the shareholder, prefect and leader of TNA,” said Sports Assistant minister Kabando wa Kabando. Chairman of the group charged with looking at the Alliance matters, Mutava Musyimi, said a group opposed to Uhuru has been spreading rumours that Uhuru has stepped down for Mr Mudavadi, saying such rumours has affected supporters of the Gatundu South MP and that they are not committed to registering as voters.
There have been reports that a good number of Uhuru’s supporters were shocked with turn of events and that they may not register as voters if the Deputy Prime Minister is not a presidential candidate. Uhuru and Ruto have been indicted by the International Criminal Court over international crimes occasioned by the 2007/2008 post-poll upheavals in which 1,133 people died and more than 500,000 uprooted from their homes. “There are a lot of rumours circulating that Uhuru has stepped aside but we say here that Uhuru will be on the ballot and he is the presidential candidate of TNA. We won’t succumb to any pressure,” said Musyimi.
Kenyatta’s advisers remain divided. The older cohort of wealthy Kikuyu business leaders, mainly in their 60s and 70s, suspect that a third Kikuyu president cannot be elected and that other ethnic communities must be given a chance to hold the presidency. Jomo Kenyatta (Uhuru’s father) and current President Mwai Kibaki—both Kikuyu—have held power for 25 of the 49 years since independence in 1963. Daniel arap Moi, a Kalenjin, ruled for the other 24. Now is the time, many assert, for a Luo (Odinga), a Luhya (Second Deputy Prime Minister Musalia Mudavadi), or a Kamba (Vice President Stephen Kalonzo Musyoka) to take the reins. Kenyatta, they caution, might be unelectable, incapable of drawing voters beyond his Kikuyu, Embu, and Meru bailiwick on the slopes of Mount Kenya. This so-called GEMA or Mount Kenya coalition comprises about 30 percent of Kenya’s population and, even given a high differential turnout for the region’s favorite son, is unlikely to comprise more than 35 percent of the total vote.
The Kikuyu old guard has not thrown its support and financial backing behind Kenyatta, and its members are exploring other ways to undermine Odinga. Some are supporting Raphael Tuju, a Luo advertising executive and former cabinet minister, in the hope that he will attract votes away from Odinga, but so far Tuju has gained little traction. Most are waiting to see whether Kenyatta decides to run, but some are convinced that he is unelectable and that a vote for Uhuru is in reality a vote for Raila. If Kenyatta stands for election, he is almost certain to come second in the first round on March 4 and to go forward into a second-round runoff a month later. But Odinga is almost certain to win a second round, with 60 percent of the vote to Kenyatta’s 40 percent. The bulk of supporters of the minor candidates—who should win at least 30 percent between them in the first round—are likely to split two-to-one in favor of Odinga in the second round. Even if Kenyatta were ahead on March 4, which is improbable, he would almost certainly lose the second contest. A number of prominent Kikuyu are attempting to persuade Kenyatta to stand down and to throw his support behind Mudavadi, his vice presidential running-mate in the 2002 election.
A year ago, Musalia Mudavadi was a firm ally of Raila Odinga, who helped him resurrect his political career after the debacle of 2002. Going forward, he may prove a formidable challenger. The Abaluhya, Mudavadi’s ethnic community, are the country’s second-largest ethnic group, with some 19 percent of the population. But as a merger of 14 sub-ethnicities that came together only in the 1930s, they have historically been fragmented. The Bukusu, from the northern Bungoma District in Western Province and Trans Nzoia in Rift Valley Province, are the largest sub-group, making up some 40 percent of the Abaluhya community. The Bukusu have always been inclined to go their own way and have little love for Mudavadi, a Maragoli from Vihiga in the south. Most Bukusu favor Eugene Wamalwa. If Kenyatta remains in the contest, then Mudavadi and Wamalwa will probably split the Abaluhya vote. But if Kenyatta were to withdraw, the whole community would likely rally round Mudavadi in order to propel him into the presidency. Most Mount Kenya (GEMA) voters would probably accept Mudavadi as the next best thing to Kenyatta. A former foreign minister and minister of finance in the 1990s, he is considered competent if not very charismatic, and he has the additional advantage of being acceptable to former president arap Moi and his sons, who are now in control of KANU. Thus, competing on his own against Kenyatta, Mudavadi has little support—gaining only 7.4 percent in the Gallup opinion poll. But as Kenyatta’s preferred candidate, he would run close to Odinga and could even win, attracting voters who would never cast their ballots in favor of Kenyatta.
The Kikuyu old guard insists that if Kenyatta is serious about protecting Kikuyu economic interests and preventing Odinga with his redistributionist policies capturing State House, then he had better withdraw and throw his support behind Mudavadi. A number of younger Kikuyu businessmen, mainly in their 30s and 40s—that is, members of Kenyatta’s own age cohort—take a different view. They insist that he must contest the election and must adopt any means to win—including ethnic oathing (pledging allegiance to the Kikuyu candidate) and ballot stuffing. In fact, oathing of rural Kikuyus started eight months ago. This hardline faction is led by Kenyatta’s younger brother, Muhoho, the managing director of Brookside Dairies and a host of other enterprises.
Muhoho Kenyatta and the inner circle around his brother seem to believe that oathing and appealing to Kikuyu chauvinism—tactics that have been highly effective in the past—will still work today. But Kenya has changed. The middle class is far more numerous and independently wealthy, and civil society, despite its decline in recent years, remains far more influential and organized than in the 1960s and 1970s. The tactics of the 1960s will no longer work. It is interesting to note that the Kenyatta campaign has clearly lost the support of Maina Njenga and the original leadership of the Mungiki movement. Mungiki is many different things. In part it is a Kikuyu-based organized crime movement, but it remains true to its founding as a revivalist Kikuyu religious group, eschewing the corruption and materialism of the modern world, with appeals to githaka na wiathi (land and morality), defending the traditional moral economy of precapitalist society, which an earlier generation of Kikuyu have-nots, the Mau Mau, had sought to protect in the 1950s. The Kenyatta family, which acquired large swathes of land during Jomo Kenyatta’s presidency, is deemed to have deserted these principles and to be unworthy of support.
David W. Throup is a senior associate with the Africa Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.
http://csis.org/publication/reading-tea-leaves-kenyan-elections-patterns-violence-and-political-alliances
In social studies, a political ideology is a certain ethical set of ideals, principles, doctrines, myths or symbols of a social movement, institution, class, and or large group that explains how society should work, and offers some political and cultural blueprint for a certain social order. A political ideology largely concerns itself with how to allocate power and to what ends it should be used. Some parties follow a certain ideology very closely, while others may take broad inspiration from a group of related ideologies without specifically embracing any one of them
Based on the definition above, those who believe in tribal politics can be also be said to have an ideology because they do believe that power should be allocated based on someone’s tribe. The belief in tribal politics is premised on the notion that if your tribesmate is in power, the tribe is better-off because they get a disproportionately favorable allocation of resources and in turn they keep the leader in power. Kenyatta started this kind of politics to avert KPU threat and then Moi and Kibaki perfected it. Tribal politics in Kenya is therefore an ideology which is part of the right wing status quo ideology or its subset if you will.
The progressive change/reform ideology is against tribal politics because it believes that the best way for the country to develop is to allocate power as enshrined in the new Katiba. That tribal politics leads to corruption, unfair allocation of resources, incompetence and lowers the standards of living for everybody is non-contestable. It is clear that only very few people at the top of the food chain gains from tribal politics but the rest of the people, including those who belong to the same tribe as the tribal leader do not benefit significantly at all. Tribal politics is therefore actually a bad thing which good people and patriotic Kenyans should fight against and not embrace.
I do believe that the majority of Kenyans are against the kind of raw unadulterated tribal politics that Uhuruto are engaged in and that is why Uhuruto are having a very difficult time putting together a tribal coalition that can hold and win elections in Kenya. The only people who are happy are a certain segment of Kikuyu chauvinists.
Instability in the tribal alliance of Uhuruto is evidenced by the fact that the mere move by Kalonzo to join Raila is tearing the Uhuruto coalition apart. This means that it is a house of cards and anything will bring it tumbling down. It scares the hell out of those who are in it and those who are out are glad they are not in there.
Well written article Odero. Your analysis of the various tribal chiefs and how they and their followers relate in the name of tribe cannot be faulted. However, you unwittingly reveal that you are no better than the average Kenyan obsessed with tribalism. You are Luo, going by your name, and yet you neglect to even mention Prime Minister Odinga in your analysis of Kenyan politics. Such a key player should have featured prominently in your piece to say the very least. Since you have chosen to deliberately and conveniently leave Odinga out of your analysis, this makes you one of those “Kenyans are fixated on politicians and not their vision for the country” as you put it. This is very dishearteneing especially coming from someone obviously educated and capable of using their faculties towards fighting tribalism.
Kenyans cannot be fooled forever, especially those with a mind that can analyze and discern issues. If we can see through the politicians and their tribal politics ravaging our country, we can certainly see through your hypocrisy. I would urge you to put aside the obvious Luo agenda you propagate and join the growing ranks of cosmopolitan Kenyans who desire a country that is steered by what is good for all Kenyans and not my tribe.
Many thanks “Ethical Kenyan”. It’s ironical that you see hypocrisy in my analysis, yet you use the same lenses to deem me a Luo by my name Odero. You are not different because you also advance tribal bias when you assume that being Luo, I have tactfully dodged analysing Raila. Why don’t you (assuming you are a non-Luo) write about him?
The core of my piece is on the shifting political landscape due to the recent pre-election agreements. There is ongoing drama in the TNA-URP-UDF camp, which is why their leaders have featured prominently. I could delve into Raila Odinga and his newfound allies, but where’s the scoop so far?
Politics of ethnic alliances and ethno-regional parties: Which way for Kenya?
By Antony Otieno Ongáyo, August 27, 2012
While much has been discussed about Kenyan political parties, their leaders, lack of internal democracy, lack of ideologies and ethnic orientation, any genuine analysis of their history needs to take cognizance of the fact that Kenya has undergone many phases and transformation in terms of political party development. From a “non-party state” where Africans had no voice or representation, to individual representation at the regional (ethnic) level; from a multiparty democracy though short-lived, when the Kenya People’s Union (KPU) emerged in 1966, as a radical party ready to challenge the domination of KANU (Kenya African National Union), until it was banned in October 1969. From this point, there was a slide back to a single party dictatorship where every Kenyan was expected to belong to one party (KANU), which only ended with the legalization of opposition parties in December 1991. This followed a wave of democratization that swept across the African continent during the 1990s. However, this change was only significant in that there were many parties allowed to compete but not to win. Freedom of the press was allowed but not to be effective, and the type of multiparty system was a semi-democratic one, in which party lines and ideological differences were difficult to draw due to defections or the pervasive “stomach philosophy” which induces legislative performance within the Kenyan parliament. The current political party scenario shows a significant growth of parties, which is a process which began in the 1990s with the return of Kenya to a multiparty state.
Political alliances and the shaping of ethno-regional parties
The wave of democratization in Africa as elsewhere in the world, took many different shapes and forms, and sometimes as in the case of Kenya, democratization resulted in the re-affirmation of ethnic identities, with political parties emerging along ethno-regional criteria rather than ideological ones. The recent developments in major political parties in Kenya are a pointer to the nature of political institutional development and its ethnic orientation, which is embedded in the national political system. While discussions on ethnicity have mainly revolved around personalities and their ethnic backgrounds, not much attention has been given to the draconian and retrogressive boundaries that either unjustly separate or unite numerous communities in Kenya against their will. These artificial enclaves are the outcomes of colonial and post-independence regime mechanization to divide and rule the people while removing them from prime land and maintaining the status quo of exploitation and primitive accumulation. While this can be a subject for a prolonged debate, the immediate relevance of the ethno-regional alliances currently taking shape, fits into the political party development discourse in Kenya, which has been appearing in the media of late. What is essential is to understand that the political party system in Kenya has to evolve and what has been witnessed in the developments in Old KANU and New KANU, Ford Kenya-New Ford Kenya and Ford People, National Alliance of Rainbow Coalition (NARC) and National Alliance of Rainbow Coalition Kenya (NARC-Kenya), Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) and Orange Democratic Movement Kenya (ODM-Kenya), ODM-Kenya and Wiper Democratic Party, United Republican Party (URP), United Democratic Movement (UDM), Party of National Unity (PNU) and its affiliates, and more recently the emergence of artificial constructs such as G7 and G42, are symptoms of an infection which had evaded diagnosis and now coming out while least expected. While this picture could be a bleak one due to uncertainties related to such eventualities, this development could be a blessing in disguise since it exposes an inherent flaw in the Kenyan political system.
The emergence of ethno-regional parties in Kenya should therefore be seen as an opportunity to unite people in a much broader way, in the context of failure by the post-independence parties to recruit their membership on ideology and development agenda platforms. It could also be interpreted as a continuation of the pluralism process in Kenya. Pluralism in its very nature is a concept that can be used in different ways. Nevertheless, from a political perspective, it is the acknowledgement of diversity which is affirmed in the interests of citizens. For this reason, its applicability in the case of Kenya is appropriate for analyzing the democratic developments and political party politics in the country, and more so, in a situation whereby “negative ethnicity” seems to be the dominant rallying point during electioneering period, or in the context of the distribution of state resources. The term pluralism is also used to denote a theoretical standpoint on state and power, which to varying degrees, suggest that pluralism is an adequate model of how power is distributed in societies. In this regard, groups compete in a fair manner to access state power. Depressingly enough, the political competition in Kenya has been between the dominant forces against the citizenry, and with the advent of multiparty, it is between political parties that are individualistic, ethnic-oriented and disconnected with the citizenry they claim to represent, while at the same time using or whipping ethnic feelings for political expediency. While few parties have managed to reach out beyond their registered offices, those that have gone out have always appealed for or reached out for tribal alliances, support and vote, so what difference would it make with ethno-regional parties in the context of inter tribal/party alliances? First, let us try to understand what is meant by ethno-regional parties. Ethno-regional parties can be conceived of as political parties whose electoral and legitimation potential is primarily based on identity mobilization of an ethno-territorial community of sub-national (sub-state) nature. However, ethnic and territorial aspects may assume different relevance within the different approaches to understanding of ethno-regional parties. Regional parties are not necessarily ethnic parties and vice versa, so they could also be defined as formations with region-based electorate and mobilization resources, or as formations representing sub-national (regional) interest within communities exercising party functions to the full extent in a regionally defined operating space. Ethno-regional (ethno-regionalist) parties may thus be defined as some sort of regional (regionalist) parties. While the current parties have not come out clearly on the nature of their ethnic mobilization, what has been witnessed are tribal voting patterns; power-sharing; dishing out of public positions/jobs and the allocation of public resources with ethnic considerations. Clearly, many political parties have on many occasions appealed to a particular ethnic group to defend “their man in State House” or reached out for ethnic leaders to capture regional support. Nonetheless, this has never translated into the realization of the interests of a particular region per se, except for the GEMA and to some extent KAMATUSA, but even in these cases, there have been complaints that things have been done in their name, while the beneficiaries are a few individuals from the assumed beneficiary ethnic groups.
Political parties are ideologically bankrupt
According to Türsan (an expert in ethnic politics and political parties), ethno-regional (or ethno-regionalist) parties are characterized by their nationalism based on ethnic differentiation (or on an exclusive ethnic identity) and territorial claims within existing states, and can be defined as “ethnic entrepreneurs”. In the Kenyan cases, none of the political parties even though informed by ethnic considerations in their conduct, have used nationalism in their ethnic differentiation, nor made territorial claims (except for the recent initiatives by the Mombasa Republican Council (MRC). Nevertheless, ethnic entrepreneurship has been mainly used to ascend to position of power, or to insulate one’s position in cases of wrong doing. The logic of expansion and after all, of mere reproduction of legitimation and mobilization potential of political parties, requires that a more or less diversified message gets across to the target population and this rule equally applies to ethno-regional formations. This is what KANU preached during the Nyayo era – “peace love and unity”. Unfortunately, that did not resonate with the reality of ethnic clash victims in various parts of the country. Ford Kenya, New Ford Kenya, Ford People, DP, Safina, Wiper Democratic Party, URP,, UDM, PNU and its splinter groups or even NARC, NARC Kenya and KANU in their current form, but also such alliances as G7 or G42 are yet to exhibit characteristics of reaching out for a cross-section of ethnic groups based on issues where the platform of ethno-regional parties involves different ideological moments and not a focus on blocking one candidate from ascending to the presidency. If the alliance as issue-based and focus on what really affects the ordinary masses in the respective ethnic regions as clearly outline in agenda four of the national accord, these formations could get some legitimacy through representation as well as formalization. This should be done without the need of any direct link between the issue of self-government and territorial (as is the case with Mombasa Republican party) and political reorganization.
Ethnicity is here to stay
The launching of leadership visions by various presidential candidates in Kenya could be a good precedent if followed by political parties in stating their ideological positions, even if they are ethnically oriented. The issue of ideological orientation of ethno-regional parties can assume greater importance only in cases of apparent pluralism in the political representation of nation-forming movements, where the different political groups of leaders begin to consciously identify themselves as radical or moderate both in terms of their approach towards the claim for self-government or independence, and of socio-economic and political criteria (with the latter being the most relevant in the case of Kenya), and they do not have federalist and separatist elements in them. While this view is not necessarily a proposition for ethno-regional parties as such, the Kenyan reality informs us that ethnicity is here to stay. In this case, Kenyans should find better ways of dealing with it, making use of its positive sides, accepting that ethnic groups can live and work together even at political party level. Moreover economic and political marginalization of some regions in Kenya since independence is not ethnic- specific but cuts across many groups. Issues affecting North-Eastern province are not that different from Coast province, Ukambani area, North Rift and Luo -Nyanza, or even poverty that can still be found in some parts of Central and Rift valley provinces even though they two regions have had unlimited access to state power and resources since independence. But even in a scenario where Kenyan could have ethno-regional political parties all parties and/or quasi-party political movements, ethno-regional parties will not operate in a vacuum, but form part of an institutionalized arrangement and interact with other operational units of a given system. Their activities will form part of the functioning of the respective party and political arrangements, and contribute to the formation and reproduction of prevailing interaction patterns, which are typical of the arrangement as a system. James Madison (the fourth President of USA) who was among the earliest to argue for pluralism feared that factionalism would lead to in-fighting in the new American republic.
To avoid factionalism, it is best to allow many competing factions to prevent any one dominating the political system. Therefore, maintaining the current plural nature of Kenyan politics should be a core concern for those who want Kenyans to have a clean break from the past. The diversity in Kenya is a source of wealth not yet tapped. This diversity can be harnessed to take the nation a step further in its developmental path. The question is whether Kenyans accept their diversity or not? Or if they are willing to do away with such myths about who owns Kenya (Kenya in wenyewe) or have they accepted the bitter reality that Kenya belongs to all who belong in it?
Where is the Kenyan citizenry in all this?
The recent and current developments in the political mobilization and participation vis-à-vis representative politics in Kenya are revelations, which are very critical for proper diagnosis of what ails Kenya as a country as far as political organizing is concerned. It is also useful for seeking appropriate prescriptions that could direct efforts towards institutional re-engineering and mental shift in the way Kenyans perceive relate with their leaders and hold them accountable. With decades of missed opportunities, disappointments and steep increase in the gap between the rich (the political elite and middle class) and the poor (who are the majority), the Kenyan voters are getting wiser by the day even though through painful socio-economic and political experiences that are occasioned by acts of political expediency, self-preservation and personal aggrandizement by the political elite. The impact of the recent mental shift in the Kenyan voters can be observed in the number of previous parliamentarians who lost their seats despite the huge sums (political corruption) they dished out to influence the voters. The forth coming general election which is linked to a new constitutional dispensation and devolution of the political system and sources will therefore see an enormous increase in the voter bribery price, but even with such large sums, winning an elective position will still not be guaranteed. This shift will therefore force the Kenyan political elite to re-strategize or re-invent themselves in order to attract voters through means other than money. The post election violence which was the result of historical injustices and entrenched interests and culture of impunity has also revealed the mythical Kenyan politician who can easily sacrifice his/her community at the altar of political expedience for self interest and insatiable egos. The ordinary people on both sides were the major losers. They now realize that they killed each other yet they shared the same poor conditions entrenched by the interest of the same persons they killed to defend their interests and ambitions. It is the ordinary person that still languishing in the camps for the Internally Displaced across the country. Moreover in the face of such traumatic experiences such as the post election violence in 2007 and failure of the government to address the underlying factors as observed in Agenda Four of the Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation Accord, majority of Kenyans are slowly beginning to realize that the old order is not for their own good, but for a few local capitalists and the political elite whose interests are served by the status-quo of weak state institutions, unaccountable leadership and impunity. But despite these positive signs, the Kenyan citizenry is not yet out of the woods. As noted by Makau Mutua in a recent opinion article in the Daily Nation (Saturday, March 3 2012), the three “Kenyan traitors” are Kenyans themselves who have allowed themselves to be enslaved by the Kenyan political class, the educated tribal chauvinist and the media in Kenya. The three traitors have a mutual convergence in which the act or omission by either party reinforces the dynamics that shape their relationship. In such a constellation of unintended consequence of the convergence of interest and submissiveness, the desired change in Kenya will only take place when the citizenry consciously refuses to give up their “agency” to the Kenyan political class and the “middle class” that derives their opulent lifestyle from the status quo in Nairobi. Whether the time for politics of ethnic alliances and ethno-regional parties has come, or the Kenyan citizenry has come off age to refuse slavery conditions under the Kenyan political elite and educated tribal chauvinist, the 2012 general elections will offer an interesting political litmus test for the new constitutional dispensation and path to democratization in Kenya.
Odero, do not insult my intelligence and that of Kenyans in general. I do not deem you to be a Luo but have just stated the obvious and facts can never be assumed as they are a certain occurrence. The hypocrisy I gleaned from the omissions in your article is confirmed in your defense of such an omission. You have been very adept at analyzing the tribal chieftains in your sights but do not use the same yardstick with those allied with Raila. Are you aware that Odinga and his allies are also part and parcel of the shifting political landscape of pre-election agreements? Why are you silent in the part he plays, yet he has featured prominently in the news? Why do you focus on the TNA-URP-UDF coalition as if they are the only players on the field? If the TNA-URP-UDF coalition is the core subject of your article then the heading of the article should reflect the same. Otherwise the implication of your article is that only those that support TNA-URP-UDF that are obsessed with politicians and not ideology. All the member of the various coalitions are playing the tribal card and pretending that one outfit is selling a better political option than the others is an exercise in delusion. The only difference between them is the tribal interests these coalitions represent and propagate. So if you do not have the scoop on Raila Odinga or choose to overlook his contribution in this context means that you do not even realize the fallacy of your convictions.
I also take exception to the quote with your photograph that “Some communities are so entrenched in their cocoons, they will never consider others for the presidency”. This is a lie, plain and simple. Each and every one of the communities in Kenya, a politically correct term for tribes, wants one of their own in State House. Why should we pretend it is not so? Kibaki tosha, No Raila no peace are some slogans Kenyans are well acquainted with and were shouted with extra relish by certain makabila went it suited them. The process to healing begins with acceptance of reality.
Ethical Kenyan, your retort is a good start towards roping in Raila. Develop your thoughts further and you will have a full article on his role in Kenya’s tribal politics. My piece is delimited to its contents and all you need is to expound on the title or create a new one, other than dwelling on what you think about my tribe vis-a-vis my thinking.
All kenyans should wake up and stop dividing people on tribal l lines, and we should not forget that there some people or tribes in Kenya who have been forgotten totaly as if we never got independent and yet during every election
time they are voting whole heartly , Why??? coz they love their mother land treat all Kenyan with respect, and equal share ,if any of you have never travel to Turkana,or Samburu and see mothers with children on their back beging just for water in a glass not even food , water then those with food and golden plates on their tables will all turn and say let all leaders make our country equal to all and provide the necesary, like Roads,Health Centers, Education, Water,Promote love not hate or wepons to all kenyans.We are a family who gave birth to Kenya ?? Kenyans
To reproduce your GEMA tribe, you have only two choices.
One, you can choose the path of incest. This is the path of in-breeding and sin. Although shameful, it is the path they chose in 2007 and more clearly in. And the results are obvious: Political incest can only produce mongoloids.This is what you have in the coalition government.
The second choice is the one taken by Gikuyu and Mumbi. They sent their daughters to breed with others. This is how the tribe survived. Your survival, therefore, depends on others; the Maasai, Ndorobo, Luo, Luhya and all.. Gikuyu had two categories of people; the ‘‘ahoi’’ and the ‘‘athomi’’. The ‘‘ahoi’’ were the poor.In rural areas they walk around without shoes, their feet all cracked up. And in urban areas, they are the ‘‘shamba boys’’, the drivers and the cooks. As a driver, he told us he was in the urban group of ‘‘ahoi’’. The ‘‘athomi’’ were the educated and propertied. They were also arrogant, insensitive and ruthless….(How else would leader utter words like join us or perish in a media coverage)
The ‘‘athomi’’ did not think much of the ‘‘ahoi’’. They saw them as slaves of sorts. And this is how you must understand Tribal rich chiefs. Most of you follow him blindly. In fact, because you are in the ‘‘ahoi’’ group, he expects you to.Unfortunately, and together with the ‘‘athomi’’, he dragged you into a state of civil war. They used you. And since the ‘‘athomi’’ are untouchable, you bore the brunt of the violence. Where are your IDPs today? In the meantime, you think the presidency will be yours. Zero. It belongs to the ‘‘athomi’’.Allow me to describe your position as ‘‘ahoi’’ using a story. A man set out on a journey through a thick forest full of thorns and rocks. Suddenly, an elephant appeared and gave him chase. He took off and went to hide in a well. To his horror, he saw a huge snake at the bottom of the well.
He had to cling to a thorny creeper that was growing around it. Looking up, he saw two mice chewing the creeper he was hanging on. But just as he was contemplating his next move, he saw a bee hive next to his mouth. Occasional drops of honey were trickling from the hive. And this man tested the honey. He got confused.Although a kind man offered to help him out of his trouble, he refused. He wanted to be excused until he had enjoyed himself to the full. Not clever. Good people, you are behaving like this man. You have seen a bee hive dripping with honey.And although you are hanging on a thin creeper between an angry elephant and a snake, you don’t care. You want to enjoy the honey, the presidency. Unfortunately, the creeper will snap and you will have to deal with the snake at the bottom of the well. On this, the choice is yours.
The third thought regards Mungiki. When our great grandfather joined Mau Mau, they called it a Mungiki-type movement. Yet it was a group of restless young people whose ‘‘wazees’’ had lost direction. I want to put it to you that you have no leadership. The ‘‘Athomi’’ in your ranks have reached intellectual menopause. And in this state, they have exhibited unnecessary arrogance towards others.As a not so humble Kenyan shareholder tribe, I submit that you need new leadership. A leadership that will cause you to climb down in the interest of the country. One that is not beholden to the ‘‘athomi’’ and one that will respect the other communities………
Let us begin this conversation with the highlighted quote from Odero “Some communities are so entrenched in their cocoons that they will never consider others for the presidency”
Then read “Each and everyone of the communities in Kenya ,a politically correct term for tribes “Let us pause .
So we have “politically correct and others” ,and tribes as the premise of this discourse.
Intellectual bankruptcy manifests itself in such pedestrian euphemisms.
Please follow ,and attempt to emulate the bar set by the comments by O’ngayo,we should be ashamed ,that instead of pursuing such in depth and policy laden ,research based treatises we embark on denigrating those of us who attempt to be part of the solution,
Am part of a community ,not a tribe ,reason The Luo in Kenya are an extention of the Greater Luo in the Diaspora ,from the banks of the Nile in the Sudan ,up to the the desserts of the Sinai till the valleys of the Kush. Little be said ,if “those people” are still struggling to be communities they are welcome ,The bar has been set
A tribe is one that owes its existence to the existence of a larger aboriginal whole ,which is not the case with the Luo in Kenya .We are an extention of a greater Luo people.This converstaion has the potential to be a fully fledged discourse on the current emptiness of of reasonable debate amongst the Kenyan people in Scandinavia
This is the beginning of the grand challenge ,be counted or fall by the wayside.
Ean Wuod Luo
Jared you have hit the nail on the head and I don’t see why This Ethical Kenyan is trying to twist words around.voting patterns in Kenya show that the Kikuyus never vote for other tribes.they are so stuck in their selfishness and believe that the presidency should never go beyond River Chania.
Mapenzi you have described this community in the right way.Their people are so tribal they will never join others.Look at how they reject MaDVD.One would think rejecting Raila was enough but they still won’t accept anybody who is not from Mt Kenya to lead. Ethical Kenya must be one of them for focusing on nonsense in Odero’s article instead of the contents. Kikuyus never vote for others and Uhuruto will never lead Kenya.They belong in Hague.
Musalia will be forced by State House to lead Kenya.
Okuyos will be herded like sheep by Kibaki and Uhuru to vote for Mudavadi because he will protect their interest.kikuyus want an easy going president who they can control.Raila is too serious they will never have him and will fight him to the end.
Railaphobia at work. The alliance of Hague brothers is to make sure that Raila never becomes prezzo. Ethical whoever suffers from the same phobia and wants Raila everywhere even when he should not be mentioned. I like Wuod Luo’s reference to intellectual bankruptcy exhibited by this lot which focuses on parochial matters.
When will African contnent Wake Up?>http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/12/07/276631/sudan-captures-israeli-spy-vulture/
Ethical Kenyan is a psycho-chauvinist Kikuyu.
There is a deliberate and well-orchestrated movement on the internet to vilify certain Kenyan tribes, especially the Kikuyu. And what is the crime these tribes are perceived to have committed? They vote for their leaders and these leaders have short-changed the Kenyan people as a whole. Since each and every tribe in Kenya votes for one of their own, what is so special about the Kikuyu that would cause so much fear and loathing to many Internet commentators? The peasantry and metropolitan Kenyans regardless of ethnicity are suffering due to inept leadership. Many of the current Kikuyu leaders stem from backgrounds of affluence, often pre-independence where their ancestors served their colonial masters as administrators or home guards. However the majority of the Kikuyu populace was trampled underfoot by the colonial boot with help from the collaborators that were not exclusively Kikuyu, but were even drawn from the other major tribes of Kenya. The divide and rule policy employed by the colonialist enlisted the Luo, Nandi (Kalenjin), Kamba exclusively to the African corps of the security forces and used to counter the Mau Mau revolutionary forces. This historical fact is used by the Kikuyu political elite to keep peasant and metropolitan kikuyu in perpetual fear and ensure they vote for this corrupt class. As the saying goes, better the devil you know than the one you do not. To crown all this, the corruption and delinquency of these vampire kikuyu’s is placed squarely on the shoulders of the common kikuyu, largely by the equally down trodden members of the other tribes struggling to free themselves from an elitist scion in their own communities. Unfortunately, the numbers of Kenyans that are truly nationalistic and see through the divide and rule policy exercised by the non-tribal political elite are few in number. Sadly even educated Kenyans have been programed to give in to base tribal sentiment and are basically intellectually bankrupt. They are programed to instinctively shut down mentally and resort to tunnel vision when stimulated psychologically with sentiments of “our man in State House”.
My intention and challenge to Odera was in regard to a balanced article where the prevailing political landscape was analyzed from a nationalistic perspective. None of the communities or tribes in Kenya bears responsibility nor influence the nature of the coalition’s that were formed by the corrupt ruling elite. These greedy politicians are only looking out for themselves regardless of the party they represent and are concerned about preserving their life styles, and those closest to them, for generations to come at the expense of the Kenya people. They stole our birthright at the dawn of independence and continue to do so with impunity. However, there are always those that aspire to join this class and will go to any lengths to aid these corrupt elite, all the while hoodwinking Kenyans on the nature of their patriotism. They are recognizable by the clever manner and stratagem they employ geared at embroiling their brethren in tribal sentiment that serves to keep the status quo as is. They are accomplished lairs and puppeteers driven by the desire to join and wallow in the grandeur life styles of their corrupt heroes. They have sacrificed their morals and decency at the altar of greed and will not hesitate to stoop to any means to achieve their goals.
Ours is a struggle of class and not of tribe, and this battle pitches the Kenyan people and patriots against the political wealthy elite and their minions. The common man or woman in Busia or Moyale is not an impediment to the development of the common man or woman in Nanyuki or Kitui, but there are those that are desperately trying to sell this lie to gain recognition from the ruling class. Kenyans do not be deceived, the corruption and decadence destroying our country is maintained and strengthened by tribalism.
Ethicsl Kenyan, your latest entry is very good, and is what you should have written from the beginning instead of those unnecessary jabs at Odero, who was very contextual. One does not have to write everything within a single text.
I am amazed with Ethical Kenyan who seems like a very bright mind but am like WTF! The person can’t stick to the issue on the table and the latest comments are neither here nor there. Odero coined his thoughts and then Ethical Kenyan digressed to Raila Odinga and soon was all praises to the son of Jomo. Typical Kikuyu swollen ego to always bring in Luo matters when not required. The person is not attempting to hide raw tribalism directing their thinking. C’mon class struggle my ass….tribalism is alive and palpable. I rest my case!
In the link below, Minister Ababu Namwamba explains that tribalism in Kenya is here to stay. Question is, how can we fight it?
Raila: I’ll go after stolen public assets
Fresh from getting his party’s nomination ticket Prime Minister Raila Odinga took the battle to Deputy Prime Minister Musalia Mudavadi’s doorstep with a warning that if elected he would pursue stolen public assets. He directed the warning to unnamed leaders in the Jubilee Coalition whose leading lights are Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta through The National Alliance, Eldoret North MP William Ruto and his United Republican Party, as well as Mudavadi and his United Democratic Front. Addressing a series of campaign rallies in Vihiga County Raila promised that should he be elected, his government’s agenda would be to ensure stolen public resources were returned. He declared that in his presidency members of the Jubilee Alliance should be ready to surrender public property. “It is stated in the Bible, (the book of) Leviticus chapter 25:10 that during the Jubilee year the country would be reborn, all slaves set free and property stolen returned to owners,” he went on to quote. He added: “Jubilee Alliance team should be ready to return all the public resources they acquired illegally”. Raila explained his government would ensure all Kenyan communities get their fair share of the national cake, quoting again from the Bible’s Book of Joshua 18:20. Said Raila: “The battle would be between CORD (Coalition for Reforms and Democracy) and Jubilee… the rest are donkeys.” He claimed Kenyans did not have confidence in some leaders in the Jubilee Alliance because they were to blame for the suffering they were encountering. “Some leaders who were at the forefront flashing red cards to oppose the new Constitution are campaigning on a platform of reform…you should reject them because they are not honest,” said Raila. Raila addressed his supporters at Kima, Ekwanda, Luanda Mwichio, Vihiga, Majengo, Chavakali and Hamisi stadium where he declared his Coalition for Reforms and Democracy would form the next government. – The Standard.
There are large numbers of semi-illiterate Kenyans posting comments all over Internet sites, an excellent example is Mariwa who comments about issues I never raised. The fellow is completely off course, perhaps thinking that commenting on a blog is proof of intelligence. Sample this:
– The person can’t stick to the issue on the table and the latest comments are neither here nor there.
(I think I made my position very clear which is an article on the political landscape in Kenya today can only be fair and balanced if an analysis of all coalitions and what they represent is made)
– Then Ethical Kenyan digressed to Raila Odinga and soon was all praises to the son of Jomo.
(I did not digress to Raila, but questioned his absence in the article since he is a key player. Where did I praise Uhuru in all my comments? Only a moron could conclude as such)
– The person is not attempting to hide raw tribalism directing their thinking.
(This semi-illiterate is of the opinion because I questioned the coverage of only one coalition this translates to tribalism or some kind of Luo-phobia. Again, only a moron could conclude as such)
– Typical Kikuyu swollen ego to always bring in Luo matters when not required.
(The idiot assumes I am a Kikuyu, exposing the underlying hatred for Kikuyus as the driving force behind their comment)
– Class struggle my ass, tribalism is alive and palpable.
(Did I state that tribalism was not alive or palpable in any of my comments? My whole argument is that tribalism is one of the avenues used in the divisive politics in Kenya. Mariwa seems incapable of deciphering the simplest of ideas)
Mariwa concludes his vitriol with the phrase, I rest my case. There was never a case to begin with and the phrase is a poor attempt at appearing knowledgeable. There is no doubt that Mariwa is incapable of even writing an application for employment let alone correct others. I highly recommend Adult educational classes for the likes of Mariwa, since the will to engage in discussion exists, and is commendable, to attain basic fundamentals required in the achievement of logical reasoning.
Mariwa needs to be educated on the fact that members of the wealthy political elite have no interest in the eradication of tribalism. The video posted about Minister Ababu Namwamba thoughts in the subject are meant to confuse and placate Kenyans in this respect. This man owes his position in society to tribalism and is a direct beneficiary of the rotten system, just like all his colleagues regardless of tribal affiliation. He has nothing in common, be it aspirations, hopes or desires, with the common Kenyan. Kenyans that would view him as a person with a positive message can be categorized in the following groups: From his tribe and tribe rules the day, every day; Wannabe recruits to the Kenyan bourgeoisie’s class; A member of this parasitic bourgeoisie’s class; Someone gullible and out of touch with reality.
Which group do you belong to Mariwa?
I have nothing against my Kenyan brethren and I do not care whether they were born in Nyanza, Western, Central, Eastern, North-Eastern or Coastal Kenya. They are Kenyans and deserve to partake of the riches that our country produces and provides. But I take great exception to the wealthy and politically powerful section of Kenyans that lives off the common man, and think that this is the natural order of things. Kenyan will have back their birthright, no matter how long it takes. These parasitic classes of thieves, lairs, murderers and plunderers, their collaborators and foreign allies have been put on notice. We are coming!
Ethical Kenyan, you digressed right from your first response by intentionally bringing in Raila Odinga into a topic that was very specific to the discussed politicians. You were challenged to discuss his tribal ills which you never did. It is useless replying you because you are just too full of yourself and try to steer comments to suit your ego. Keep it up! You want this to turn into a battle of insults, but you ain’t getting none.
try to avoid politics when I can. But when we talk about national development (a topic I am most passionate about) somehow politics has to sneak its way. And if we talk about politics, then tribalism walks in slowly, rears its ugly head and divides the debaters.
The Kikuyu in me has become idiosyncratic I fear. I tend to defend any ills committed by a Kikuyu. In fact I could give you a million excuses of why that Kikuyu had to do what it had to do. When we were presented with a half baked constitution, devoid of merit and outrightly substandard I defended it the way a mother whose kid has been accused of stealing the neighbours mangoes would. Not because everybody who voted against it did it because of the reasons listed above.
We coined sayings like The house of Mumbi and proceeded to declare that it was under threat. For some strange reason Kikuyus have a superiority complex. The pride you feel when you read a John Grisham or a Sidney Sheldon and read about the Kikuyus of Kenya. The Kikuyu in me has refused to die. That is the pride called “before a fall”. We also say “Kikuyus have saved this country.
History has favoured my tribesmen/women and so has climate. My father calls everyone a “kabila”, is also Luophobic.
In due course they were handed a humble pie. So we figured a way to eat the pie humbly in the most pompous and callous manner. Sack them! You could almost hear the chorus. And the big man for once gave in the pressure to sack and sack he did.
The country sunk into deeper problems that it was before. In almost 2 weeks prices of commodities had gone up by 30%, there was famine in the country, there was a shortage of registration forms and it has been established one cannot replace an ID for the next 6 months. Someone has declared there is a person in Nairobi who has sinned as the rains keep giving us a wide berth.
We cannot blame a Kikuyu for just like everyone else he thinks as a Kikuyu first then as a person.
It is with this background in tribalism that we must ponder if we are willing to let this country go to the dogs just because we will not sacrifice our own.
Just in the morning, I was listening to a local fm station whereby it is too obvious that our ministers are handing some folks resignations and awarding their tribesmen posts.
Kulundu could be heard defending Lumbaso “she is not my sister…” The fact that she is a Luhya was something Kulundu should have thought about before the appointment. Isn’t also sinister that his brother Kulundu Bitonye is the Principal of Kenya School of Law now?
Then there is Kivutha Kibwana a Law Professor and currently the Minister of Environment who has just replaced Professor Michieka with a Dr. Mwinzi his own tribesman.
Henry Obwocha the now acting Minister for Planning has appointed a Kisii (whose name I am unable to write) to the Kenya Ports Authority.
We cannot avoid tribalism, it is what defines a particular people. I am a Kikuyu, I am a Maasai,.that is Kenyan. When tribalism will fly out of the window, individualism will set in or a class social order as it is in the America.
But how do we avoid letting this tribalism sink us into deeper problems than we are already in. Does it count that if all the people I think are qualified are my tribesmen do I out rightly become a tribalist? Americans seem to have allowed a class of persons to rule them as has the Britons. Kenyans cannot allow a small group of people read tribe to rule them!
I have studied in various colleges since I left High School. I have established the proprietors of the certain college. It has always shocked me that the tribe of a proprietor always reflects our lecturers. If the owner is a Kikuyu, about 75% of the lecturers will be Kikuyus and so forth.
So why do Kenyans all over sudden imagine that a person who has been working with his tribesmen all his life will now become too accommodative to other tribes. It is all in the social setting.
A person growing up in Kisumu will probably attend Kisumu Boys and then set out for Maseno University where he will only have associated with his tribesmen throughout the time.
To get rid of tribalism we will have to do more than shout from the rooftops of how our leaders are tribal. The past regime was tribal, this one is tribal and the next one will be.
We will need to get rid of the quota system that resigns provincial schools from admitting persons from outside their province district. About 75% of the schools only admit students joining the school only from their district.
We could also ban mother tongue from being a language of instruction in the village schools.
Granted, majority of Kenyans reside in the rural areas, and from these rural areas do you find our most leaders coming from.
The problem of tribalism is not going to die away soon. We better admit. We have grown up being a certain tribe and just like the mzungu took a long time to admit a person can be black so does tribalism work.
Disclaimer : I am not tribal.I do not condone tribalism.
Girl in the Meadow: 2006
Reports reaching my desk indicate that kikuyu men have become the punching bags for their wives all over Central Kenya.
Whilst one may naturally feel obliged to sympathize with these men, a quick dose of common sense prohibits such feelings.
The reasons for this sad line of affairs are deeper than what is publicly known. To objectively analyze this strange phenomenon, one must invoke into the discussions several constants prevalent amongst all kikuyu men and women:
a) Kikuyu men are inherently obsessed with making money and such personal decisions such as marrying are made casually over beer in smoke filled dens. For as long as a certain ‘njeri kiarie’ says yes to ‘kamau njoroge’, the latter will quickly organize tribal ceremonies and quickly get married. What these men don’t realize is that in most cases they get married to hardened, conniving, rough , barbaric and frigid women. What they don’t realize is that the seemingly ‘innocent’ Njeri Kiaries they get married to are nothing more than fraudulent charlatans who come to the marriage institution with only one aim: to sit down and watch money roll in, courtesy of the hard work from their husbands.
b) When the scenario in a) above doesn’t happen, these women begin accumulating dangerous acrimony against their husbands, wondering how their erstwhile hardworking husbands aren’t raking enough wealth to support their anticipated luxurious living. Sooner than later, the bitterness explodes.
c) When the bitterness in b) above explodes, most likely the unfortunate husband will arrive home late and excessively drunk with Yokozuna-kumi kumi and other cheap poison. Needless to say he will be reduced to a smoldering pulp.
Against these constants, is the grim reality: whenever a tribe worships money and women enter the marriage institution expecting his husband will turn into a Chris Kirubi overnight, a recipe for disaster is perfectly brewed. Again, whenever men turn themselves into cabbage (due to alcohol) without realizing they are married to conniving and wealth-impatient fortune hunters, they should be ready to face the consequences. Kikuyu men have become physically weak due to their incessant love for alcohol. They are an easy target for their violence loving wives.
kikuyu ruling class is useless.Thousands of fellow kikuyu are living in IDP Tents yet they don’t give a damn about the poor njeri or wanjiku in a tent. Uhuru kenyatta sits on a half a billion dollars fortune largely gotten when his father pushed out fellow kikuyus from their ancestral land and into nandi land.Kenyattas own the biggest land in Kenya yet Uhuru whos is the political face of the family is not doing a damn thing for his people suffering as IDPS. WHAT A SHAME!
Uhuru spent 16 million dollars to hire white British lawyers to repair his rotten public image.
@Mariwa, you are still fumbling in the dark. Stay there if it suits you.
@ngaleo, your comment stereotyping kikuyus is pathetic. Only a numbskull would believe and reproduce that kind of tripe, not considering it is just as easy to stereotype any other tribe including yours with even filthier connotations.
@Kenyan bimbo, a very thought provoking perspective. However, how do you explain the metropolitan phenomenon where young people seem to bond with each other regardless of tribe? In the suburbs of Kenyan cities like Nairobi Eastlands, the youth mix and mingle with apparent disregard to ethnicity. Unfortunately, this changes and tribalism sets in when they gain employment and to existing standards. Even those from well to do or wealthy families seem to discard tribalism, intermarriage is common in these circles without the bile associated with tribal bias. Fidel Raila’s son first wife was from the Kenyatta’s family (regardless of how that turned out and is another debate) but the diehard kikuyu’s and jaluo’s seem to have missed the occasion as they were and are very conspicuously silent about this joyous occasion. One wonders why insults and frothing at the mouth did not feature anywhere. At district level, the picture changes drastically. Here interactions and associations are purely tribal and can even disintegrate to the clan level, hence the coining of the phrase, “Ushamba” by those in the cities. Ushamba meaning uncivilized buffoons, especially since tribe affiliation can never be an indication of achievement or advancement anywhere in the world.
If I were a luyha and Mudavadi were to become president, would it follow that I had achieved or advanced in my life? Would I call my friends at home and abroad to boast of the news saying that ‘we’ had landed in State House? Reminds me of the celebrations in Nyanza when Obama became president and was elected for the second term. This was an honor for his family, but what did the rest of the fellows jumping up and down think would happen in their lives? Obama is an American and his sympathies beyond that of his family extend only to US citizens. Kibaki may be a Kikuyu, but his sympathies beyond that of his family extend only to his friends and allies. The same goes for Mudavadi, Uhuru, Raila, Ruto and the other politicians you are busy fighting tooth and nail for. You will still lack the basic necessities that have been chartered by the UN as a human right even with your man in State House, unless of course one of your next of kin is counted amongst or close to the bandits that have political and monetary power in Kenya.
‘I could never understand ethnic or national pride. Because to me, pride should be reserved for something you achieve or attain on your own, not something that happens by accident of birth. Being Irish isn’t a skill; it’s a fucking genetic accident. You wouldn’t say “I’m proud to be 5’11”. I’m proud to have a predisposition for colon cancer.” So why the fuck would you be proud to be Irish, or proud to be Italian, or American or anything?’ George Carlin
‘My mom and dad refused to believe that people who had grown up together in peace and friendship, had gone to the same schools, spoken the same language, and listened to the same music, could overnight be blinded by ethnic hatred and start to brutally kill one another. They simply didn’t accept as true that less than two years of a multiparty system and competition for power could poison people’s brains so much.’ Savo Heleta
‘There are large numbers of people who simply don’t have the values and vision necessary to be part of an inter-dependent world. They think their differences, whether religious, political, tribal or ethnic, are more important than our common humanity. They believe the truth they have justifies their imposition of that truth on other people, even if it takes them to the death of innocents.’ Bill Clinton
‘Because we believe that our ethnic group, our society, our political party, our God, is better than your God, we kill each other.’ Neale Donald Walsch
There’s nothing to learn from a dog like Fidel whose marriage to a Kikuyu woman was clearly for political convenience. Kenyans are smarter than what Ethical Kenyan is busy portraying. Who really takes seriously an exercise of musings to while away time?
Latino Turkanas Just Enjoy yourself>
Hi ,serious ,and this has been.So tufanyaje ,when what has been expressed is being first denied ,then twisted ,and finally accepted .Man Wajadhe tuko mbele,hata kama wana tuonyesha hizo madharau ,bado tume poa ,na tuna washow ati akili zetu ziko ridho.
Its like Henry Louis Mencken said”Democracy is a form of religion.It is the worship of jackals by jackasses”1880-1950.
And as usual am a mjaluo very established as one .”wangni wadino nu”Either you study Dholuo or you just simply say “but do i say”
Ean Wuod Luo
The Inadequacy of Kenya’s Coalition Law
Posted on December 3, 2012 by LONE FELIX
“While Kenyan politics completely lacks any ideological deviation, and it would have been thought that such would facilitate easy cooperation, individual egos are central to political quest that attempting to build a lasting coalition is like attempting to standardize personal interests.”
The Kenya Constitution 2010, immaculately promulgated on the 27th August 2010 was a culmination of a two decade struggle heavily informed by a quest for good governance. Indeed, a bulk of provisions in the constitution targeted to curb imperfections in our past systems.
The Constitution dedicated a great deal of effort in attempting to provide a streamlined structure that was meant to reshape our political and governance mechanisms. Consequently it has provisions on matters of integrity, representation and party disciplines.
A new injection in the Kenyan Political landscape is the requirement in the Constitution that a winning Presidential candidate must obtain fifty plus one percent of cast votes and an additional requirement of at last 25% of votes in more than half the counties.
This requirements coupled with current political realities have fueled talk of political coalitions in the country. Indeed, cooperative politics is not an entirely new concept in Kenya. In 1964 the first political merger in Kenya occurred between KANU and KADU. This was indeed a tougher merger in my opinion since there was a clear ideology and constituency difference between the two. KADU sought federalism while KANU advocated for a unitary state. KADU drew its support from communities eclipsed by the major ones in KANU. Equally, in the post independent politics, politicians seem to have had clear opinions on the path the nation should take.
There have been subsequent cooperation, some amphibious and incapable of being classified as either coalitions or mergers. The uniqueness of our cooperative politics is not the only peculiar thing, but some of these unities have brought together truly strange bedfellows. For instance, after 1997, it was unimaginable that Raila Odinga’s NDP could merge with KANU with the shadow of suspicion looming in the past. NARC was a merger of various political parties and so was PNU.
Then there is the reality of the Grand Coalition Government whose term will come to an end in 2013. I am incapable of discerning whether it is a coalition from any sense whatsoever or union unique to our Kenyan circumstances.
Several political coalitions are rumored to be in the offing. Yesterday, Munyori Buku, Uhuru Kenyatta’s Spokesperson intimated that a ‘deal’ had been finalized between TNA and URP. While the statement was later hurriedly rescinded, it is not lost on observers that URP merely wanted to make the announcement a juicy affair.
On other frontiers, the Wiper Democratic Movement and the United Democratic front has also been engaged in negotiations. ODM and the Wiper party representatives have also met and deliberated.
While these deliberations are fine, and in a way welcome to avoid polarity in our politics, The Country has to interrogate the frameworks, legal and otherwise within which the coalitions are being concluded.
In particular, there are serious questions as to the implication of these pacts on, the stability of consequent government, other laws inclusive of the Constitution and the guarantee to respective Coalition partners.
Apparently, informed by the dishonored pact between NARC bigwigs, the drafters of The Political Parties Act 2011 provided in Article 10 that political parties may form a Coalition either before or after the election. The coalition agreement must be deposited by the Registrar of the political parties at least three months before the election or 21 days after the signing if it is an after election pact.
The Act also contemplates political mergers but this option is not viable as a merger would necessarily dissolve the individual parties necessitating the lengthy registration requirements.
While the depositing of the pacts with the registrar is intended to give some sort of legitimacy to the agreement, there are extensive deficiencies in the law and practice of coalition building in Kenya.
These deficiencies include: Enforcement mechanisms, Implication on other laws of the country and regard to political realities around the touted coalition building.
The Enforcement Mechanism:
This is necessary to assure the confidence of the partners, assure the stability of the consequent government and the general political stability in the country.
The mechanisms contemplated in the law include the fact that the coalition agreement shall be deposited with the registrar of the political parties and The Political Parties Dispute Tribunal established under article 39 of The Political Parties Act.
The tribunal is a quasi judicial body with members appointed by the Judicial Service Commission. The members are a chair, required to have such qualifications as a High Judge and four other advocates of the High Court all serving on a part time basis.
As such, the resolution mechanism is temporary, perhaps so proposed with an assumption that political wrangles cannot be in existent all year round.
The Tribunal however is only secondary to internal party dispute resolution mechanism. The Tribunal is empowered to determine disputes between members of a political party, between a member and a party, between political parties, coalition parties and appeals from decisions of the registrar.
Appeals shall lie from the decision of the Tribunal to the High Court on points of law and facts and on points of law to both the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court.
The enabling statute fails to give the exact reliefs that the tribunal may render. Perhaps, this is since relief in political disagreement is rather indeterminate.
The reality of practical politics makes the tribunal but a mediation committee. I am unable to foresee any possibility that the tribunal can make a determination adverse to the interest of one party, say in a coalition and have that determination respected.
This is since, perhaps unlike in contract law, where parties have determinate obligations mutually agreed and enforceable, political pacts are based on interest and change of interest will necessarily mean change of terms of engagement.
Being an association of trust, the tribunal lacks a logical mandate to ‘determine’. And if it does, it lacks a mechanism to ensure that its determination is upheld.
For instance, if a Coalition partner was to sue claiming that their share of positions have not been met, and in the opinion of the tribunal indeed that pre-agreed has not been met, and the tribunal issues an order that it be met, and the coalition partner refuses to meet that share, what would follow.
The law provides that such orders be enforced like court orders, but I am unable to imagine a party official being arrested that as a coalition partner it has not given the agreed share to its colleague.
While someone else would argue that in such a scenario the parties would find recourse in political tact such as non cooperation, what happens if the other parties in parliament support the wronging partner? This leaves the affected partner without any assured security.
The appeal process suggests that partners may seek redress in courts. This provides dual risks. While the litigation progresses, government programs may be ground and the major risk is the politicization of the court system.
Political feuds should rarely find their way into courts if public confidence in the judicial system is to be found.
In democracies that have had successful coalition building, recourse mechanisms heavily lie in the internal party organs.
While indeed comparing a country like Kenya and say Germany provides real difficult, a firm internal structure, respected by all partners would be the only sure guarantee. In other words, a political disagreement can only be resolved effectively by an agreement between disagreeing partners and not directives of an external tribunal.
The political culture in Kenya does not offer any reason to the fact that parties can build such capacity. Let us regard TNA and URP for instance, the parties themselves are infant barely with recognizable structures. They neither have elected officials, or for that matter officials who command member respect.
I wonder whether Ole Kaparo can sit down with Sakaja to solve a party dispute. This lack of internal instruments poses a truly great risk.
Interestingly, The Law actually requires the parties themselves to determine the procedure of appeal to the tribunal. This would mean that all parties would have to agree that they are incapable of resolving the problem. What happens if one party feels so and the other contests otherwise?
Would it have been prudent for the law to determine when a dispute shall be seen as incapable of being resolved by party mechanisms to avoid the possibility of deliberate delay by one partner.
Implication on Other Laws
The effect of coalition would be to foster cooperation, in our case I content that the main aim of the coalition building is to obtain political power.
The law but states that political agreement shall be deposited with the registrar of political parties; this is an extra ordinary assumptive provision.
It assumes that the agreement as drafted shall be in compliance of all law and legal provision. The law does not require the Registrar to interrogate the provisions of the agreement; it does not require disclosure of the contents of the agreement nor does it state what happens if the contents conflict or develop a law.
For example after the 2005 referendum, calendars in the country displayed speculative position sharing agreements. Some of the agreements showed two deputy presidents, two deputy prime ministers and what have you.
This never materialized, but what happens if such a scenario plays out in the current situation. The Constitution contemplates only a single position of a deputy president, what if in the seclusion of the agreement, partners agreed to create a second position of a person designated deputy president.
I do not see any law that contemplates such a situation, would the MOU be capable of restructuring legally established government structures? Would it be necessary that such an MOU be given a force law through an act of parliament? Would it be blindly adopted?
The Political Parties Act requires that the agreement indicate modes of coalition dissolution. This is indeed true, but what would be the effect of that dissolution on the Presidency for instance? What happens if the parties say that dissolution of the coalition means dissolution of government?
Neither does the constitution nor any other law contemplate exit of a president through such a mechanism.
Consider the National Accord that establishes the current government, it was entrenched in the constitution with effect that dissolution of coalition means dissolution of government.
These coalition provisions also assume a lasting internal party harmony. What would be the effect, if a political party suspends its head who for instance is a deputy president and claim his removal from office, or seek their substitution because it is essentially a coalition of parties and not individual candidates?
There needed to be clear legal provisions beyond coalition agreements. In Germany for instance, coalitions notwithstanding, it requires a vote of no confidence, only by the Bundestag to replace the chancellor.
Political Realities
Successful coalitions would ideally be built around policy issues as this is much a longer goal than the need to acquire power.
For instance, the World Bank lists Kenya’s Water Sector reforms as one of the most successful coalitions in the entire world. According to the World Bank, “Because of a clear focus on the major issues in the country’s water sector, the political momentum created with the incoming government in 2003, and the renewed interest in water by the government’s development partners, a coalition coalesced around reforms.
The above illustrates the need for a consultative, well thought process. In the case of a political pact, in the Kenyan scenario, the main stakeholders would be the electorate and their attending interest.
The reality of our politics is that constituencies are pawns in political bargains, rarely is there true regard to varied interest.
While Kenyan politics completely lacks any ideological deviation, and it would have been thought that such would facilitate easy cooperation, individual egos are central to political quest that attempting to build a lasting coalition is like attempting to standardize personal interests.
We can safely assume that policy as a matter of grounds for Kenyan cooperative politics is nonexistent. And we remain with the fact of power balance.
While in the drafts that will be deposited at the Registrar’s desk there is likelihood of beautifully curved policies, the key thing is position haring.
One thing is clear though; there is only one assured position; that of Deputy President. The other positions are speculative, out of effective control of cooperating partners. Would failure of delivering such positions as speaker, majority leader be a breach of the coalition?
A position such as speaker is dependent on individual members of parliament casting votes in secrete. It is impossible to assure that elected MPs, some unknown to party leaders, some in parties for convenience rather than principle would remain faithful to these pacts.
And by the way, giving binding oaths is illegal in Kenya.
We need to serious think about these realities as a nation if we are at any chance anticipating a stable political environment.
Enduring clash of ideologies in Kenyan elections
By M Wachira
Posted Tuesday, April 16 2013 at 19:18
Most analyses of Kenya’s contemporary political landscape present voting patterns and coalitions such as Cord and Jubilee as largely driven by ethnic solidarity and the desire to build winning majorities.
But is it possible that we run to our ethnic enclaves whenever we vote so as to protect not so much the “tribe”, but other fundamental things?
I suggest that we run to our “tribal” enclaves at election time to protect two visions that are clearly etched in the minds of many Kenyans and have existed since our independence.
With every election, the outlines and contours of these visions become more vivid. Eventually, the visions themselves will be stated in our discourse.
There will no longer be any need for voters to take refuge in ethnic enclaves and politicians will not need to appeal to “tribal” loyalties. Instead, both voters and politicians will go straight to the issues.
But what are the visions we seek to protect when we run to our ethnic enclaves?
The first vision: This is shared by Kenyans who see capitalism or private enterprise as the key to realising the dreams of the average Kenyan.
Those who subscribe to this vision see the right to engage in private enterprise and self-reliance as central to Kenya’s creed, uhuru. This wing of politicians and ordinary Kenyans frowns upon reliance on the Government or waiting for the services of the public sector.
Giving people things without demanding work or effort in exchange is like robbing the recipients of the very drive that creates progress and development.
Statements such as “People do not cherish anything free” or “nothing is really free because somebody, somewhere ultimately pays” feature in casual conversations among holders of this vision.
To this group, certain rules must be accepted so as to release the vitality of Kenyans. Among these is the willing-seller-willing-buyer rule, as well as the rule with probably the farthest-reaching consequences: the right of all Kenyans to own property and invest anywhere in Kenya without regard to ancestral right, guided only by market forces.
These rules have far-reaching implications because they threaten to break the link between territory-language-ethnicity, thereby erasing “tribe” as a meaningful analytical category.
Under these rules, a Kenyan from Mandera is invited to invest in Kisii; a business person from Vihiga is welcome to set his or her roots in Malindi or Narok with the assurance that such an activity is both sanctioned and encouraged by the State. As people set roots outside their ancestral parts of the country, it will take perhaps two generations to weaken the link between territory, ethnicity, and language.
For those who subscribe to this vision of a capitalism-driven country, the resulting ethnically homogenised society is welcome. It is the brave new Kenya.
For others, it is a frightening society with no norms. In general, there is a close correlation between support for this vision and segments of the population or parts of the country where capitalism or private enterprise has taken root. Conversely, the vision is weak where the roots of capitalism are tenuous.
The Kibaki years have been the most unapologetic expression of this vision. Securing both individual well being and sovereignty through hard work and robust fiscal policies that enable the country to provide access to education and health services to all, entrenching local governance through measures such as Community Development Fund, establishing industrial parks throughout Kenya and all other hopes and aspirations captured in Vision 2030, or working round the clock to raise productivity, are all based on accepting the legitimacy of capitalism, a market system, and pragmatism as the path to development.
In external relations and trade, this vision supports inviting venture capital confident that Kenya can manage the risks, minimising entanglements in issues that are of no direct concern to Kenya and seeking out new development partners whose inputs are not only financially less expensive, but come with minimal social and political agendas attached.
This is our first vision which has existed since our founders first outlined the Kenya they
wanted.
The second vision: It causes us to take cover in our ethnic enclaves and is predicated on two concerns that have challenged Kenya’s nationalism since it first emerged. First is the concern that a market-based economy or capitalism legitimises colonial era inequities, and, unlike socialism, will trap most Kenyans in perpetual poverty; Second, the concern that one or a few ethnic groups will monopolise access to and use of resources.
The first fear, the tension between capitalism and socialism, was seemingly modulated in the landmark Sessional Paper No. 10 of 1965 but actually lingered on in the form of acrimonious exchanges among Jomo Kenyatta, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga and Bildad Kaggia culminating in a parting of ways in or around 1969 when a market-based economy was imposed.
Socialism was relegated to the sidelines from where it has grumbled steadily over the years as an undertone in the 20-year epic of the Constitutional Reform movement, the Referendum, and Devolution; as a driving force of the antecedents of the Orange Democratic Movement; as a vehicle for the grievances that were vented in the 2007-2008 post-election violence; as the popular platform for intellectual, academic and political commentary.
The second fear has taken on different identities over the years — KADU, majimboism, regionalism, parts of constitutional reform or devolution – but the theme that uhuru, Kenya’s national creed, is faulty because it does not protect equal access to resources for all, has been constant.
The many political parties and formations that have appeared over the last 50 years and ultimately led to the Orange Democratic Movement have been the faithful platform for the second vision.
The competition between these two visions is the key to much of Kenya’s post-independence political economy including our periodic elections. In time, perhaps our analysts will go beyond pointing out, for instance, that after the most recent election the country is divided “mostly along ethnic lines” and they will interrogate the average voter a little more closely.
The average Kenyan voter is quite sophisticated and can go beyond “tribal” analysis to state reasons that are unrelated to ethnic solidarity for voting for or against particular candidates or coalitions.
Ethnicity does not wholly explain our voting patterns. More to the point: it camouflages the real reasons why Kenyans vote the way they do.
Dr Wachira is a former World Bank economist and a consultant based in Washington.