The ridicule directed at Dr. Oburu Oginga following his appointment to lead ODM is not merely political criticism—it is a profound cultural misreading. Those who reduce his leadership to a crude arithmetic of years expose not Oburu’s weakness, but their own intellectual shallowness. Age, within Luo society, is not an administrative inconvenience. It is a repository of memory, judgment, continuity, and legitimacy. To insult an elder is not to injure the individual alone; it is to strike at the architecture of African cultural order itself.
Yet Oburu Odinga’s appointment cannot be lazily dismissed as cultural sentimentality. It was neither automatic nor ceremonial inheritance. It was a rational political act grounded in proximity to power, institutional memory, and strategic continuity. Oburu was not elevated solely because he is Raila Odinga’s elder brother in the biological sense. He was elevated because he was Raila’s political elder—his advisor, confidant, and stabilizing constant through decades of ideological struggle, betrayal, negotiation, and reinvention.
Ida Odinga herself affirmed that Raila consulted Oburu on critical decisions, including ODM’s entry into the broad-based government. This fact alone annihilates the argument that Oburu is an outsider to ODM’s strategic core. He is not an observer of ODM’s political evolution. He is one of its architects.
The Elder As The Custodian Of Political Memory And Legitimacy
Within Luo culture, elders are not ornamental relics. They are custodians of continuity. The Luo Council of Elders’ symbolic coronation of Oburu Odinga was not an empty ritual. Symbolism, within African political psychology, is itself a form of authority. It signals consensus, continuity, and legitimacy.
The African proverb declares: an old man sitting on a stool under a tree sees further than a youth on a branch on top of a tree. This is not metaphorical poetry. It is empirical political wisdom. Elders see patterns invisible to those intoxicated by immediacy. They remember betrayals others have forgotten. They recognize traps disguised as opportunity. They can see actions and predict consequences.
Oburu’s public warnings during moments of existential political danger—including his unequivocal warning to President Ruto against harming Raila during the volatile post-2022 election period—demonstrated precisely this function. He spoke when others hesitated. He articulated danger when others cloaked themselves in caution.
No one outside Raila’s immediate domestic and familial sphere can credibly claim superior knowledge of Raila’s political thinking. Not allies. Not rivals. Not opportunists masquerading as inheritors. Oburu and Ida Odinga occupy a category of political credibility that cannot be manufactured through proximity to microphones or crowds. To undermine Oburu’s leadership is therefore to undermine ODM’s political continuity and African/Luo culture itself.
Age Is Not A Disqualification: Global Power Is Filled With Elder Statesmen
The argument that Oburu Odinga is “too old” collapses immediately when confronted with empirical political reality. Mahathir Mohamad governed Malaysia at 92. Hastings Banda ruled Malawi into his 90s. Shimon Peres led Israel at 90. Robert Mugabe governed Zimbabwe into his tenth decade. Paul Biya continues to rule Cameroon into his 90s. Joe Biden governed the United States past 80, not to mention Fidel Castro of Cuba, Deng Xiaoping of China, and Nelson Mandela, who remained a stabilizing authority in South Africa at 81. Oburu Odinga is 82. What, then, is the big deal?
Age did not disqualify Mahathir from dismantling entrenched political monopolies. At 90 years old, age did not prevent Peres from shaping Israel’s global posture. Age did not prevent Biden from commanding the most complex state machinery in human history. A leader is never alone. Leadership is not measured by muscular endurance. It is measured by judgment, legitimacy, and the capacity to stabilize power structures during periods of crises or transition.
Oburu is not leading ODM because he is the youngest, loudest, or most theatrically energetic. He is leading ODM because ODM, following Raila Odinga’s passing, required stabilization—not experimentation. It requires continuity—not disruption. Even within the Luo household, the presence of the grandfather is not valued because of his physical productivity. It is valued because of what he represents: continuity, authority, and protection against chaos. To insult such a figure is not bravery. It is cultural illiteracy masquerading as political critique.
Oburu Odinga As The Bridge Between ODM Power And The Future Of The Kenyan State
Dr. Oburu Odinga’s leadership must be understood not as a terminal appointment, but as a transitional command—a bridge between legacy and future power consolidation. His authority stabilizes ODM at its most vulnerable moment and preserves Luo bargaining power within the architecture of the Kenyan state. Without such stabilization, political fragmentation would weaken Luo’s influence precisely when strategic clarity is most required.
His role ensures that Luo political capital remains intact, organized, and positioned within government structures where real decisions are made. He embodies continuity between Raila’s historical struggle and the emerging generation that will inherit ODM’s machinery. Power does not reward disorder. It rewards continuity, discipline, and legitimacy. Oburu Odinga provides all three.
Through him, the Luo nation and the entire national ODM fraternity do not retreat from power. It reorganizes, recalibrates, and prepares for deeper integration into Kenya’s governing structure—now and in the decisive political contests yet to come. Like any political party, as Dr. Oburu has articulated, ODM wants power. That is why Oburu’s critics should take a deep breath and accord the old man the respect he deserves.
Okoth Osewe
About the Author
