A Political Kenya: Latest Politics and Kenya Economy News

Raila Odinga is a happy man.

On Sunday, he went to the beach and was pictured on the front page of Kenya’s leading newspaper, The Daily Nation, lounging by the waves, wearing shorts and argyle socks.

On Monday, as he polished off a bowl of vegetable soup and sautéed fish at the Nairobi Club, he seemed relaxed, chatty and upbeat — for the first time in weeks.

“Better half a loaf than no bread,” Mr. Odinga said of a power-sharing agreement struck on Thursday that marries his political party to his rivals in the Kenyan government.

Mr. Odinga, 63, is Kenya’s top opposition leader, and his decision to drop his claim to Kenya’s presidency — which he says he rightly won — and to accept the newly created position of prime minister has helped pull this country back from the brink of chaos.

Last week, the governing party agreed to form a coalition government with Mr. Odinga’s party, a breakthrough in a dangerous political crisis that erupted in December with a flawed presidential election. The incumbent, Mwai Kibaki, was declared the winner, despite widespread evidence of vote rigging.

The election set off weeks of bloodshed, destruction and ethnic balkanization, which for a moment put Kenya’s future in doubt.

The political violence has mostly calmed down, though on Sunday night more than 10 people were killed in western Kenya in clashes over contested land. Mr. Odinga, in an interview on Monday, credited the unstinting pressure by the European Union and the United States government with forcing Mr. Kibaki to compromise.

“They knew the game was up,” Mr. Odinga said, referring to Mr. Kibaki’s side, which had insisted for weeks that it would not share power with the opposition, but finally conceded to just about all of Mr. Odinga’s demands except for the presidency.

Mr. Odinga said Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had been especially influential — and tough. She visited Kenya last month, and by the accounts of Mr. Odinga and others with knowledge of her meetings, she spoke sternly to Kenya’s president, telling him that his plan to prevent Mr. Odinga’s team from getting any real power was “unacceptable.”

People close to Mr. Kibaki have conceded that the foreign pressure had played a role in Mr. Kibaki’s about-face, especially from donor nations like the United States, which has provided Kenya with more than half a billion dollars of aid each year. And, Mr. Odinga says, that pressure must continue.

“We’re still at a very critical stage,” he said.

The next step is for Parliament to ratify the political agreement signed by Mr. Odinga and Mr. Kibaki. There are many questions to sort through, like how the government will function with essentially two bosses and what will happen to the vice president, a position that now seems to be eclipsed by that of the prime minister. Parliament is to meet Thursday.

But the biggest question seems to be how Mr. Odinga and Mr. Kibaki will get along. The two teamed up in 2002, when Mr. Kibaki won his first term as president. But they soon had a bitter falling-out.

Mr. Odinga said he had no problem working with Mr. Kibaki. He said his only potential problem was “the clique around him.” He said the clique could persuade some Parliament members to skip the vote on the power-sharing agreement.

The agreement needs a two-thirds majority to be put into Kenya’s Constitution through an amendment. So far, Mr. Kibaki’s political allies have said that they will support the agreement, though some have continued to grumble about its ramifications.

Mr. Odinga seems cautiously optimistic. He spoke Monday of the ministries his party wanted to take over, including finance and internal security, and how he planned to provide better housing to improve conditions in Kenya’s slums, which had been incubators of violence during the election crisis.

He also said that he was excited about the American presidential race, and that he was rooting for Barack Obama, who is half Kenyan and whose father was Luo, Mr. Odinga’s ethnic group.

Luos have felt marginalized for years. There is an old joke in Kenya that has caused a lot of chuckles lately, that a Luo will be president of the United States before being president of Kenya.

“We beat them to it,” Mr. Odinga said, laughing so hard that his eyes watered. “I just wasn’t sworn in.”

How is the grand coalition likely to impact on Government spending? We must hope that it will not lead to bigger government.

Already,we are spending a dispropportionate share of tax revenues on the political sector and related institutions.

If you scrutinise the expenditure patterns of the Government closely-the picture is that of a country that devotes a dispropportinate shares of its taxes on administration and wages at the expense of provision of services .

The capital expenditure budget is still way below the reccurrent budget- a sign that we are spending more on managing and circulating existing wealth- than on creating and building new assets.

Today, the salaries we pay our MPs are well above those in neighbouring countries , or developed countries such as the US, the UK,or Norway.

Implemented well, this grand coalition experiment we are trying may provide the opportunity to restructure government,reduce the number of ministries and re organise the Government around a few core functions.

During his first term, President Kibaki was forced by the political exigencies of the day to create far too many more ministries than we needed .

We still remember what happened after the 2005 referendum on the constititution when the President was arm-twisted by Charity Ngilu and Musikari Kombo into appointing more of their tribesmen into the cabinet.

Political acquisence was purchased at a very high price because we ended up with a situation where mere Government departments were transformed into fully-fledged ministries.

And, more ministries not only meant more ministers, assistant ministers, permanent secretaries and deputy secretaries, but more new carpeted offices and more fuel-guzzling limousines.

Clearly, the Government has become too big. How exactly, does it spend our taxes? Here is a snapshot.

Parliament, the presidency, the judiciary, 31 ministries and nine departments and three statutory commissions-consume about Sh 500.4 billion in a year.

In other words,this category of institutions alone absorb about 24.3 per cent of all wealth produced in Kenya in a year- what is reffered to in fancy lingo as the Gross Domestic Product.

The second largest consumer of taxes is the category known as Consolidated Fund Services, money spent on servicing public debt, pensions and other statutory obligations. It consumes about Sh 154 billion or 7.5 per cent of GDP.

In the third category will be autonomous Government agencies such as public universities , publicly funded research bodies and regional authorities. In all,these institutions consume an estimated Sh 60 billion-or 2.9 per cent of GDP.

IN THE FOURTH CATEGORY ARE 175 local authorities which consume an estimated Sh 20 billion- including the money they receive from Local Authority Transfer Fund.

Finally, is the Constituency Development Fund that consumes approximately Sh 10 billion in a year.

In future, the biggest challenge to any government will be how to re -orient spending from devoting too much to wages and debt to creating new wealth and assets.

We simply can not afford to have more ministers,assistant ministers and permanent secretaries.

How will the “ grand coalition” principle of sharing portfolios be applied in the civil service and parastatals?

While sharing power and portfolios among politicians will have fewer challenges-reshuffling of top permanent secretaries and managing directors of critical parastatals will not be easy.

Politicians can agree to share power. But sharing permanent secretary and managing director positions will be alot more difficult.

I say so because a good number of permanent secretaries and managing directors of parastatals wield much more power than politicians.

The most formidable opposition to the principle of responsibility-sharing is likely to come from this clique.

After more than 20 years of pork-barrel politics under the regime of former president Daniel arap Moi, and perhaps due to the relatively small size of the private sector, big public sector jobs are a hot political potato.

Our people still put a high premium on public sector jobs. Indeed, the flip side of the grand coalition idea is that it will entrench the system of appointing managing directors of parastatals and permanent secretaries through patronage.

Today, the public service is suffocating with individuals who owe their positions to politicians and power brokers.

Some permanent secretaries and managing directors have long passed the retirement age but continue to serve on contractual terms -in some cases-with salaries that are way higher than the salaries of career civil servants.

And, the problem with managing directors or civil servants who secure their positions through the influence of powerbrokers is that they tend to owe their loyalty to the powerbrokers rather than their hierarchical superiors.

The way i see it,some degree of pork-barrel politics will have to continue. A grand coalition arrangement that is not based on inclusion can not work.

And, in our context, this includes restoring the ethnic arithmetic in public appointments.

NOW THAT A DEAL HAS been struck by the principal actors in the Kofi Annan-led negotiating team, it is time to focus our attention on those who lost their homes or were brutally attacked during the madness that engulfed Kenya in the weeks after the announcement of the 2007 election results.

Among this group of people are the women, girls, men and boys who were savagely raped during the mayhem.

This group deserves all the support it can get because while houses can be rebuilt, it is difficult to mend souls that have been damaged through an act of rape.

Anyone who has worked with rape victims knows that fear of other human beings is a common response among victims. The victims’ terror becomes such that although their bodies may heal, their minds threaten to implode. Thoughts of suicide are common among victims, as are feelings of extreme paranoia.

The poet, Marge Piercy, describes rape as being no different from “being pushed down a flight of cement steps, except that the wounds also bleed inside” or “going head first through a windshield except that afterwards you are afraid not of cars, but of half the human race”.

In a conflict situation, there are two groups of people who emerge to take advantage of the resulting lawlessness: arms dealers and smugglers.

In Africa, in particular, both groups have been known to engage in the illicit “blood diamonds” trade in places such as Sierra Leone.

But in Kenya, for some peculiar reason, the mayhem seems to have unleashed the rapists in our midst.

The stories of all the women, men, girls and boys raped in the post-election violence may never be told or reported, as many of the victims are probably too frightened to report the crime or too emotionally distraught to go through Kenya’s unresponsive medical, legal and judicial systems.

However, forensic scientists and investigators from the Crime Scene Investigators group claim that in the last two months, Kenya had more cases of rape than at any other time in its history.

The group claims that since December 30, the incidence of rape in the country nearly tripled.

In Nairobi alone, there were more than 500 reported cases, of which 60 per cent of the victims were minors under the age of 18 (the youngest victim was just nine months old!) and nearly 10 per cent were men.

A majority of the victims were gang raped.

Unicef claimed that the post-election conflict gave civilian men in the country “a licence to rape” like never before, a situation which it described as alarming, if not unprecedented.

ONE REPORT EVEN SUGGESTED that at least five women were being forcibly circumcised every week in some parts of the country. Meanwhile, in places such as Naivasha and Nakuru, women wearing trousers were being harassed.

Sexual abuse of girls within the camps for internally displaced people have also been reported. As if this was not bad enough, some children in the camps became victims of human traffickers, who lured the children, mostly teenage girls, out of the camps and offered them food in exchange for sex.

People have also been seen recruiting domestic workers at the camps, forcing the Red Cross in Nakuru to put up a sign that states that the camp is not a recruiting ground for cheap labour. Yet none of our political leaders, male or female, raised a word against these acts.

How does one explain the rising cases of gang rape, bizarre killings and mutilations that occurred, and are probably still occurring, in many parts of the country? And why are the victims mostly female? Has violence against women and girls in our society become institutionalised?

Perhaps we live in a society where violence, especially against women and girls, is considered “normal”. The issue of rape is not high on the political agenda of our leaders as they are more concerned about their own political and economic survival than the survival of the country’s people or the nation as a whole.

This has created a culture of impunity among our male youth who think that the only way they can assert their masculinity is through the cruelest form of violence — the rape of their own sisters and brothers.

The political and economic rape of our country manifests itself in the physical rape of our people.

As the new coalition government contemplates the way forward, I urge it to look seriously into the issue of why violence, including rape, is tolerated in our society, and to come up with concrete solutions to tackle the issue of gender-based violence once and for all.

There is no point in addressing issues of economic and political justice without addressing the deeply-entrenched institutionalised violence in our society that makes rape a lesser crime than say, a flawed election.

MANY KENYANS ARE DISTUR-bed by the interest which the rich Western powers have shown in our political crisis, and their determination to ensure that we do not go the Somali or Burundi way. They ask: Are we really free? Is our independence fake?

We emerged from colonialism not long ago. There are still many of us who were born and went to school during the colonial period. We remember the subordination, humiliations and racism. I am sure very few of us, if any, would wish to be re-colonised.

On the other hand, across Africa, like in Somalia and Zimbabwe, there are millions who are oppressed, starved, silenced, dehumanised and detained by their post-colonial regimes. There are also those who are hunted like wildlife and those forced into exile.

TO ALL THESE PEOPLE, AND THEY are the majority, the difference between colonialism and independence is the same. Given real option, most such people would happily opt to live under imperial sovereignty. I stand to be corrected, but I think we were happier and more secure in my Yimbo Village, than we have been since independence.

Why, then, did we join the anti-colonial struggle, if we were happy under colonialism? It was because of the glorious picture which was painted for us by the educated nationalists, about the splendour of Uhuru.

Once they took over the reins of power from the white oppressors, the African nationalists did not behave differently. They did not only take over the right to rule, they took over the colonial infrastructure, laws, values and properties.

Instead of returning settler farms to the original owners, they simply grabbed them. So, colonialism really went on, although now it was nicknamed Uhuru.

True, independence opened for us different gates. It also opened venues that had been plugged by colonialism. Now a few of us could happily go to high school and university. We even began to send our children overseas. That, too, opened up the world for us.

But back at home, the nationalists were busy entrenching themselves in power, acquiring more and more land, changing the country’s Constitution to suit their whims, passing drastic laws to protect their wealth and loot, and fighting amongst themselves over leadership and other issues.

The objectives of freedom were soon forgotten. Indeed, some people have become so strong that they refer to Kenya as a sovereign state!

Sovereign? I thought that is a term that was used to define monarchical dictatorships in the Medieval period in Europe? Do they now wish Kenya to be a kingdom? Are we independent?

True, but we still need a lot of support from the older, richer and more enlightened friends in the world. There is no point bragging about being independent if we cannot even make a bicycle.

And how can we manufacture a bicycle if our possible investments on the project have been illicitly banked abroad? What joy is there in a sovereign state where individuals hide billions of stolen funds in foreign banks, while millions of their countrymen go hungry?

During the colonial period, in my village, we were truly uneducated and ignorant about science, the arts, and the world, but — I repeat — we were solidly happy and well fed. Occasionally we had famine, but that was occasionally. Today’s maladies like hypertension, gonorrhoea, and homosexuality were unknown.

DO I SOUND LIKE A REACTIONARY? A neo-colonial stooge? You are free to choose your epithet. We have to start afresh, to re-define our conduct, to restate our policies and to confirm whether we are human.

There is too much suffering and tears in Africa because of a handful of people. Must we support these soulless people simply because they are our race?

In schools and discourses, over the last 40 years, we have been persuaded to take a firm nationalist stand against colonialism and imperialism. We have failed to evaluate colonialism objectively.

No doubt, most of the colonial agents on the ground, including white settlers, were ill-educated and detestable. Forty years later, we must begin to compare the colonial era and the post-colonial period. From this comparison we might develop sounder humanist policies for the future. Is oppression by foreigners worse than exploitation by our black brothers? Is it?

Prof Ochieng’ teaches history at Maseno University.

n the last 80 years, Kenya’s population has jumped from 2.9 million to 37 million. On realising the possible impact of such a high population growth rate on food production, in the 1970s, the Government set aside 240 acres of land for potato research.

Although demand for potatoes then was only low, the tuber soon became very popular with those who crave chips and crisps, mainly urban dwellers. As a result, today, demand for potatoes is rising rapidly, making it the second most important staple after maize.

Last week, the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute’s centre responsible for potato research estimated the crop could soon surpass maize in importance — as early as 2010.

Unfortunately, the research body says it can neither meet the demand for clean planting materials, nor come up with innovations fast enough, for it no longer has enough space for seed multiplication.

Most of Kari’s land was grabbed in the 1990s by politically correct individuals. This land can, and should be, repossessed.

The second reason why Kari is unable to meet farmers’ demands is that it is using outdated technologies, which are slow and expensive.

The centre has already identified alternative technology and made its presentations to the parent ministry, but, seemingly, its application for funds is not being taken seriously.

While population levels and food demand continue to rise, land remains inelastic. But with creative technological applications, other smaller and more densely-populated countries have managed to attain food sufficiency.

THE PACT BETWEEN PRESIDENT Kibaki and Mr Raila Odinga on power-sharing was as welcome as it was a relief.

Any more death or destruction would only have worsened the already degenerating political and humanitarian crisis. Already, about 1,500 people have died in the post-election violence and over half a million have been displaced.

There are still hundreds who were maimed and may still be recovering in hospitals around the country. Some of these include women and children who were raped and violated.

Rumours circulating suggest that factions supporting each side of the political divide were re-arming for revenge killings had the talks failed.

The breakthrough, therefore, came not a moment too soon. But as Mr Kofi Annan himself said, “the journey is far from over”.

Kenya, Africa and indeed, the world, owes a debt of gratitude to the African Union’s mediating team led by Mr Annan, Madam Graca Machel, and former President Benjamin Mkapa, as well as the many friends of Kenya who were relentless in their pursuit of a political settlement.

They have all demonstrated exemplary commitment, patience and persistence. In so doing they have prevented the country from descending into horrors such as have been witnessed in many countries within Africa.

It is now the collective responsibility of all sectors of society, including religious leaders, the private sector, politicians, civil society and, indeed, every Kenyan, to ensure that this process continues, is nurtured and protected by all who believe in the common good rather than in personal gain.

If we allow self-seekers to derail this process, we will have only ourselves to blame. We must not be derailed and we must not trivialise the challenge and responsibility before us. Now the work begins and we must all remain engaged.

WE MUST FOCUS, NOT ONLY ON operationalising the immediate political settlement, but also the other instruments that will help us address the long-standing, underlying causes of the crisis.

Foremost among these are issues around land ownership and distribution, and the settlement of the displaced.

It is extremely important that the Government discourages the forced movement of all those that have been displaced in a manner that could balkanise the country along ethnic lines.

All displaced persons must be resettled in an environment that is secure, even if it means providing them with a non-partisan “Peace Force”, created from the Police, the Army or any other branch of the Armed Forces.

Security is paramount to giving those returning to their homes confidence and reducing their fear. With adequate security, it should be possible to provide temporary shelter to the refugees as they await resettlement.

This type of resettlement would facilitate the closing down of the huge refugee camps which are dehumanising and difficult to manage.

This process is also likely to hasten the reduction of trauma and to enhance healing and reconciliation.

There have been other suggestions such as a commission on Truth and Reconciliation, brought forward to deal with the slow process of healing.

Too many Kenyans have lost homes and loved ones — not only in the latest violence, but also in unresolved conflicts of years past. Their grief and anger needs to be dealt with, once and for all, through a process of justice and healing. Only then can there be reconciliation and a lasting peaceful resolution.

Prof Maathai, the 2004 Nobel Peace laureate, is the author of Unbowed: A Memoir.

PRESIDENT KIBAKI AND ODM leader Raila Odinga signing on to a power-sharing deal was probably the easy part.

Now comes the tricky bit of crafting out the fine print in the pact that is supposed to lead, for the first time in Kenya’s history, to the President sharing power with a prime minister coming in from the opposition to form the so-called Grand Coalition.

Ideally, such an agreement should present a win-win solution. But one gets the impression that celebrations in some quarters are rather muted.

In President Kibaki’s political camp, there seems to be a feeling among hardliners that too much was given away.

And while the Odinga forces are jubilant that their man will get a share of power as Prime Minister, it is still unclear whether the powerful Rift Valley constituency — the region most affected by ethnic evictions — is all that excited.

Resettling the hundreds of thousands evicted from their farms and homesteads could turn out to be easier said than done, especially where the properties have already been appropriated.

It could also need a lot of effort by President Kibaki and Mr Odinga to whip their respective MPs fully into line behind the agreement. It would take just a third of all MPs staying away during the crucial vote to derail any constitutional amendment Bill.

The accord was rather vague on the finer details of exactly how the President and the Prime Minister will share power, and the exact duties and functions of the proposed new office.

One problem is that the power-sharing deal is more of a shotgun marriage than a union by mutual consent.

Even assuming all the tricky bits are agreed on without too much fuss, the actual operationalisation could be hampered if there is too much mistrust and suspicion.

For one, both sides will be diverted considerably by keeping an eye on the next elections. The coalition is designed as a temporary measure to oversee work on the longer term solutions needed to put Kenya back on an even keel. Beyond that task, both sides will be plotting to out-do each other come 2012.

Mr Odinga will certainly be working on a strategy aimed at securing power, and not shared power, whether it is through the presidency or the premiership depending on which office he covets in a new constitutional dispensation.

President Kibaki is on his final term and will not be in the running, but there are, in central Kenya, a few already actively working to inherit his mantle.

Narc, which took power in 2002, collapsed basically because both sides, Mr Kibaki’s and Mr Odinga’s, remained in competition even after the elections. The constitution review exercise of the time became merely a tool for each side to try and retain power or plot to take power.

IF SIMILAR QUESTS DOMINATE the new coalition, then it could again be paralysis that will force a parting of ways before any meaningful progress is made in the search for long-term solutions to Kenya’s ethno-political and social schisms.

Then there is the added complication that a president in his final term is always a bit of a lame-duck. President Kibaki will be even more so in a situation where he is serving out his final term forced to share power with a bitter rival.

Many in his camp will be looking beyond the present to either make their own bids for power, or lining up behind those they feel can best represent their interests in the post-Kibaki era.

If there is a critical mass of his MPs who feel President Kibaki accepted a raw deal, then they will have even more incentive to look towards a new champion for the community.

Such a scenario was already building up even before the agreement when a good number of MPs and Cabinet ministers from central Kenya started rallying round a few of their own, independent of the established Government machinery to lead a counter-offensive against the Rift Valley attacks.

Within the Government, also, there is the issue of how Vice-President Kalonzo Musyoka fits into the new political dispensation.

Although the VP has publicly welcomed the power-sharing pact, it is obvious that he loses out when Mr Odinga comes in. A Prime Minister in charge of co-ordination and supervision of government is likely to be much more powerful than a Vice-President who has little in terms of defined responsibilities beyond running a ministerial docket.

Besides being a heartbeat away from the presidency, the VPs post carries little clout – not worth much more than pitcher of warm spittle, as a former US Vice-President famously put it.

If he also loses his leadership of the Government side in Parliament to the PM, Mr Musyoka’s role will be further diminished.

Mr Musyoka is not part of President Kibaki’s PNU, but was invited into government to provide the numbers needed to keep Mr Odinga’s ODM in check. Now Mr Odinga is coming into government with vastly superior numbers, and still evidently angry at what ODM calls Mr Musyoka’s betrayal, first in running his own presidential campaign through ODM Kenya, and then in going into the Kibaki Government.