In
Kenya, we take politics seriously; perhaps too
seriously.
Taking politics too seriously can be hazardous: it makes it hard, if
not impossible, for people to engage about the merits and demerits of
particular political choices.
If we are to overcome our national partisan political positions based
on ethnicity, we must start find ways to temper our political
temperatures when discussing politics. We must also find ways to
introduce class and ideology into our national political discourse as a
way to lessen the stranglehold of ethnic politics in our political
discourse.
In
that spirit, what would happen if we began publicly rationalizing
why specific individuals should or should not be elected President?
I think we might form a basis for a rational political discourse that
might cut across tribal positioning. I also think, as a polity,
we might begin sending clear messages to our political class about where
we want to go as a country, and the kind of discourse we want them to
engage in.
|
Leading the way
|
The
following thoughts are offered in this spirit. What if we imagined
a Raila presidency - an imagination backed by a pragmatically clear-eyed
rather than romantic or idealistic analysis? What if we imagined
a different take on how to deal with corruption in Kenya - a take
that, admittedly controversially, involves forward-looking rather than
backward-looking efforts?
If
we did so, we might end up with a Raila presidency and a forward-looking
anti-corruption strategy. What is more, importantly, both outcomes
will represent not a loss for Kibaki -- only a victory for Kenya.
The losers will be the cabals of power-mongers around President Kibaki.
I deal with the Raila Presidency here, and will return to the corruption
question in a second installment.
Raila
should be elected Kenya's next President. A pragmatic analysis
suggests that Raila Odinga should be elected Kenya's next President.
We begin with the proposition that, at the next General Elections, Kenyans
should make their decision on the basis of three key issues I discuss
below. Without trashing the Kibaki regime, and even while, in context,
applauding its (limited) successes, it is possible to come to a reasoned
conclusion that Kenyans should seriously think about giving Raila a
chance to be President.
First,
Kenyans should look to continue on, and accelerate the path of economic
prosperity of the last 5 years. No doubt Kenya has prospered moderately
under the Kibaki regime. Some say that this prosperity has come
in spite of the Kibaki regime. However, there are many economic
governance decisions that have been made correctly, and they chiefly
account for the economic growth. However, we can, and should do better.
Some of the current regimes missteps in economic governance are legendary
(Anglo-Leasing; lack of strategic engagement with the international
community on key issues important to Kenya's economic interests (e.g.
on tea trade with German where Vietnam recently overtook Kenya as the
biggest supplier of tea); lack of adequate provision on key infrastructural
needs such as main arterial roads.... The list is endless. To be clear,
it is true that compared to Moi, Kibaki's regime stands heads and shoulders
above; but that is not enough. With another Kibaki presidency, we are
unlikely to see much radical change in economic governance issues. However,
with the key decisions - including institution building decisions -
made under Kibaki, a new president stands a very likely chance of deepening
the reforms; with, barring Idi Aminisque dictatorship (which is unlikely),
little risk of defection. This is a case for a new president
- with a pat on the back to the outgoing president for a job well (but
not-excellently) done.
|
walk this way
|
Secondly,
Kenyans should think about the opportunity to construct an autochthonous
institutional mechanism for sharing national wealth - across regions
and classes - that will supplement without supplanting the on-going
economic prosperity. Granted that we must continue and deepen the
economic policies that have bequeathed to us the Kibaki economic prosperity,
we must also guard against the likely validly righteous but deeply disruptive;
democratically populist but ominously anti-economic politics that might
discourage continued investment by both local and international investors.
To do this, we must simultaneously encourage the on-going economic growth
while putting in place effective mechanisms for sharing the prosperity.
Here, I think Raila's articulated social democratic ideology is useful.
I do not mean to romanticize Raila by imagining that his political articulations
will become policy on December 30th upon election. But I think political
ideology matters. While Kibaki's mainly neo-classical economic thinking
will take care of the front-end of things (economic development brought
by an enabling environment that rewards private initiative and incentives)
as it has done for the past five years; Raila's social democratic
hues in his political ideology will take care of the back-end of things
(social cooperation and cohesion brought about by redistribution and
other mechanisms for managing social conflicts and reducing moral hazards).
Thirdly,
we must imagine the possibility and promise of national healing of the
deep wounds of tribal suspicions and prejudice that have been re-opened
recently.The Kibaki presidency has, wittingly or unwittingly, deepened
the ethnic cleavage in Kenyan politics. We cannot bury our heads in
the sand and pretend that we will become a nation by default. We must
make political (and institutional) choices that will take us there.
The next General Elections provides Kenyans with an opportunity to begin
a post-tribal political discourse in Kenya. By post-tribal political
discourse, I mean, not a politics where ethnic affiliation and tribal
identity miraculously become extinct, but one where individuals can
think across ethnic affiliations in a socially rational way that foregrounds
the interests of the whole. Granted this may, at times, involve ethnic
interests, but this should be but one of the factors that individuals
take into consideration - others being class interests, regional (as
opposed to strictly tribal) interests, national interests, moral values,
etc. In such a dispensation, people make political decisions based on
a complex matrix in which all these conflicting and competing interests
are important but not necessarily decisive. The necessity of putting
in place mechanisms for solving social and political conflicts in ways
that imbue confidence to economic actors to invest in risky and long-term
enterprises makes this task even more urgent. I suggest that a necessary
first step to getting there is a Raila presidency. Because of Kenya's
unique tribal politics, President Raila will be a powerful symbol that
we are in a new post-tribe era. This is not because I have purist thoughts
of Raila as a saintly anti-tribal leader. Rather, it is because, if
Raila is to be elected President, it will be (largely because of media
representations) in spite of his tribe.
|
wheels of progress
|
This,
in itself, would be a big first step. Secondly, and controversially,
I think a Luo presidency will put to rest the idea that some Kenyans
cannot be President because of their tribal affiliation. Thirdly, the
notion that Luos have been mistreated in Kenya's political history is
real because it is deeply felt by many Luos in Nyanza. In my view, it
would be difficult to move forward in building a unified nation unless
and until we address this perception (which, as always, is the reality).
A Raila presidency does that. Fourthly, as a pragmatic matter,
a Raila presidency is likely to re-align political and economic forces
- hence making tribe less of a factor in politics and economic governance.
This is because, first, despite his socialist and progressive ethos,
Raila is deeply capitalistic; a hard-core entrepreneur. He is therefore
unlikely to destroy the economic base but is likely to forge class-based
alliances across the political divide. Second, short of assuming draconian
dictatorial powers, President Raila will not easily afford to be complacent:
he will be facing well-heeled political opponents. Yet, these would
be opponents who have a solid economic base and would not crumble easily
due to the use of moderate state power against them. Lastly, President
Raila will direct some much needed infrastructural finances towards
Western Kenya and Nyanza. As a friend recently correctly pointed out,
the Lake Basin is the least developed part of Kenya in terms of its
potential. Imagine the increased prosperity of Kenya when that potential
(including a savvy renegotiation of the Nile River Treaty) is unleashed.
|
Brighter days ahead
|
What
does this mean for Raila and his handlers? That he must change
his emphasis on the hustings. He must free his campaign from the
perception that it is anti-GEMA or anti-Mount Kenya. He must transform
his campaign to be one of ideology and national healing. He must
energize his supporters in spite of, not because of their anti-GEMA
sentiments. He must address economics beyond the vaguely unhelpful
incantations that the national cake is not equitably distributed.
He must tell Kenyans how he will keep the modest prosperity going while
re-orienting the national legal baseline to one that permits productive
redistribution of national resources. Differently put, Raila must
start speaking the language of national healing, reconciliation, and
the classic feature of a virtuous welfare state: the promise to use
organized state power to moderately modify the play of market forces
to guarantee the lower classes social inclusion and some minimum resources
irrespective of the value that the market places on their labor and
goods.
And,
oh, well, may be he should sell his Hummer (the symbol of American
imperialism) and donate the money to a charitable organization!
*
The author is an Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Washington,
Seattle, Washington. He is admitted to practice law in Massachusetts
and Kenya.
Trackback(0)
 |
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Show/Hide comments
Show/Hide comment form
Even though my assessment of Kibaki's leadership is very unkind, (I fall in the category that believes Kenya has developed some despite Kibaki.)I have to agree he put in place some economic structures that need to be entrenched.
Kibaki could have done way better especially with the goodwill that ushered him into presidency in 2002. He should have done a better job in building our infrastructure, enhancing security, creating jobs, stemming corruption and keeping the tribalism genie corked tight in the bottle.
I hated the way he reneged on all the promises that inspired Raila to campaign hard despite his accident and Wamalwa's sickness. Turning his back on Raila was a very bad gesture that Kenyans must remember in the polling booth.
Judging from the mess that's Kenya, it's obvious the so-called hands-off leadership style doesn't work. We need a leader like Raila who's gonna provide visible leadership and heal ethnic tensions. It's impossible for Kibaki to provide such leadership because he's the cause of the current ethnic tensions.
But Raila has demonstrated that he can work well with all including GEMA communities. He's even accepted them in his bloodline.
Kenyans should dump Kibaki as a lesson to all future presidents who break promises and promote mediocrity.