|
Home
|
ContactThis e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it for content related questions and suggestions This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it for republication enquiries This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it to report faults or offensive comment. NewCommentsLatest commentsArticlesLatest Articles
Diaries
MostReadMost Read Articles |
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
Archives | About Us
| KenyaImagine How To | Privacy Policy | ContactUs | Join KenyaImagine |
Advertise Here| Legal Disclaimer | Terms & Conditions | Directory
Copyright 2008 KenyaImagine.com, the KenyaImagine logo and KenyaImagine.com are trademarks of the Six Degrees Media Company















Suicidal statecraft is hurting the nation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Imre Loefler
Arnold Toynbee, the British historian, has written about "suicidal statecraft", a process whereby a ruler or a government can destroy itself and can damage the state. Were Toynbee alive, he could use the example of President Kibaki and his government to demonstrate his point. Suicidal statecraft is usually due to incompetence and hubris.
Mr Kibaki is a nice man, probably the nicest man at the helm of any country, certainly the nicest African president. In terms of education he is among the elite of world leaders and in political experience he is also in the top ranks of the presidential and prime ministerial class. Nevertheless he appears to be an incompetent president. It is difficult to understand why his regime is such a failure and such a personal disaster. Could it be that he is simply not talented for governing? Or could it be, that the stroke he suffered in January 2003 has caused lasting incapacitation?
The presidential stroke was a setback for everyone, except the ring of people around him, who kept him out of sight for a long time and usurped his powers and established a modus operandi in which, apparently, the recovering patient acquiesced.
Cronyism and tribalism
The high ratings of Mr Kibaki were certainly not proportionate to his performance. He did not keep any of his election promises, he seemed to be unable to govern, he was unable to make his ministers to do their work, the purported economic growth benefited only the rich, he earned the attributes of cronyism and tribalism. He did not mix with people with ease and he seemed to be comfortable only among his community’s millionaires.
The apologists of presidential behaviour resorted to the time honoured excuse, they said that the President was given bad advice. To seek advice is wise, yet wisdom also recommends to choose the advisor well and to sift the advice. At the end it does not make any difference whether the bad ideas, the omissions and the blunders of Kibaki’s presidency were his own or were due to bad advice heeded by him. Taking bad advice is a form of incompetence. In addition, Kibaki’s advisors seem to be driven by hubris, the hubris of the elite, the hubris of the rich and even if he, personally, is not prone to hubris, the hubris of his advisors tainted him.
He allowed himself to be captured by the latter day Mau-Mau. The 21st century Mau-Mau did not have to endure the hardships of the Aberdares and did not have to risk their lives, neither were they poor, landless and humiliated, but their aim was the same: to establish supremacy. Instead of oaths Banana resorted to brainwash. Eventually just as the ultimate victims of the Mau-Mau were the Kikuyu, the victims of the Banana campaign were also the Kikuyu, the millions of God fearing, law abiding and hard working Kikuyu, who now find themselves isolated.
Cohesion threatened
Kibaki had his comeuppance. He took it badly, surily even and when he came on television after the referendum he tried to change the subject: shift attention from constitution to development. His short speech was strained and uninspired, he lost a unique opportunity, for if he said: "Kenyans, you told me your wishes, help me to lead you in that direction, I am proud of how you deported yourself, this is the kind of behaviour I was hoping for when I founded the Democratic Party!" Kenyans from every corner of the country would have gathered to give him another chance. Then Kibaki’s governing slipped from the bad to the worse. He does not seem to understand that the nation increasingly resents his friends and that trust in his word, not only in his judgement, is eroding fast – see the manner of bargaining for top jobs. If suicidal statecraft would hurt only Kibaki and his circle, one would say, so be it, they deserve it, but it hurts the nation, its cohesion is threatened yet again, institutions are further devalued, political morality is at its lowest point and development is postponed. Most ominous is the double oath ministers had to take: the oath of allegiance to the laws of the Republic and to Kibaki himself.
During the Banana campaign, Kibaki ignored the law and acted in contempt of court. Suppose he would do so again, which of the two parts of the oath will ministers be expected to uphold?
What undid the Mau-Mau was hubris: they underestimated the adversary and they overestimated the sympathy of the emerging nation. Then after the "change the constitution" group failed to prevent Moi from succeeding Kenyatta, their hubris cost the Kikuyu dearly. Banana was driven by hubris too, so is Kibaki’s post referendum behaviour and hubris ends in nemesis. If he is unable to change his stance, his employment must be terminated one way or other. He ought to realise that the 153 districts in the seven provinces, who said "No" to his designs did do so because of the lack of trust in him and his circles. The President’s nemesis must not become the nemesis for the nation.
The writer is a surgeon and social commentator