Opening of Kenya’s Parliament.
Tomorrow, Monday January 14, 2008 is the official opening of Kenya’s official legislative body -- the Kenya Parliament. Leaving aside, for the moment, the increasing tension in the rest of Kenya, this first Parliamentary session is bound to be the stuff of Prime Time TV… so get your popcorn ready.
The Opposition (ODM) party controls 108 out of 222; clearly not a majority but with alliances they might even reach a super majority. The incumbent government party (PNU) won only 36 seats out of 222 seats; they need desperately to form massive coalitions, and as the incumbent government they can AND have already offered minor parties major roles in the governmental apparatus e.g. the vice-presidency in exchange for their parliamentary loyalty. This, unfortunately, is a movie we have seen so many times before in Kenya -- business as usual. And in truth, this is how democracy ought to work -- horse-trading etc. but in the backdrop of a stolen election things are a little different.
The EU and US resist Kenyan business as Usual
The EU presidency has said "All political parties in Kenya should recognize that it cannot be business as usual in Kenya until there is political compromise which leads to a lasting solution that reflects the will of the Kenyan people, wins their confidence, and helps return Kenya to stability,"
The US, in a welcome change, has, according to the US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Dr Jendayi Frazer, said in a statement: "The United States cannot conduct business as usual in Kenya. The Kenyan people recognize that the post-electoral crisis has revealed longstanding problems that cannot be ignored."
This is helpful. Clearly the foreign powers with the most influence in Kenyan political affairs -- the USA and the EU -- have decided that: 1) a recount is not possible due to the time that has elapsed (in addition due to Kenya’s constitutional temporal limitations on recounts); 2) a run-off is not acceptable, because of the cost in human lives, logistics, loss of financial and economic opportunities, investments and the generally unpredictable violence that this might entail. The only feasible solution, then, is to encourage a political settlement between the Opposition and the incumbent government based on the announced result.
Both sides know this and are digging in. Should they decide to stage their standoff in Parliament rather than the streets of Kenya, then most at stake is who elects the powerful Speaker of Parliament and his/her deputy because they largely control the agenda that comes before the whole parliament, including, votes of confidence or lack thereof.
The Ideal Situation
This would be what I outlined in my January 5 post: Fully reproduced herebelow:
“A possible way forward?
In my view, because both sides have red-line positions that seem intractable (Govt: you must accept our authority or go to court to contest it. Opposition: We cannot under any circumstances trust the courts to be fair), BUT both sides have also stated that they are willing to discuss forming a coalition government. Then this cold-blooded political deal seems the only way out of this impasse.
Power of the President
The biggest issue would be what President Kibaki's administration could offer the opposition. This is the biggest issue because, in Kenya, the President is both the head of state and head of government, and has powers to both appoint and REMOVE without cause the highest ranking executive officers (cabinet members, police chiefs etc), military officers (captains, generals etc.), AND judicial officers (High Court justices INCLUDING the Chief Justice) throughout the land WITHOUT any legislative or other review. This makes the President of Kenya basically Superman, or stated more politically, a King! Stated simply, the entire Executive branch, the entire Armed Forces and the entire Judiciary serve at the President's pleasure and Parliament has NO say in who gets to serve and who does not.
Reducing Presidential Powers: A couple of Suggestions
First, perhaps, the post of a Prime Minister could created with, for instance, the power to veto the President's power to remove without cause certain executive, military and judicial officials. What level of unaccountable Presidential appointment and removal power could be a point of negotiation that might be acceptable to both sides?
Second, if the post of a Prime Minister is not possible, maybe, then, the appointment of very high ranking executive, military and judicial officials could be made to require legislative approval of a certain threshold -- perhaps a simple majority. If these two changes ALONE were implemented in Kenya's constitution, they would make a REVOLUTIONARY difference in Kenyan politics.
An Opportunity for the Opposition?
This, perhaps, is what the Opposition should now focus on fighting for. I say this for two reasons: 1) the diminution of Presidential power would mean that obtaining and retaining the Kenyan Presidency would cease to be the zero sum game that it currently is. The stakes associated with being President of Kenya would diminish to a level congruous with other stable democracies. This concentration of an inordinate amount of power in the President's Office is the single most damaging, DIVISIVE and destructive condition that Kenyan political, civil and economic life suffers from; 2) this reduction in Presidential power is also a clearly stated and principal raison d'etre of the opposition itself. This, together with the devolving of power from a nearly omnipotent central government in Nairobi to the different provinces are the clearly stated ultimate goals of the opposition. These are the promises the opposition ran on and with which they won 60% of Kenya's legislative seats, and why 80% of President Kibaki's cabinet was voted out of office.
If the opposition can force these constitutional changes, or something approximating a meaningful diminution of Presidential power in Kenya's Constitution, then perhaps the senseless violence; the horrific rapes and vicious murders; the heartbreaking and unnecessary loss of life; the massive displacement of Kenyan citizens; and even the potential but, hopefully, temporary loss of faith in democracy and its processes would be worth it.”
Monday, January 14, 2008
Tuesday, January 8, 2008
On Saturday, the political temperature in Kenya dropped dramatically – perhaps because the opposition protestors were tired, or perhaps because Kenyans decided to be reasonable – whatever the reason, we celebrated the chance for a negotiated settlement. We were premature in our celebration and our hopes seem to have been seriously misplaced – nay we were naïve about how politics works in Kenya.
Politics is a Power Game
Politics is about power and who controls power. Today, power exists in 1) the number of gun barrels you control; 2) the number of strong allies you can mobilize; and 3) the strength of the will of the people you are trying to exercise power over.
The Opposition suffers from a serious deficit in all three power bases.
People Power
First, and most importantly for the opposition, after the results were announced, serious questions were asked of the will of the people of Kenya to resist the fraud that had been perpetrated on them and the clearly emerging answer is that Kenyan’s are not willing to risk everything over this election. I say this because the Opposition leaders called for million man marches a number of times and civil disobedience and every time the government’s law enforcement apparatus was able to beat back attempts at organizing widespread civil disobedience and mass protests. The reason this happened was because most of the protests seemed to be concentrated in slums that are easily cordoned off and controlled. Had Kenya’s middle class risen up, things might have been different. This is EXTREMELY crucial because a general uprising of ‘the people’ was the Opposition’s ace in the hole. If the people are NOT willing to rise up and heed your call then what this indicates is that your power-base – the supposedly disenfranchised people – offer you NO power because they are willing to accept a stolen election if it ensures peace over a righteous but personally costly resistance.
Foreign Allies
Second, though many foreign powers have openly stated that the elections were rigged, they said this in a context under which civil war seemed imminent. As the Kibaki administration begins to assert authority by controlling civil disorder, many foreign governments are likely to come to a number of conclusions: 1) Fraudulent peace is better than righteous anarchy; and 2) Better the Devil you know than the one you don’t. Kibaki is a known and favorable quantity in all the indices important to powerful foreign governments – conservative, pro- big business, pro-western, pro-commerce, steady and calm. Odinga, his rival, is, on the other hand, is a charismatic firebrand whose father was a known socialist. Also, Odinga was educated partly in the former East Germany. These facts alone will, and, in my estimation, have already cooled the planet’s only Superpower’s desire to support his resistance. The US has a long history of going to the mat for popular uprisings AGAINST communist/socialist governments. However, when these popular uprisings might bring a potential leftist/socialist to power, the US almost always looks the other way. Initially, the US retracted its congratulations offered to Kibaki, now the official US position, as articulated by Mr. Frazer, is that: there was evidence of rigging but both sides possibly engaged in it, which, is, incidentally, Kibaki’s line. Because the US government is unwilling to support the Kenya Opposition in the way that it supported the Ukrainian Opposition, this robs the Opposition of the most important ally it could have – The government of The United States of America. This, in my view, is fatal.
Military Power
Third, the Opposition has no guns. The top brass of the Armed Forces of Kenya were present at Kibaki’s secret swearing in and have been present at all major State functions. This is a full-throated declaration of their position. Even if the Opposition had guns, would they be willing to use them given their inability to organize effective mass protest? And if they had guns, would this be an appropriate outcome for Kenya?
Kibaki’s moves
If I were a cold-blooded Kibaki advisor, based on the above, I would suggest that he act like there is no controversy, and, more importantly, that he act like he is the magnanimous Head of State offering a coalition to any aggrieved parties. I would suggest that he crackdown on any civil disorder while offering peace and reconciliation. Eventually, the Kenyan people and foreign governments will fall in line as long as he maintains control of civil order. This is the most crucial factor. If total chaos ensues, his administration will fall.
Foreign Governments
Foreign governments have limited interests in intruding in African elections as long as the African government is not too repressive and shares certain bedrock values with the foreign government e.g. free commerce. Beyond this, a foreign government’s main interest in any internal African power struggle is in sitting back and waiting to see who emerges victorious and then deciding whether to work with them. After all, if Kenya’s own people are unwilling to stand up and fight for what many believe is a fraudulent election, why should London, Paris or Beijing care?
Conclusion
My considered opinion is that the Opposition has been thoroughly out-maneuvered. Their ace in the hole – a mass uprising – is not going to materialize. Mr. Kibaki seems to have better read the character of the Kenyan people.
Politics is a Power Game
Politics is about power and who controls power. Today, power exists in 1) the number of gun barrels you control; 2) the number of strong allies you can mobilize; and 3) the strength of the will of the people you are trying to exercise power over.
The Opposition suffers from a serious deficit in all three power bases.
People Power
First, and most importantly for the opposition, after the results were announced, serious questions were asked of the will of the people of Kenya to resist the fraud that had been perpetrated on them and the clearly emerging answer is that Kenyan’s are not willing to risk everything over this election. I say this because the Opposition leaders called for million man marches a number of times and civil disobedience and every time the government’s law enforcement apparatus was able to beat back attempts at organizing widespread civil disobedience and mass protests. The reason this happened was because most of the protests seemed to be concentrated in slums that are easily cordoned off and controlled. Had Kenya’s middle class risen up, things might have been different. This is EXTREMELY crucial because a general uprising of ‘the people’ was the Opposition’s ace in the hole. If the people are NOT willing to rise up and heed your call then what this indicates is that your power-base – the supposedly disenfranchised people – offer you NO power because they are willing to accept a stolen election if it ensures peace over a righteous but personally costly resistance.
Foreign Allies
Second, though many foreign powers have openly stated that the elections were rigged, they said this in a context under which civil war seemed imminent. As the Kibaki administration begins to assert authority by controlling civil disorder, many foreign governments are likely to come to a number of conclusions: 1) Fraudulent peace is better than righteous anarchy; and 2) Better the Devil you know than the one you don’t. Kibaki is a known and favorable quantity in all the indices important to powerful foreign governments – conservative, pro- big business, pro-western, pro-commerce, steady and calm. Odinga, his rival, is, on the other hand, is a charismatic firebrand whose father was a known socialist. Also, Odinga was educated partly in the former East Germany. These facts alone will, and, in my estimation, have already cooled the planet’s only Superpower’s desire to support his resistance. The US has a long history of going to the mat for popular uprisings AGAINST communist/socialist governments. However, when these popular uprisings might bring a potential leftist/socialist to power, the US almost always looks the other way. Initially, the US retracted its congratulations offered to Kibaki, now the official US position, as articulated by Mr. Frazer, is that: there was evidence of rigging but both sides possibly engaged in it, which, is, incidentally, Kibaki’s line. Because the US government is unwilling to support the Kenya Opposition in the way that it supported the Ukrainian Opposition, this robs the Opposition of the most important ally it could have – The government of The United States of America. This, in my view, is fatal.
Military Power
Third, the Opposition has no guns. The top brass of the Armed Forces of Kenya were present at Kibaki’s secret swearing in and have been present at all major State functions. This is a full-throated declaration of their position. Even if the Opposition had guns, would they be willing to use them given their inability to organize effective mass protest? And if they had guns, would this be an appropriate outcome for Kenya?
Kibaki’s moves
If I were a cold-blooded Kibaki advisor, based on the above, I would suggest that he act like there is no controversy, and, more importantly, that he act like he is the magnanimous Head of State offering a coalition to any aggrieved parties. I would suggest that he crackdown on any civil disorder while offering peace and reconciliation. Eventually, the Kenyan people and foreign governments will fall in line as long as he maintains control of civil order. This is the most crucial factor. If total chaos ensues, his administration will fall.
Foreign Governments
Foreign governments have limited interests in intruding in African elections as long as the African government is not too repressive and shares certain bedrock values with the foreign government e.g. free commerce. Beyond this, a foreign government’s main interest in any internal African power struggle is in sitting back and waiting to see who emerges victorious and then deciding whether to work with them. After all, if Kenya’s own people are unwilling to stand up and fight for what many believe is a fraudulent election, why should London, Paris or Beijing care?
Conclusion
My considered opinion is that the Opposition has been thoroughly out-maneuvered. Their ace in the hole – a mass uprising – is not going to materialize. Mr. Kibaki seems to have better read the character of the Kenyan people.
Saturday, January 5, 2008
A Ray of Hope
Two important things have happened in the last two days since my last post.
Ineffective Opposition Mass Protest
First, the Opposition's attempts at organized mass protest in the capital city of Nairobi with the aim of bringing down the incumbent Kibaki administration have been largely thwarted by the effectiveness of a special unit of Kenya's law enforcement known as the General Service Unit (GSU). These are paramilitary riot control shock troops but t
hey are also a SWAT team. Anything the regular cops can't handle the GSU is called in, hence the name General Service Unit -- they are up for anything. The GSU has kept the city center free of protesters, both violent e.g. local street thugs, and peaceful e.g. one of my sisters. The inability for the opposition to force a collapse of Mr. Kibaki's administration through mass protest reduces their options to ascend to power and puts pressure on the opposition to compromise.
Lack of recognition of newly "elected" Kenyan President
Second, the vast majority of the world has refused to recognize the validity of the presidential vote tally due to well-documented "irregularities" (outlined in my first post herebelow). The EU formally dismissed the presidential election results as lacking credibility and called for an international audit. The US retracted an initial congratulatory message to Mr. Kibaki. The UK expressed deep concern about the "irregularities" associated with the tallying of the Presidential vote count and also has not congratulated Mr. Kibaki. France has been the most outspoken and has outright rejected the presidential election results as rigged. The Canadian ambassador ahs been seen publically with the opposition leader. Many other countries have remained silent. This lack of recognition by important countries in the world reduces the options of the Kibaki administration to hold on to power and puts pressure on president Kibaki to compromise.
A situation ripe for both sides to compromise.
Because of pressure from the international community at large, and from international dignitaries like Archbishop Desmond Tutu, both sides have backed down from their initial hard line positions. The opposition initially insisted that President Kibaki must first resign before any dialogue could occur now they are open to the formation of a coalition government without a resignation. Mr. Kibaki initially insisted that the elections were free and fair and that no recount or re-run of the election would happen. Now he too is open to a coalition government as well as a re-run if the Kenya courts demand it.
Still far apart
This is definitely progress! However, the two sides still remain very far apart. The Opposition insists that any coalition government would be only a caretaker government whose sole purpose would be to organize an new Presidential election within 3 months, which, they are sure they will win. The administration, naturally rejects this because to accept this would be to tacitly admit that the current results are fraudulent. They are NOT going to do this. They need the opposition and the international community to accept the validity of the currently contested election results. This is their red-line position.
No more violence
For it's part, the administration demands that no coalition government will be discussed until the violence stops and there is law and order which is, on its face, a reasonable demand. However, violence can just as easily be fomented by the government as it can by the disgruntled opposition. Still, it is also in the administrations interests to have violence cease because it needs to be seen as being in control of the country.
Electoral challenge in Kenya's courts
The administration also insists that any change in the officially announced results MUST go through Kenya's Constitutional Processes. Again, this, at first blush, is wholly reasonable. However, the constitutional processes that now remain for challenging the election results can only go through Kenya's courts because a recount, by law, can only happen within 48 hours of the announcement. So the only constitutional and legal remedies left to challenge this fraudulent election are the Kenyan courts which are notoriously corrupt and known to be beholden to the government.
Effect on Opposition on court challenge
If the opposition were to follow this path and the courts verified the current result, then legally and constitutionally the opposition would be in a double bind because: 1) the duly constituted (but totally corrupt) Electoral Commission of Kenya initially verified them making them legal; and 2) The Supreme Court (again corrupt) added its august imprimatur on the result. If this happens, there are no more legal options for the opposition and, God forbid, violence and civil war will be the only way to force the government from power. This is the trap the opposition fears it will be led into if it accepts to contest the result in Kenya's courts. This is the opposition's red-line position.
A possible way forward?
In my view, because both sides have red-line positions that seem intractable (Govt: you must accept our authority or go to court to contest it. Opposition: We cannot under any circumstances trust the courts to be fair), BUT both sides have also stated that they are willing to discuss forming a coalition government. Then this cold-blooded political deal seems the only way out of this impasse.
Power of the President
The biggest issue would be what President Kibaki's administration could offer the opposition. This is the biggest issue because, in Kenya, the President is both the head of state and head of government, and has powers to both appoint and REMOVE without cause the highest ranking executive officers (cabinet members, police cheifs etc), military officers (captains, generals etc.), AND judicial officers (High Court justices INCLUDING the Chief Justice) throughout the land WITHOUT any legislative or other review. This makes the President of Kenya basically Superman, or stated more politically, a King! Stated simply, the entire Executive branch, the entire Armed Forces and the entire Judiciary serve at the President's pleasure and Parliament has NO say in who gets to serve and who does not.
Reducing Presidential Powers: A couple of Suggestions
First, perhaps, the post of a Prime Minister could created with, for instance, the power to veto the President's power to remove without cause certain executive, military and judicial officials. What level of unaccountable Presidential appointment and removal power could be a point of negotiation that might be acceptable to both sides.
Second, if the post of a Prime Minister is not possible, maybe, then, the appointment of very high ranking executive, military and judicial officials could be made to require legislative approval of a certain threshold -- perhaps a simple majority. If these two changes ALONE were implemented in Kenya's constitution, they would make a REVOLUTIONARY difference in Kenyan politics.
An Opportunity for the Opposition?
This, perhaps, is what the Opposition should now focus on fighting for. I say this for two reasons: 1) The diminution of Presidential power would mean that obtaining and retaining the Kenyan Presidency would cease to be the zero sum game that it currently is. The stakes associated with being President of Kenya would diminish to a level congruous with other stable democracies. This concentration of an inordinate amount of power in the President's Office is the single most damaging, DIVISIVE and destructive condition that Kenyan political, civil and economic life suffers from; 2) This reduction in Presidential power is also a clearly stated and principal raison d'etre of the opposition itself. This, together with the devolving of power from a nearly omnipotent central government in Nairobi to the different provinces are the clearly stated ultimate goals of the opposition. These are the promises the opposition ran on and with which they won 60% of Kenya's legislative seats, and why 80% of President Kibaki's cabinet was voted out of office.
If the opposition can force these constitutional changes, or something approximating a meangingful dimunition of Presidential power in Kenya's Constitution, then perhaps the senseless violence; the horrific rapes and vicious murders; the heartbreaking and unnecessary loss of life; the massive displacement of Kenyan citizens; and even the potential but, hopefully, temporary loss of faith in democracy and its processes would be worth it.
The stage is set for Mr. Kibaki and Mr. Odinga. May God give them the wisdom, compassion, and HUMILITY to make a compromise that benefits all Kenyans.
Ineffective Opposition Mass Protest
First, the Opposition's attempts at organized mass protest in the capital city of Nairobi with the aim of bringing down the incumbent Kibaki administration have been largely thwarted by the effectiveness of a special unit of Kenya's law enforcement known as the General Service Unit (GSU). These are paramilitary riot control shock troops but t
hey are also a SWAT team. Anything the regular cops can't handle the GSU is called in, hence the name General Service Unit -- they are up for anything. The GSU has kept the city center free of protesters, both violent e.g. local street thugs, and peaceful e.g. one of my sisters. The inability for the opposition to force a collapse of Mr. Kibaki's administration through mass protest reduces their options to ascend to power and puts pressure on the opposition to compromise.Lack of recognition of newly "elected" Kenyan President
Second, the vast majority of the world has refused to recognize the validity of the presidential vote tally due to well-documented "irregularities" (outlined in my first post herebelow). The EU formally dismissed the presidential election results as lacking credibility and called for an international audit. The US retracted an initial congratulatory message to Mr. Kibaki. The UK expressed deep concern about the "irregularities" associated with the tallying of the Presidential vote count and also has not congratulated Mr. Kibaki. France has been the most outspoken and has outright rejected the presidential election results as rigged. The Canadian ambassador ahs been seen publically with the opposition leader. Many other countries have remained silent. This lack of recognition by important countries in the world reduces the options of the Kibaki administration to hold on to power and puts pressure on president Kibaki to compromise.
A situation ripe for both sides to compromise.
Because of pressure from the international community at large, and from international dignitaries like Archbishop Desmond Tutu, both sides have backed down from their initial hard line positions. The opposition initially insisted that President Kibaki must first resign before any dialogue could occur now they are open to the formation of a coalition government without a resignation. Mr. Kibaki initially insisted that the elections were free and fair and that no recount or re-run of the election would happen. Now he too is open to a coalition government as well as a re-run if the Kenya courts demand it.
Still far apart
This is definitely progress! However, the two sides still remain very far apart. The Opposition insists that any coalition government would be only a caretaker government whose sole purpose would be to organize an new Presidential election within 3 months, which, they are sure they will win. The administration, naturally rejects this because to accept this would be to tacitly admit that the current results are fraudulent. They are NOT going to do this. They need the opposition and the international community to accept the validity of the currently contested election results. This is their red-line position.
No more violence
For it's part, the administration demands that no coalition government will be discussed until the violence stops and there is law and order which is, on its face, a reasonable demand. However, violence can just as easily be fomented by the government as it can by the disgruntled opposition. Still, it is also in the administrations interests to have violence cease because it needs to be seen as being in control of the country.
Electoral challenge in Kenya's courts
The administration also insists that any change in the officially announced results MUST go through Kenya's Constitutional Processes. Again, this, at first blush, is wholly reasonable. However, the constitutional processes that now remain for challenging the election results can only go through Kenya's courts because a recount, by law, can only happen within 48 hours of the announcement. So the only constitutional and legal remedies left to challenge this fraudulent election are the Kenyan courts which are notoriously corrupt and known to be beholden to the government.
Effect on Opposition on court challenge
If the opposition were to follow this path and the courts verified the current result, then legally and constitutionally the opposition would be in a double bind because: 1) the duly constituted (but totally corrupt) Electoral Commission of Kenya initially verified them making them legal; and 2) The Supreme Court (again corrupt) added its august imprimatur on the result. If this happens, there are no more legal options for the opposition and, God forbid, violence and civil war will be the only way to force the government from power. This is the trap the opposition fears it will be led into if it accepts to contest the result in Kenya's courts. This is the opposition's red-line position.
A possible way forward?
In my view, because both sides have red-line positions that seem intractable (Govt: you must accept our authority or go to court to contest it. Opposition: We cannot under any circumstances trust the courts to be fair), BUT both sides have also stated that they are willing to discuss forming a coalition government. Then this cold-blooded political deal seems the only way out of this impasse.
Power of the President
The biggest issue would be what President Kibaki's administration could offer the opposition. This is the biggest issue because, in Kenya, the President is both the head of state and head of government, and has powers to both appoint and REMOVE without cause the highest ranking executive officers (cabinet members, police cheifs etc), military officers (captains, generals etc.), AND judicial officers (High Court justices INCLUDING the Chief Justice) throughout the land WITHOUT any legislative or other review. This makes the President of Kenya basically Superman, or stated more politically, a King! Stated simply, the entire Executive branch, the entire Armed Forces and the entire Judiciary serve at the President's pleasure and Parliament has NO say in who gets to serve and who does not.
Reducing Presidential Powers: A couple of Suggestions
First, perhaps, the post of a Prime Minister could created with, for instance, the power to veto the President's power to remove without cause certain executive, military and judicial officials. What level of unaccountable Presidential appointment and removal power could be a point of negotiation that might be acceptable to both sides.
Second, if the post of a Prime Minister is not possible, maybe, then, the appointment of very high ranking executive, military and judicial officials could be made to require legislative approval of a certain threshold -- perhaps a simple majority. If these two changes ALONE were implemented in Kenya's constitution, they would make a REVOLUTIONARY difference in Kenyan politics.
An Opportunity for the Opposition?
This, perhaps, is what the Opposition should now focus on fighting for. I say this for two reasons: 1) The diminution of Presidential power would mean that obtaining and retaining the Kenyan Presidency would cease to be the zero sum game that it currently is. The stakes associated with being President of Kenya would diminish to a level congruous with other stable democracies. This concentration of an inordinate amount of power in the President's Office is the single most damaging, DIVISIVE and destructive condition that Kenyan political, civil and economic life suffers from; 2) This reduction in Presidential power is also a clearly stated and principal raison d'etre of the opposition itself. This, together with the devolving of power from a nearly omnipotent central government in Nairobi to the different provinces are the clearly stated ultimate goals of the opposition. These are the promises the opposition ran on and with which they won 60% of Kenya's legislative seats, and why 80% of President Kibaki's cabinet was voted out of office.
If the opposition can force these constitutional changes, or something approximating a meangingful dimunition of Presidential power in Kenya's Constitution, then perhaps the senseless violence; the horrific rapes and vicious murders; the heartbreaking and unnecessary loss of life; the massive displacement of Kenyan citizens; and even the potential but, hopefully, temporary loss of faith in democracy and its processes would be worth it.
The stage is set for Mr. Kibaki and Mr. Odinga. May God give them the wisdom, compassion, and HUMILITY to make a compromise that benefits all Kenyans.
Wednesday, January 2, 2008
Desecration of a Church
Today we received horrific news. Upwards of 50 Kenyans were burned alive in the church in which they had sought refuge. There were women and children who died horrible deaths because the post-election violence is escalating. This crime is unforgivable. Innocent souls were lost in a scene reminiscent of the Rwanda genocide where thugs would target churches and massacre entire villages that were hiding there from the violence. The victims were from the Kikuyu ethnic group and were murdered by gangs from the Kalenjin, Luhya and Luo ethnic groups. This act was sickening and Mr. Odinga must strongly condemn it.
Kenya is NOT Rwanda. The ethnic killings MUST stop. Mr. Kibaki and Mr. Odinga must call on their supporters to stop the violence.
The political situation is confusing. The government is offering talks with the opposition but there is little that the government can offer the opposition because power in Kenya is concentrated in the Office of the President and that is what is the center of the controversy -- the Presidency. On the other hand, the opposition's hard line stance (they refuse to meet with the government unless Kibaki accepts defeat which he will never do) is unrealistic. Both sides, it seems, are buckling down for a showdown tomorrow when an opposition protest is planned without government approval. There might be an enormous amount of violence tomorrow in Kenya and I am very upset.
The government position is clear: Focus attention on the ethnic violence and crack down hard. The government MUST prevent large numbers of Kenyans from congregating in Nairobi's city center because this would indicate a loss of control. The battles will be fought on the edges of the slums on the outskirts of the city center as people try to leave and law enforcement try to keep them in. If the people break through the police lines, who knows what will happen. Many, many Kenyans might die tomorrow. The question is how far the government is willing to go and how far the people are willing to go. This is going to be a test of wills.
The government refuses to conduct a recount administered by an independent body. This is odd if they won the election fair and square. The opposition has just indicated that they are willing to participate in an interim government for 3 months with the aim of re-running the presidential election.
So what's gonna happen tomorrow with the proposed rally?
People in the slums will try leave and head for the city center to protest. There will, naturally, be a police cordon around all slums because the government has banned this event. As more and more people build up at the edges of the slums and try leave, the police will have to decide what level of force to use. If the people are peaceful and are led by women it might be tough to contain the people. But if young men are leading and become violent, then many people will die.
Another big question is what happens if the police cordons are breached? Running battles will probably ensue all over the city center because the temptation to loot might be be too strong. If the people remain focused on the political goal, then we might witness an amazing political revolution. If they decide to loot, then all will be lost and mayhem will ensue. My big worry is that it only takes a few thugs to start and escalate violence. This is why this protest must be led by women.
Then the 64 million dollar question is: what will happen to the opposition leaders if/when they attempt to reach the city center. Will they be arrested? And if they are, what will be the response in the immediate vicinity and what will be the response in the country as a whole? Is Raila Odinga willing to risk arrest and what would this mean strategically for him? Is Mwai Kibaki willing to arrest Raila Odinga and other opposition leaders and what will this mean strategically for him? It is important to note that in Kenya, getting arrested generally means you lose.
Unless, an 11th hour deal is brokered, Thursday, January 3 2008 is judgment day for Kenya.
Kenya is NOT Rwanda. The ethnic killings MUST stop. Mr. Kibaki and Mr. Odinga must call on their supporters to stop the violence.
The political situation is confusing. The government is offering talks with the opposition but there is little that the government can offer the opposition because power in Kenya is concentrated in the Office of the President and that is what is the center of the controversy -- the Presidency. On the other hand, the opposition's hard line stance (they refuse to meet with the government unless Kibaki accepts defeat which he will never do) is unrealistic. Both sides, it seems, are buckling down for a showdown tomorrow when an opposition protest is planned without government approval. There might be an enormous amount of violence tomorrow in Kenya and I am very upset.
The government position is clear: Focus attention on the ethnic violence and crack down hard. The government MUST prevent large numbers of Kenyans from congregating in Nairobi's city center because this would indicate a loss of control. The battles will be fought on the edges of the slums on the outskirts of the city center as people try to leave and law enforcement try to keep them in. If the people break through the police lines, who knows what will happen. Many, many Kenyans might die tomorrow. The question is how far the government is willing to go and how far the people are willing to go. This is going to be a test of wills.
The government refuses to conduct a recount administered by an independent body. This is odd if they won the election fair and square. The opposition has just indicated that they are willing to participate in an interim government for 3 months with the aim of re-running the presidential election.
So what's gonna happen tomorrow with the proposed rally?
People in the slums will try leave and head for the city center to protest. There will, naturally, be a police cordon around all slums because the government has banned this event. As more and more people build up at the edges of the slums and try leave, the police will have to decide what level of force to use. If the people are peaceful and are led by women it might be tough to contain the people. But if young men are leading and become violent, then many people will die.
Another big question is what happens if the police cordons are breached? Running battles will probably ensue all over the city center because the temptation to loot might be be too strong. If the people remain focused on the political goal, then we might witness an amazing political revolution. If they decide to loot, then all will be lost and mayhem will ensue. My big worry is that it only takes a few thugs to start and escalate violence. This is why this protest must be led by women.
Then the 64 million dollar question is: what will happen to the opposition leaders if/when they attempt to reach the city center. Will they be arrested? And if they are, what will be the response in the immediate vicinity and what will be the response in the country as a whole? Is Raila Odinga willing to risk arrest and what would this mean strategically for him? Is Mwai Kibaki willing to arrest Raila Odinga and other opposition leaders and what will this mean strategically for him? It is important to note that in Kenya, getting arrested generally means you lose.
Unless, an 11th hour deal is brokered, Thursday, January 3 2008 is judgment day for Kenya.
Tuesday, January 1, 2008
Kenya in distress...
Introduction
The East African nation of Kenya (my native land) conducted General Elections on December 27, 2007. It was an extremely well attended contest with 70% of eligible voters voting, according to some reports. The voting itself was mostly uneventful. However, problems emerged during the tallying process. This resulted in the incumbent President winning the Presidential election (which, in Kenya, is separate from the parliamentary vote) DESPITE 80% of his cabinet being summarily voted out of office, AND his party's parliamentary majority in the Kenya Parliament dwindle to a measly 33 seats out of 210 seats. This would be akin to the Democrats winning more than 60 seats in the US Senate and more than 300 seats in the US House of Representatives, but Giuliani winning the US Presidency by a couple thousand votes. It’s possible, but fishy.
First, let me say, I am an American citizen of Kenyan descent so I have no direct stake in the recently concluded 2007 Kenyan elections more than a deeply felt desire to see my native country advance to a more evolved species of political animal. Having said that: Clearly, the first thing that must happen is that the tribal killings and resultant reprisals, as well as the indiscriminate looting of legitimate businesses MUST stop because the ethnic violence only obscures the main issue: that, based on the information currently available to me, the 2007 Kenya Presidential Election was BLATANTLY & AUDACIOUSLY stolen by the incumbent government. This is a provocative and pointed statement, but this is what I believe.
Direct Evidence
On the point of the veracity of the election results, there has been overwhelming reporting of direct evidence of rigging from credible news sources the world over (e.g. The BBC, The New York Times, The Times, The Guardian, The Independent) including, but not limited to, ballot stuffing using photocopied voting returns; outright inflation of voting numbers in government strongholds e.g. the Precinct Returning Officer originally declaring around 50,000 votes for the government winner, but then numbers that appeared in the national tally for the exact same precinct were magically increased to around 78,000. In addition, voter turnout in some government stronghold constituencies were as high as 200% (i.e. there were 70,000 registered voters in a constituency, but 140,000 votes were tallied from that same constituency). Now, 115% voter turnout is undeniably fake but it is still possibly acceptable given that elections can never be perfect. But a 200% voter turnout is beyond the pale.
Circumstantial Evidence
This direct evidence of rigging taken together with the equally overwhelming circumstantial evidence of Mr. Kibaki (the incumbent President) losing 6 out of the 8 provinces, yet winning the presidency outright; as well as 80% of Mr. Kibaki's cabinet being summarily voted out of office yet he still wins the presidency. Then there was the suspicious 2 day delay of reporting of results from Central and Eastern provinces (the incumbent's stronghold); the suspicious tallying process including the mysterious disappearance of OFFICIAL returning officers from certain constituencies for up to 48 hours (there was not even cell phone contact). Then the secret declaration of Mr. Kibaki as the winner and his immediate swearing in less than an hour after the results were announced. On top of this, there is the subsequent government’s outright rejection of a recount request; and the subsequent government imposed media blackout. All these factors point to the fact that the allegation that the 2007 Kenya Presidential General Election was fraudulent is NOT a frivolous charge, and deserves, at a minimum, independent auditing.
Legitimacy of democratic elections
Having said that, the most unfortunate consequences following this scandalous election are NOT the tribal ones. Though the tribal clashes have been the most widely reported consequence of the 2007 Kenya election and, admittedly, this ethnic violence cannot be ignored, this tribal conflict remains, in my view, at best, a red herring. The most unfortunate consequence of this election is, without question, the legitimacy of the democratic process and the Kenyan peoples’ perceptions of and faith in this democratic process.
The legitimacy of democratic elections depends on the confidence the people have in them. This confidence in democratic elections is built over time and over numerous elections where, the generally accepted pre-election peoples’ voice is, more or less reflected in the post-election voting tallies. If this happens enough times, the people acquire an innate and steady belief in the authenticity of the democratic election process that will survive the occasional anomaly that will eventually occur in all democratic societies (see e.g. U.S. Presidential elections of 2004).
The generally perceived illegitimacy of Kenya’s 2007 election result does enormous damage to this nascent process of the seeding, rooting and growth of faith and confidence in democracy writ large and, specifically, in the technical and bureaucratic processes that democratic elections require. The Kenyan political psyche and Kenyan political behavior desperately needs to believe in the notion that “even if we are a minority, our rights will be protected”. Kenyans showed their faith in the democratic process by showing up and voting in record numbers -- by some estimates, upwards of 70% of eligible voters. What will happen to that faith in democracy and its processes after this election? What will happen if Kenyans begin to believe their votes mean nothing?
Effect of underlying ethnic tensions
The following statements will be controversial and even offensive to some Kenyans but let me say it loud and clear and without equivocation: 2007 was NOT inherently the Luo ethnic group's turn to lead Kenya! Conversely, the Kikuyu ethnic group do NOT, as many other Kenyans, rightly or wrongly believe, have a birthright to lead Kenya. The Presidency of Kenya should not be a zero sum game! If you lose the presidential election, you do what everyone else in mature democracies does: wait till the next election, build up your supporters and compete again and maybe you'll win. This is what happens in the more evolved democratic species of planet earth.
The sad thing is that this election was an opportunity for Kenyans to begin to evolve by understanding that the Presidency of Kenya is not the be all and end all. But because the election was, based on what I currently know, so blatantly rigged, and because Mr. Kibaki is fighting so hard to hold on to power by using soviet style police state tactics, these actions will only reinforce this PRIMITIVE genetic “winner takes all” predisposition that Kenyans are prone to: that "It’s the Presidency or broke; that without the Presidency you are nothing." Kenyans are ready to evolve beyond this but their leaders keep failing them and, worse, keep conditioning them to feel that if they don't have the Presidency, they have nothing.
What to do now?
Mass peaceful and sustained civil disobedience is the way to go. I say this because if I were a cold-blooded Kibaki adviser hell-bent on holding on to power, I would advocate a two pronged policy: 1) Play for time. Black-out the non-government controlled media to gag both the opposition and international media and, most importantly, to keep the Kenyan people misinformed and confused, and hope that in a week or two the ardor will die down and passions will cool and people will become indifferent; 2) I would also advise him to incite ethnic violence in targeted areas and then crack down hard and when enough people have died, both Kenyans and the international community will likely decide that a dishonest peace is the lesser evil between an endless and uncertain but righteous resistance.
This is why sustained peaceful mass civil disobedience is the way to go. This will better spotlight the fact that it is Kenya's democracy that's at stake and not atavistic ethnic resentments. To this end, I would organize rallies led by old women and children followed by the general public marching peacefully. Surely many of the Police & GSU officers charged with maintaining law and order are ALSO Kenyan and have ALSO seen what has happened and ALSO believe the election may have been fraudulent. How, then, can these officers beat up or even kill peaceful women and children advocating what they themselves, though professional law enforcement officers, also believe because they too are Kenyan voters with consciences? This is the confrontation that must happen and cannot be lost: peaceful women and children vs. armed government soldiers.
Purpose of Civil Disobedience
The purpose of any civil disobedience must be aimed at informing the recalcitrant administration that its authority is not recognized until the true result of the election is ascertained. In addition, civil disobedience must be aimed at educating the ordinary people that their resistance to tyranny is valid and effective and not futile. If civil disobedience forces a recount by an independent body then that ought to be enough. If civil disobedience causes a run-off election overseen by independent bodies, then that ought to be enough. Civil disobedience should not be used to disrupt ordinary commerce and trade, nor should it be used to target rival ethnic groups and ratchet up ethnic tensions. It should always be peaceful; deriving its power from the certitude of its moral correctness.
Possibility for Negotiations?
The pessimistic side of me worries that Kibaki and Raila may have gone too far for either side to be able to back down while saving face by either conceding defeat, or offering the possibility of a recount or accepting a run-off vote. If this is the case, then Mr. Kibaki will naturally be forced to go all the way: arrest all opposition leaders, declare martial law, including indefinite detentions without trial etc. until order is established throughout Kenya. This would be a disaster because many people will die if this happens. But I still have faith that sustained and coordinated civil disobedience plus international pressure is the only way to counter this.
Wild Card
Of course the wild card in all this is the Kenyan military who, to their credit, have not gotten involved... yet. From what I have heard the military is divided. This might be good news because it would mean that a political solution is more likely to occur than if the military were unanimously behind one candidate one way or the other. On the other hand, if things reach the boiling point, the military might split might unfortunately devolve Kenya into a full blown civil war. May the Holy Saints and our Sacred Ancestors prevent this from happening.
Role of foreigners with Kenyan heritage
For Kenyan-born people with foreign citizenship, if you believe this election was fraudulent and understand and accept the importance of this election, then you must harass your Congressman, Senator, MP or other legislative representative in your adopted country and keep the pressure on. This is also the only way to compete with the higher profile media situations in Pakistan and the current US primary election cycle. Call your representative every day and call several times a day. Indicate your ability to donate and organize like minded folks and keep badgering them to pressure the State Department/Foreign and Commonwealth Office etc. to pressure the US, UK, EU etc to pressure Kibaki to agree to a recount or runoff conducted by an independent party.
Final thoughts
One final comment, this result CANNOT be allowed to stand because it sets an unacceptable precedent. If the result stands, then why should the elections of 2012, 2017, 2022 etc. be any different? People will vote and the powers that be will still remain in charge. We will go back to the Moi days of the 1980s. This 2007 election and what happens after is a HUGE and CRITICAL opportunity to further entrench the principles and process of democratic government in the Kenyan psyche and in Kenyan political behavior. We cannot afford to mess this up. As an American of Kenyan descent my heart bleeds for the land of my fathers.
God help us all.
Andrew Owiti
The East African nation of Kenya (my native land) conducted General Elections on December 27, 2007. It was an extremely well attended contest with 70% of eligible voters voting, according to some reports. The voting itself was mostly uneventful. However, problems emerged during the tallying process. This resulted in the incumbent President winning the Presidential election (which, in Kenya, is separate from the parliamentary vote) DESPITE 80% of his cabinet being summarily voted out of office, AND his party's parliamentary majority in the Kenya Parliament dwindle to a measly 33 seats out of 210 seats. This would be akin to the Democrats winning more than 60 seats in the US Senate and more than 300 seats in the US House of Representatives, but Giuliani winning the US Presidency by a couple thousand votes. It’s possible, but fishy.
First, let me say, I am an American citizen of Kenyan descent so I have no direct stake in the recently concluded 2007 Kenyan elections more than a deeply felt desire to see my native country advance to a more evolved species of political animal. Having said that: Clearly, the first thing that must happen is that the tribal killings and resultant reprisals, as well as the indiscriminate looting of legitimate businesses MUST stop because the ethnic violence only obscures the main issue: that, based on the information currently available to me, the 2007 Kenya Presidential Election was BLATANTLY & AUDACIOUSLY stolen by the incumbent government. This is a provocative and pointed statement, but this is what I believe.
Direct Evidence
On the point of the veracity of the election results, there has been overwhelming reporting of direct evidence of rigging from credible news sources the world over (e.g. The BBC, The New York Times, The Times, The Guardian, The Independent) including, but not limited to, ballot stuffing using photocopied voting returns; outright inflation of voting numbers in government strongholds e.g. the Precinct Returning Officer originally declaring around 50,000 votes for the government winner, but then numbers that appeared in the national tally for the exact same precinct were magically increased to around 78,000. In addition, voter turnout in some government stronghold constituencies were as high as 200% (i.e. there were 70,000 registered voters in a constituency, but 140,000 votes were tallied from that same constituency). Now, 115% voter turnout is undeniably fake but it is still possibly acceptable given that elections can never be perfect. But a 200% voter turnout is beyond the pale.
Circumstantial Evidence
This direct evidence of rigging taken together with the equally overwhelming circumstantial evidence of Mr. Kibaki (the incumbent President) losing 6 out of the 8 provinces, yet winning the presidency outright; as well as 80% of Mr. Kibaki's cabinet being summarily voted out of office yet he still wins the presidency. Then there was the suspicious 2 day delay of reporting of results from Central and Eastern provinces (the incumbent's stronghold); the suspicious tallying process including the mysterious disappearance of OFFICIAL returning officers from certain constituencies for up to 48 hours (there was not even cell phone contact). Then the secret declaration of Mr. Kibaki as the winner and his immediate swearing in less than an hour after the results were announced. On top of this, there is the subsequent government’s outright rejection of a recount request; and the subsequent government imposed media blackout. All these factors point to the fact that the allegation that the 2007 Kenya Presidential General Election was fraudulent is NOT a frivolous charge, and deserves, at a minimum, independent auditing.
Legitimacy of democratic elections
Having said that, the most unfortunate consequences following this scandalous election are NOT the tribal ones. Though the tribal clashes have been the most widely reported consequence of the 2007 Kenya election and, admittedly, this ethnic violence cannot be ignored, this tribal conflict remains, in my view, at best, a red herring. The most unfortunate consequence of this election is, without question, the legitimacy of the democratic process and the Kenyan peoples’ perceptions of and faith in this democratic process.
The legitimacy of democratic elections depends on the confidence the people have in them. This confidence in democratic elections is built over time and over numerous elections where, the generally accepted pre-election peoples’ voice is, more or less reflected in the post-election voting tallies. If this happens enough times, the people acquire an innate and steady belief in the authenticity of the democratic election process that will survive the occasional anomaly that will eventually occur in all democratic societies (see e.g. U.S. Presidential elections of 2004).
The generally perceived illegitimacy of Kenya’s 2007 election result does enormous damage to this nascent process of the seeding, rooting and growth of faith and confidence in democracy writ large and, specifically, in the technical and bureaucratic processes that democratic elections require. The Kenyan political psyche and Kenyan political behavior desperately needs to believe in the notion that “even if we are a minority, our rights will be protected”. Kenyans showed their faith in the democratic process by showing up and voting in record numbers -- by some estimates, upwards of 70% of eligible voters. What will happen to that faith in democracy and its processes after this election? What will happen if Kenyans begin to believe their votes mean nothing?
Effect of underlying ethnic tensions
The following statements will be controversial and even offensive to some Kenyans but let me say it loud and clear and without equivocation: 2007 was NOT inherently the Luo ethnic group's turn to lead Kenya! Conversely, the Kikuyu ethnic group do NOT, as many other Kenyans, rightly or wrongly believe, have a birthright to lead Kenya. The Presidency of Kenya should not be a zero sum game! If you lose the presidential election, you do what everyone else in mature democracies does: wait till the next election, build up your supporters and compete again and maybe you'll win. This is what happens in the more evolved democratic species of planet earth.
The sad thing is that this election was an opportunity for Kenyans to begin to evolve by understanding that the Presidency of Kenya is not the be all and end all. But because the election was, based on what I currently know, so blatantly rigged, and because Mr. Kibaki is fighting so hard to hold on to power by using soviet style police state tactics, these actions will only reinforce this PRIMITIVE genetic “winner takes all” predisposition that Kenyans are prone to: that "It’s the Presidency or broke; that without the Presidency you are nothing." Kenyans are ready to evolve beyond this but their leaders keep failing them and, worse, keep conditioning them to feel that if they don't have the Presidency, they have nothing.
What to do now?
Mass peaceful and sustained civil disobedience is the way to go. I say this because if I were a cold-blooded Kibaki adviser hell-bent on holding on to power, I would advocate a two pronged policy: 1) Play for time. Black-out the non-government controlled media to gag both the opposition and international media and, most importantly, to keep the Kenyan people misinformed and confused, and hope that in a week or two the ardor will die down and passions will cool and people will become indifferent; 2) I would also advise him to incite ethnic violence in targeted areas and then crack down hard and when enough people have died, both Kenyans and the international community will likely decide that a dishonest peace is the lesser evil between an endless and uncertain but righteous resistance.
This is why sustained peaceful mass civil disobedience is the way to go. This will better spotlight the fact that it is Kenya's democracy that's at stake and not atavistic ethnic resentments. To this end, I would organize rallies led by old women and children followed by the general public marching peacefully. Surely many of the Police & GSU officers charged with maintaining law and order are ALSO Kenyan and have ALSO seen what has happened and ALSO believe the election may have been fraudulent. How, then, can these officers beat up or even kill peaceful women and children advocating what they themselves, though professional law enforcement officers, also believe because they too are Kenyan voters with consciences? This is the confrontation that must happen and cannot be lost: peaceful women and children vs. armed government soldiers.
Purpose of Civil Disobedience
The purpose of any civil disobedience must be aimed at informing the recalcitrant administration that its authority is not recognized until the true result of the election is ascertained. In addition, civil disobedience must be aimed at educating the ordinary people that their resistance to tyranny is valid and effective and not futile. If civil disobedience forces a recount by an independent body then that ought to be enough. If civil disobedience causes a run-off election overseen by independent bodies, then that ought to be enough. Civil disobedience should not be used to disrupt ordinary commerce and trade, nor should it be used to target rival ethnic groups and ratchet up ethnic tensions. It should always be peaceful; deriving its power from the certitude of its moral correctness.
Possibility for Negotiations?
The pessimistic side of me worries that Kibaki and Raila may have gone too far for either side to be able to back down while saving face by either conceding defeat, or offering the possibility of a recount or accepting a run-off vote. If this is the case, then Mr. Kibaki will naturally be forced to go all the way: arrest all opposition leaders, declare martial law, including indefinite detentions without trial etc. until order is established throughout Kenya. This would be a disaster because many people will die if this happens. But I still have faith that sustained and coordinated civil disobedience plus international pressure is the only way to counter this.
Wild Card
Of course the wild card in all this is the Kenyan military who, to their credit, have not gotten involved... yet. From what I have heard the military is divided. This might be good news because it would mean that a political solution is more likely to occur than if the military were unanimously behind one candidate one way or the other. On the other hand, if things reach the boiling point, the military might split might unfortunately devolve Kenya into a full blown civil war. May the Holy Saints and our Sacred Ancestors prevent this from happening.
Role of foreigners with Kenyan heritage
For Kenyan-born people with foreign citizenship, if you believe this election was fraudulent and understand and accept the importance of this election, then you must harass your Congressman, Senator, MP or other legislative representative in your adopted country and keep the pressure on. This is also the only way to compete with the higher profile media situations in Pakistan and the current US primary election cycle. Call your representative every day and call several times a day. Indicate your ability to donate and organize like minded folks and keep badgering them to pressure the State Department/Foreign and Commonwealth Office etc. to pressure the US, UK, EU etc to pressure Kibaki to agree to a recount or runoff conducted by an independent party.
Final thoughts
One final comment, this result CANNOT be allowed to stand because it sets an unacceptable precedent. If the result stands, then why should the elections of 2012, 2017, 2022 etc. be any different? People will vote and the powers that be will still remain in charge. We will go back to the Moi days of the 1980s. This 2007 election and what happens after is a HUGE and CRITICAL opportunity to further entrench the principles and process of democratic government in the Kenyan psyche and in Kenyan political behavior. We cannot afford to mess this up. As an American of Kenyan descent my heart bleeds for the land of my fathers.
God help us all.
Andrew Owiti
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)