Kenya: Election Merely the Break in Country's Dam Wall

Kenya: Election Merely the Break in Country's Dam Wall

http://allafrica.com/stories/200802010119.html

Business Day (Johannesburg)
ANALYSIS1 February 2008Posted to the web 1 February 2008

Hany Besada And Edward KariithiJohannesburg
THE violent clashes, political turmoil and mayhem that have gripped Kenya over the past few weeks, following the seriously flawed presidential elections on December 27 , dispel any western-backed notions regarding the country as a model democracy to be replicated elsewhere on the continent. Once the envy of its poverty-stricken neighbours, many of whom are plagued by serious political instability, Kenya has long been regarded as a bastion of peace, hope and progress in a region that borders the Horn of Africa.
The crisis in east Africa's powerhouse has sent shock waves throughout the region and beyond. With more than 800 deaths, 250000 people displaced and half-a-million more in need of humanitarian assistance, Kenya is living through some of its worst recorded political violence since its independence from the UK in 1963. Far from being seen as the result of election fraud and an issue of tribal grievances, the violence can best be understood as the result of the gradual , growing frustration of Kenyans with social ills afflicting their nation. These include social marginalisation of ethnic groups, deep-seated corruption, income disparity along ethnic and regional lines, and a grotesque appetite for power by politicians but, more deeply, the failure of its political system.

The opposition, which constitutes a banding together of member of the Luo , Luhya and Kalenjin tribes, representing roughly 40% of the country's population and led, largely, by opposition leader Raila Odinga of the Orange Democratic Movement , has long insisted that it has been discriminated against by the traditionally dominant Kikuyu ethnic group, led by incumbent President Mwai Kibaki for decades, and going back as far as the early post-independence days.
Although this conflict does run along ethnic lines, it is simplistic to blame historical ethnic grievances for the country's current political turmoil. Rather, its seriously flawed and weak parliament, as well as the structure of its political system, has been a recipe for disaster for a long time coming.
This has produced a situation, similar to those in other African states with weak legislatures, where the presidential elections are regarded as an opportunity for an incumbent president, or the opposition, to utilise every avenue and all available resources to not only contest the presidency but, more importantly, win the presidency at all costs, thus ensuring accessibility to the state's coffers and power structure.
Given the government's apparent reluctance to conduct free and fair elections, its corrupt and abusive security and safety apparatus, its incompetent electoral commission and continued monopoly on power and wealth, coupled with a weak legislature, the opposition has been all the more willing to resort to an anarchic display of public disorder and violence. Looking at events over the past weeks, it is clear that Odinga and his supporters are equally to blame for the breakdown of the state's security structures, by undermining the legitimacy of the rule of law and due process, while maximising the chaos amongst the frustrated peasantry, eager for a piece of the country's wealth.
Given the weakness of the country's legislature and the obvious pitfalls that are commonly associated with the centralisation of power in the presidency, it is highly unlikely that the opposition will call off violent protests while the government refuses to address the root of the crisis. It is difficult to conceive of a change in government policy in restructuring and strengthening the country's legislature without western-backed pressure for reform, or the west abandoning, even momentarily, its long-standing backing of the regime. Kibaki -- often characterised in western media as a reliable partner in the US war against terror, a supporter of free-market economic policies, presiding over surging economic growth in recent years, and as a politician who first ran in 2002 on a political platform to curb corruption and open up Kenya's political system to greater democracy -- has had the luxury of western backing despite his apparent dismal track record in both fields. If the international community is genuinely interested in assisting Kenyans to defuse much of the violence ripping the country apart, it would need to substantially invest in bolstering Kenya's capacity by strengthening its formal institutions, particularly the national legislature.

It is too early to know whether the new face-to-face meetings between Kibaki and Odinga will produce the kind of answers that Kenya desperately needs to defuse the crisis. If mediation talks do succeed in quelling the violence temporarily, and if both sides agree on a comprehensive overhaul of the political system and electoral process, the current crisis will, undoubtedly, offer the country an opportunity to prepare the ground for a more comprehensive social rehabilitation process.
On the other hand, failure will propel the country towards chaos and the risk of ethnic cleansing -- something the international community would want to avoid at all costs, given the recent memories of Rwanda and of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Besada is senior researcher, working on fragile states, at the Centre for International Governance Innovation in Waterloo, Canada. Kariithi is chief financial officer of the Unified Financial Group and a Kenyan analyst.