|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Africa
Violence still threatens after Kenyan peace deal
By Ann Talbot
12 March 2008
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
President Mwai Kibaki of Kenya and opposition leader Raila
Odinga signed a power-sharing agreement brokered by former United
Nations General Secretary Kofi Annan on February 28. Both parties
to the agreement expressed the hope that it would bring an end
to two months of intertribal violence and state repression that
have claimed at least 1,500 lives.
However, at least 19 people have been killed since the deal
was signed, and the figure is expected to rise. Many bodies are
thought to be lying uncollected because further clashes are feared.
Violence has continued in the Rift Valley area. Further ethnic
cleansing was reported in Narok and Kericho. More people flocked
to the camp for displaced persons at Naivasha, where approximately
16,000 people are already sheltering from earlier violence. Official
figures estimate that some 4,600 people have fled from the district
of Laikipia in the Rift Valley after four days in which houses
were torched.
As the official opening of the Kenyan parliament got under
way, it was still not clear how the power-sharing agreement would
work. Rival militias are said to be arming themselves in readiness
for further violence.
The US government has retained its travel warnings for Kenya.
We are yet to lift it. The advisory still stands. When we
lift them, it will be made public, Ambassador Michael Ranneberger
said at the annual dinner of the Kenya Law Society.
Odinga, who is to become the first prime minister in Kenyas
history, joined President Kibaki in a display of unity at the
Karen Golf and Country Club, where they distributed the prizes
in the Tusker Kenya Open Golf Championships. They used the opportunity
to allay the fears of investors. It required me and Kibaki
to sort out the Kenyan poll problem, Odinga said. Kenya
is safe for tourists to come.
As ambassadors of goodwill, I appeal to you to market
Kenya in your home countries, Kibaki told the golfers, not
only as a peaceful country, but also as a tourism and investment
destination of choice.
Kibaki and Odinga are eager to reassure businessmen because
tourism is a major foreign exchange earner for Kenya. Kenya lost
US$6 million as a result of the cancellation of conferences.
Standard and Poors gave Kenya a B+ rating for investment
last year. When the post-election violence began, they put Kenya
on credit watch. Fitch, the rival ratings agency, expects a further
downgrading of Kenyas status this year. This is a serious
situation because the government intended to carry out some major
privatisations and to become the first East African country to
launch a Eurobond.
It is still not clear how the power-sharing agreement will
work. The uncertainty gives ample scope for conflict between the
participants, which may spill over onto the streets.
The constitution must still be amended to create the post of
prime minister. Kenya has had an executive president since independence
in 1963. How the presidents powers will be shared with the
prime minister remains uncertain. Some commentators have suggested
that the president may control foreign affairs and the prime minister
domestic affairs, as in France.
On Thursday, parliament will begin the process of implementing
the deal with the National Accord and Reconciliation Act. It will
be the first of four bills intended to end the violence.
Kibaki and Odinga must begin to appoint a cabinet. It is thought
that Odinga will demand the posts of finance minister and justice
minister for his Orange Democratic Movement (ODM). Justice Minister
Martha Karua has been one of the fiercest defenders of President
Kibaki and led his Party of National Unity (PNU) negotiating team
in the talks that preceded the agreement. She opposed the idea
of a coalition up to the last minute. It was a torrent of abuse
from Karua that led Annan, now head of the Panel of Eminent African
Personalities, to suspend the talks at one point.
The post of finance minister, presently held by Amos Kimunya,
may be even more hotly contested since it holds enormous powers
of patronage. It will be a key post in relation to the corruption
scandals that have plagued the government of Kibaki. If Kibaki
loses the right to appoint his own man to finance, his political
power will have been considerably curtailed.
Currently, the two parties are almost balanced in parliament.
But five by-elections are due that may alter the situation. These
elections will become intense contests that may at any point result
in further violence.
Immense external pressure was put on Kibaki to accept the agreement.
He only agreed to power sharing when President Yoweri Museveni
of Uganda turned against him. At one point in the talks, Museveni
asked all Kibakis advisors to leave the room. The two men
were closeted together for three hours, after which Kibaki emerged
looking chastened, according to observers.
Museveni is said to have spoken just as bluntly to Odinga.
Ugandas landlocked economy was suffering from the blockade
on trade to and from the port of Mombasa. How far Musevenis
threats went is not known, but he has shown himself willing to
intervene militarily in other Africa countries before. There were
rumours that Ugandan troops had been seen in Kenya.
Pressure also came from Canada and Europe, with leading Kenyan
politicians threatened with travel bans and having their assets
seized. The fact that Switzerland came on board was important,
because many of the Kenyans have Swiss bank accounts where they
salt away their illicitly acquired wealth. The same threats hang
over any of Kenyas political elite who attempt to disrupt
the power-sharing agreement.
Most important was the pressure brought to bear by the United
States. While President Bush was touring Africa, Secretary of
State Condoleezza Rice was in Kenya holding talks with Kibaki
and Odinga. It simply isnt going to be business as
usual until this crisis is resolved, she said.
Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Jendayi Frazer
warned of targeted sanctions if the two parties failed to sign
a power-sharing agreement.
Kenya is not in a position to break its ties with the West
because its economy is so closely geared to markets in Europe
and to North American tourism. Whilst the growing influence of
China and other non-Western powers in Africa allowed Kibaki to
hold out against making a power-sharing agreement for some time,
the West has eventually been able to exert decisive pressure on
Kenyas political elite and business class. This was especially
true of the newer layers of entrepreneurs who have moved into
the digital and financial sectors in recent years.
But the agreement does not address the underlying problems.
Even if the two main political parties wished to make power sharing
work, there are fundamental political, economic and social issues
that have still not been resolved.
Packing flowers for US$2 a day rates as a good job in Kenya,
and such jobs are hard to find. Many of Kenyas predominantly
young population are unemployed or work sporadically in the unofficial
economy. Kenyas 6 percent economic growth rate in recent
years has deepened the division between rich and poor. The majority
of the population have not shared in the boom.
Unemployment was estimated to stand at 40 percent even before
the post-election violence. Unemployed youth and students, who
see limited prospects for themselves despite their education,
made up the militias that terrorised many districts. Politicians
from both sides were able to hire them to drive out the supporters
of their rivals while keeping their own hands clean. Members of
other tribes or ethnic groups have become scapegoats for the economic
deprivation that so many suffer in Kenya.
Land remains a key issue, despite the flow of population into
the towns and the development of the economy because of the high
unemployment levels. It is often the only means of gaining a certain
measure of economic security.
In the Rift Valley, which has seen some of the worst violence,
British colonialism has left a legacy of inequitable land distribution.
This fertile area was part of the so-called White Highlands where
British colonial settlers seized the land of the nomadic Maasai
herders and the Kalenjin to establish vast estates. After independence,
the predominantly Kikuyu elite were able to acquire most of this
land and lay the basis for their continued domination of Kenyan
business and political life.
Local tribes that have been excluded from landholding in the
Rift Valley supported Odingas ODM in the election in the
hope of securing a redistribution of land. Even before the election,
party officials and local elders were planning a campaign of ethnic
violence to drive out the Kikuyu. Those who suffered were comparatively
poor farmers, rather than the wealthy absentee landowners.
The Kikuyu who settled in the Rift Valley had in many cases
been driven from their land by white colonial settlers. They do
not have a homeland to go back to as the pro-ODM Kalenjin militia
demand.
On its part, the Kenyan government appears to have turned to
the Mungiki, an illegal secret society that exacts tolls from
minibus taxis and levies protection money in urban slums. The
BBC has alleged that senior government figures met with leaders
of the Mungiki at an official presidential residence. The BBC
claims that sources inside the Mungiki have said that it was a
renegade group that met with the government. Eyewitnesses maintain
Mungiki were involved in attacking non-Kikuyus with machetes.
A policeman told the BBC that police on duty at roadblocks were
told to allow certain minibuses through, although they were filled
with young men who appeared to be armed.
A Kenyan government spokesman has declared that these allegations
are preposterous. Only last year, there was a police
crackdown on Mungiki operations. But Kenyan human rights groups
and church sources are convinced that Mungiki members were operating
alongside the police in some areas.
Politicians have turned to the Mungiki in the past. President
Arap Moi and Uhuru Kenyatta appealed to it the 2002 elections,
and the ODM turned to it during its 2005 campaign for a constitutional
referendum.
As long as the question of social inequality is not addressed,
there will be the basis for political violence in Kenya. And the
power-sharing agreement offers no prospect of reducing the disparity
between rich and poor or providing jobs for the unemployed.
For the politicians, the power-sharing agreement is just thatan
agreement to share power and the privileges that go with it, at
least for the time being. Odinga spoke about social inequality
in his election rhetoric and demanded change, but the main change
he is concerned with is securing wealth for himself and his supporters.
The ruling elite of all parties are incapable of resolving
the problems inherent in the legacy of colonialism. The fact that
they have had to turn in the present crisis to foreign powers
demonstrates that Kenya remains a semi-colonial country, whose
independence has always had a very limited character.
Bush may not have been able to personally visit Kenya as he
had originally intended to do, but, at a time when US power in
Africa is being seriously challenged by China, Kenya has found
itself being drawn even more tightly into the US orbit. The US
is determined to maintain its hold on this country, which is strategically
vital to its interests in East Africa and beyond.
The contending parties in Kenya may be reluctant to allow street
violence to reach the levels that it has in recent weeks because
they both want to maintain US support. But the agreement will
only ensure a temporary cessation in the conflict because the
underlying issues have not been resolved. They cannot be resolved
under the auspices of a colonial power that is engaged in an explosive
campaign of military expansionism. For the US administration,
this nation of 37 million people is no more than a cog in its
military and intelligence machine.
See Also:
UN secretary-general arrives
in Kenya in attempt to restart talks
[2 February 2008]
An exchange on Kenya:
Social disintegration in country touted as African success
story
[31 January 2008]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |