COMMENTARY ON KENYA'S POLITICAL LANDSCAPE
President Kibaki's June
Reshuffle – a win-lose affair

By Matunda Nyanchama
Toronto Ontario

July 2 -- President Mwai Kibaki reshuffled the cabinet a few days ago. Reading

Mwai Kibaki, current president of the Republic of Kenya

Kenyans' reactions across the world, the move came as an anti-climax in view of Kenyans' expectations of sweeping changes for the betterment of "Wanjiku".

As per the government promise, Kenyans would have ushered in a new constitution in June 2004. As well, following the recent budget reading, Kenyans' general view of government's ability to deliver on its promises is perhaps at its lowest since its euphoric inauguration in December 2002. Since that time, Kenyans have witnessed unending factional bickering within the ruling party NARC, which has eclipsed program initiatives that would make a difference to Wanjiku.

On the surface, the new faces in cabinet suggest we have a government of national unity. The reality is different. Had the president the done this when he first came into office the move would have been more credible. In this respect, Kenyans see the changes through the prism of the ongoing wrangling in government ranks; it is about power and nothing else. Indeed, the president has employed tried and tested techniques that the country has witnessed in the course if its history.And it started soon after independence.

Kenya won independence under the Kanu banner under the leadership of the late president Jomo Kenyatta. The party espoused progressive policies and a populism that was in tune with Kenyans struggle for independence. Kanu leadership used the right rhetoric to beat their main opponents in Kadu, despite the lack of coherent ideologies within the party. No sooner did we get independence than the struggle for power and ideology took centre stage.
And the fallout came soon with the party getting help from its former nemesis Kadu. The latter was enticed to dissolve itself and join the government. Hence Kadu leaders like Ronald Ngala, Daniel Arap Moi, Masinde Muliro, Martin Shikuku, among others, joined government. Later the Kadu wing would play a crucial role in the ejection of Kanu's left-leaning faction led by the late Jaramogi Oginga Odinga.

Co-option ensured the survival of the powers that be. The process yielded an oppressive one-party state where the central government and its power elites dominated power for many, many years. In the Kenyatta era, patronage became the sina qua non, corruption became entrenched and egalitarianism became a foreign concept in public service. The political developments of the 1960s and 1970s occasioned JM Kariuki's famed phrase of Kenya being a country of "ten millionaires and ten million beggars". The reality has become worse over time!

Daniel arap Moi, former president of the Republic of Kenya

Daniel Arap Moi was a product of this system and perfected Kenyatta's most
Machiavellian moves, with his opponents falling one after the other like dominos. The results: perhaps one of the most despotic dictatorships of its time on the African continent.

Under Moi, we saw the politics of cooption in play following the 1997 General and Presidential Elections. Borrowing a leaf from Jomo Kenyatta, the good student that Moi was sought and obtained cooperation from the then National Development Party (NDP) under the leadership of Raila Odinga, son of the late Jaramogi Oginga Odinga. Between 1997 and 2002, the NDP propped the Kanu across a range of issues, including the controversial constitutional reforms Kenyans had been seeking for many years. For a party that was born of a reformist agenda, Kenyans saw the NDP's strategy as self-serving and reactionary. Despite the fallout just before president Moi's retirement, the NDP had played a crucial role in sustaining Moi and Kanu in the president last term in office.

Like Moi before him, it is clear that president Kibaki has been a good student of his predecessors. His most recent power play is a clear illustration of this. The Kibaki administration has come far short of the expectations in view of the euphoria with which it was ushered into office. In some respects the government's performance has left Moi looking better than he actually was.

For the NARC government, "Wrangling" could easily be mistaken for its second name. Performance in many areas has faired worse than expected. The coalition partners have been uneasy bed mates, especially on the contentious memorandum of understanding (MOU) they struck before the election. This MOU was predicated upon the successful conclusion of constitutional reforms, which would create political offices that were promised to the partners in
the coalition.

The impact of the MOU on the reforms process has been palpable from the beginning. For the LDP faction of NARC it was the executive prime minister with powers rivaling those of the presidency. The stalemate over Draft-0 of the constitution remains the most contentious aspect of the reforms process. In the big picture, this makes the reforms process a short-term search for power rather than long-term search for a constitutional dispensation for the country.

It is clear the recent reshuffle was partly intended to break the political logjam caused by differences in NARC, and weaken the LDP faction. In the face of it the reshuffle creates a government of national unity with all political parties accommodated in government. The president's motivation is more about power rather than the will to do good for Kenyans. The appointment of recycled politicians from Kanu's oppressive past makes the move even more cynical.

Our country is endowed with a forgiving and patient political culture where Kenyans go about their business wishing that the government could provide the necessary peace, security, infrastructure and other services to allow the people to improve their lot in life. NARC politicians, on the other hand, have been struggling for dominance from day one, forgetting that they were elected on a mandate to serve Kenyans. The open wrangling and failure to appreciate its negative impact on ability to serve Wanjiku is unconscionable. The failure to put aside personal differences and ambition, even if for a while, is a terrible failure of the political leadership. Our politicians can learn a lot from successful democracies where difference of opinion fuels political debate of ideas for ongoing regeneration. For example, while Draft-0 is a substantially good document, opponents of various approaches on how parliament should handle it should be free to discuss their approaches openly and remain open to others' approaches.

Politics must not be a zero-sum game where compromise is seen as a loss. Good political solutions come, almost always, through debate, discussions, negotiations and consensus-building. So far, our leaders continue to generate a lot of noise and posturing with little substance in ideas and ways to move the country forward. And since all the noise is about power and who wields it, Wanjuki's interests have been shelved to the back burner.

The reshuffle can only be seen in this context and hence the disappointment of many who expected that our politicians would do better. Would the reshuffle serve Kenyans well? That will remain to be seen. However, if history is anything to go by, consolidation of power usually results in more oppressive systems, increases dissention and disillusionment. The country experienced it under Kenyatta with the cooption of Kadu and the edging out of what came to be the Kenya

Peoples Union (KPU) under Oginga's Odinga's. We also saw it in the 1997 cooption of the NDP into government which, some would say, helped postpone the start of the constitutional reforms. In this kind of power-plays, there are winners and losers.

There are also lessons of win-wins that those struggling for in power could learn from. The bickering over constitutional reforms in the 1990s had produced two key groups which has differences on how the process should be done and by who. There was the parliamentary committee (largely driven by Kanu and the NDP) and the Ufungamano Group that had the support of the Opposition and most of the civil society. For along time none of these made meaningful movement in advancing the process. Even as the parliamentary committee claimed legal legitimacy to drive the process, politically, it could not make much headway. The breakthrough came only when Ufungamano was brought into the fold in an expanded Review Commission. With that, came the BOMAS process and Draft-0!

The way out of power logjams is not exclusion! It is discussions, debate, consensus-seeking and compromise that would bring needed breakthroughs. Such are win-win outcomes that should inform statesmanship and true national leadership.

The recent reshuffle does not address this!

Click here to comment about this story

Matunda Nyanchama can be reached at mnyanchama@masharikileo.com