Kenya is home to more than 40
different tribes and has a long history of ethnic rivalries. Most of the ethnic
disputes stem around water access and grazing rights but in the passed two
decades political conflict has emerged. After independence in 1963 ethnic
tensions were exacerbated by a winner-take-all political system that made the Kenya
African National Union (KANU) party the only political party until 1982. Kenyans
political loyalty is based on tribal ties rather than ideologies and many
tribes grew intolerant of the unequal representation by the KANU party. In 1992
and 1997, opposition parties ran against the KANU party but the elections were
accompanied by violence and fraud and the KANU party remained in power. In
2002, there were free and fair elections as Mwai Kibaki defeated the KANU
candidate under an anticorruption platform. However, in the 2007 elections,
Kibaki won the election by a narrow margin despite polls that predicted the
opposition, Riala Oginda, would sweep the incumbent. Oginda accused the
incumbent of vote rigging and widespread violence broke out. In two months of
violence there was over 1,500 deaths and thousand displaced from their homes.
The next election is six months
away and there have already been over 200 politically motivated killings in the
last two months. Every election year since the early 1990s has been plagued
with violence among tribes and Kenyans are worried that it will only increase
in the upcoming months. Recent developments have revealed that two leading
presidential hopefuls have helped organize political violence and the
International Criminal Court has indicted them. Rights groups have urged
Kenya’s High Court to ban their candidacy for president due to their support
for political violence but so far they have not been penalized.
Kenya is east Africa’s biggest
economy with what seemed to be an improving democratic state but political
violence and corrupt candidates have revealed weaknesses in the government’s
infrastructure and security. The country is ethnically fractionalized with 3.7
million people among 40 different tribes but many tribes have experienced
unequal representation within the government and have turned to violence to
show their grievances. Violence did subside after the 2007 elections when the
UN sponsored talks of power-sharing. The talks resulted in the created of a
Prime Minister that was appointed to President Kibaki opponent, Mr. Oginda. Although
conflicts can end by a power-sharing treaty, the Kenyan government drafted a
new constitution in 2010 that eliminates the role of Prime Minister in the
upcoming 2013 elections. Considering the
violence that already started amidst a new election, Kenyan’s are still showing
their grievances of tribal representation and skepticism of a free and fair
election. The state must improve security to decrease violence and promote a
political system that accurately represents the highly fractionalized country. These
politically grievances are only exacerbated from other tribal tensions and thus
police and security forces need to be able to suppress violence throughout the
country. Additionally, there should be an investigation into the presidential
hopefuls and whether they have promoted or exacerbated political violence. Kenya
needs a leader who has not contributed to political violence but is trying to
improve political representation through non-violent means. Kenyan’s will not
trust, nor support, a leader who has exacerbated the conflict. There have been reforms and a new constitution
since the last election so it’s hard to predict whether these reforms will
demonstrate a more legitimate political system in the upcoming election. If
violence persists after the March election, perhaps a UN intervention and/or
another UN-led power-sharing talk would help Kenya suppress political violence
among tribes.
Nicolette Mullenix
Kenya's current state of politics seems to mirror that of most of Sub Sarahan Africa's. In Class we have been discussing predictors of state failure and democratic consolidation. Though many theorists posit that Ethnicity plays a large role in political stability, ethnicity is not a strong predictor of conflict in statistical studies. The presence of ethnic groups alone does not necessarily cause or lead to conflict. The presence of ethnic groups in conjunction with other factors, however, can lead to conflict. Aside from the large number of tribes in Kenya, what other factors have caused politically motivated violence?
ReplyDeleteA new article came out about this today on BBC news. There was not a lot of information of other factors that would be contributing to this politically motivated violence. In 2007, the country was experiencing a high level of growth and a rise of a democratic civil society. However, there are deep inequalities and poverty within Kenya. Political parties tend to draw support from particular ethnic groups and other some regions are ignored. Unemployment sits at 40% in some regions and as one of East Africa's biggest economies, the government needs to figure out how to reach these impoverished regions. The government as needs to take this violence more seriously and provide legitimate security in highly volatile regions.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19948429
Nicolette-
ReplyDeleteIt remains unclear whether its violence driving the process or the political process is driving the violence. Are the political actors promoting these grievances and what exactly can the UN do in such a situation here?