Tag Archives: ICC

Ouattara wins expected lopsided victory in Côte d’Ivoire

A northerner, 73-year-old Alassane Ouattara must introduce more stability in Ivorian law and politics if he hopes the progress of his administration will last beyond the 2010s.
A northerner, 73-year-old Alassane Ouattara must introduce more stability in Ivorian law and politics if he hopes the progress of his administration will last beyond the 2010s.

In a more developed democracy, Côte d’Ivoire’s October 25 election might have been a civil rematch of the 2010 contest between the incumbent, Alasanne Ouattara, and his fierce rival, former president Laurent Gbagbo.Ivory Coast

Instead, Gbagbo is imprisoned at The Hague in The Netherlands awaiting trial at the International Criminal Court as the first head of state to be tried for crimes against humanity that stem from Gbagbo’s refusal to step down from the Ivorian presidency after the 2010 elections, setting the country into its second civil war in a decade as Gbagbo and his allies clung to power.

Captured in 2011 by UN and local forces loyal to Ouattara, Gbagbo still retains a loyal following, and supporters want to see Gbagbo freed.

Instead, Ouattara easily won the presidential vote, election officials announced last week, effortlessly dispatching Pascal Affi N’Guessan, formerly prime minister under Gbagbo from 2000 to 2003 and a longtime Gbagbo supporter.

Ouattara, of northern descent, served as Félix Houphouët-Boigny’s final prime minister from 1990 until the former president’s death in December 1993. Though he attempted to run for president in 1995 and 2000, opponents like Robert Guéï, the country’s military leader from December 1999 to October 2000, managed to have him barred from the race on specious charges that Ouattara was actually born in neighboring Burkina Faso, inflaming northern Muslims by implying that they are something less than fully Ivorian. An economist, Ouattara spent the late 1990s at the International Monetary Fund, where he rose to the rank of deputy managing director. The struggle over the 2000 election and its aftermath directly led to the civil war that broke out in 2002.

Former president Laurent Gbagbo, who once represented the hopes of the Ivorian opposition, now sits in The Hague awaiting an ICC trial for crimes against humanity.

Former president Laurent Gbagbo, who once represented the hopes of the Ivorian opposition, now sits in The Hague awaiting an ICC trial for crimes against humanity.

Ouattara officially won 82.66% to just 9.29% for N’Guessan, though many of Gbagbo’s supporters boycotted the vote. That means that the lopsided victory obscures the fact that Côte d’Ivoire remains highly divided on north-south lines.

Though it might have been a less-than-scintillating contest, it is perhaps remarkable that the country made it through an election without major violence — a consequence aided by the fact of an ongoing 6,000-strong UN peacekeeping force, an international presence for over a decade. Continue reading Ouattara wins expected lopsided victory in Côte d’Ivoire

Sudan’s Bashir set for expected reelection

SUDAN-POLITICS-OPPOSITION-BASHIRPhoto credit to Ashraf Shazly/AFP/Getty Images

Guest post by Kevin Buettner

In the span of just a couple weeks, Africa will experience both a historic democratic transfer of power in Nigeria and the stubborn clinging to power by a dictator in Sudan, as scheduled elections begin for the first time since the largely Christian South Sudan split from the rest of the chiefly Muslim country in 2011.sudan

Sudanese president Omar al-Bashir has ruled over perhaps the most turbulent stretch of Sudan’s post-colonial existence. During the last quarter-century, Bashir watched as Sudan lost South Sudan after decades of conflict, a concurrent genocide in Darfur (for which Bashir was indicted by the International Criminal Court), and a escalating crisis in the Blue Nile and South Kordofan states in the south of the new, truncated Sudan.

The ruling National Congress Party (NCP, المؤتمر الوطني) has ensured its continued power and Bashir’s easy reelection by designating as ‘independent’ all persons running for office without the explicit consent of the NCP leadership. With strict NCP and government control over the Sudanese media, the NCP has created the perception that the opposition is disunited.

* * * * *

RELATED: Who would win a South Sudanese civil war? Khartoum.

RELATED: Pressing pause — South Sudan at a crossroads

* * * * *

Moreover, much of the Sudanese opposition is simply boycotting polls that are expected to fall well short of international standards for free and fair elections. No one expects Bashir to lose reelection, despite some of the most strident protests in recent memory in September 2013 when residents in Khartoum, the capital city, turned out to denounce price increases and the economic malaise of the 2010s, many calling on Bashir to resign. Several dissident NCP members denounced Bashir and in November 2013, Bashir dismissed his long-serving first vice president, Osman Taha, who was largely credited with working with South Sudan and the international community to enact the peace agreement that cleared the way for South Sudan’s 2011 independence referendum. Today, however, it seems clear that Bashir has widely survived the 2013 tumult.

Though Bashir rose to Sudan’s presidency for the first time in a 1989 military coup, he only truly consolidated power between 1996 and 1999, when he outmaneuvered Sudan’s behind-the-scenes leader, Islamist hardliner Hassan al-Turabi, in part due to rising US concern about Sudan’s ties to radical Islamic terrorism.

Today, Sudan’s electorate is hardly in the kind of shape to hold a robust election that meets any kind of norm of civil society. Continue reading Sudan’s Bashir set for expected reelection

Liberia’s opposition just had a great Senate election

28122014-george-weah-mPhoto credit to DOSSO / AFP.

George Weah, the soccer superstar-turned-politician, is back.liberia

Weah, who narrowly lost a runoff in Liberia’s 2005 presidential election to Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, returned to the heart of Liberian politics by winning a seat in Liberia’s 30-member Senate. Half of the Senate’s seats were up for election in the December 20 elections.

In results announced earlier this week, Weah overwhelmingly defeated Robert Sirleaf, the president’s son, by a staggering margin of 78% to 11% in Montserrado County, the most populous of Liberia’s counties and home to the Liberian capital of Monrovia.

In all, Johnson Sirleaf’s Unity Party won just four of the 15 seats in the elections, which also saw the reelection of Prince Johnson, a former rebel leader who launched attacks against former president Samuel Doe in 1990 and Jewel Howard Taylor, the ex-wife of Charles Taylor, who has been convicted of war crimes and crimes against humanity by the International Criminal Court.

* * * * *

RELATED: West Africa’s Ebola epidemic is as much a crisis of governance as health

RELATED: As Sirleaf pushes for more power, could Ebola victimize Liberian democracy?

* * * * *

There are three clear narratives about the Senate elections worth heeding. Continue reading Liberia’s opposition just had a great Senate election

Westgate Mall siege the first test of Uhuru Kenyatta’s mettle as Kenya’s new president

kenyatta

UPDATE:  Kenyan president Uhuru Kenyatta has made a statement about today’s assault on Nairobi’s Westgate Mall, which has killed 39 people.  Declaring terrorism a ‘philosophy of cowards,’ and declaring Kenya will respond in a manner ‘as brave and invincible as the lions on our coats of arms,’ Kenyatta responded with grace, strength and compassion, rallying the unity of the Kenyan people.

The despicable perpetrators of this cowardly act hoped to intimidate, divide and cause despondency among Kenyans.  They would like us to retreat into a closed, fearful and fractured society where trust, unity and enterprise are difficult to muster.  An open and united country is a threat to evildoers everywhere.

It’s worth watching in full:

* * * * *

Today’s attack on Nairobi’s Westgate Mall — perhaps the deadliest terrorist attack in Kenya since the 1998 assault on the US embassy in Nairobi — is the first crisis of the nascent presidency of Uhuru Kenyatta.Jubaland_flagsomaliakenya

Al-Shabab, the Somali militant group, has taken responsibility for the attack.  The assailants, who attacked the mall with a combination of machine guns and grenades, may have killed over 30 people and injured many more.  It’s not the first time the radical Somali group has threatened Kenya — and it follows an al-Shabab attack in July 2010 in Kampala, Uganda, that killed 74 people within a peaceful crowd that had gathered to watch the 2010 World Cup finals.

Al-Shabab’s rationale lies in the Kenyan invasion of Jubaland, the semi-autonomous tract of southern Somalia, in October 2011 and its subsequent role as part of an African Union peacekeeping force in Somalia.  But the sudden attack on a shopping mall full of civilians — including expatriates, women and children — is a senseless and asymmetrical act of terrorism.

Even as we remember the victims of today’s tragedy and even as our thoughts remain with Nairobi police, Kenya Defense Force officials and hospital and health care workers carrying out rescue and recovery efforts, Kenyan policymakers face some weighty and difficult days ahead.

Kenyatta (pictured above, left) wasn’t president at the time of Kenya’s initial invasion, and he didn’t ask for this conflict when he was elected in March 2013 as Kenya’s fourth post-independence president.

But the challenge is his first serious crisis as president.  That’s not to say that the challenges of boosting Kenya’s economy or maintaining the calm and orderly process of sorting out land reform in Kenya.  But Kenyatta’s response to the Westgate killings places the Somali question at the heart of his administration, even amid signs that Somalia’s central government based in Mogadishu, with strong support from the African Union and Western governments, is making tentative strides (at least compared to more than two decades of civil war and state failure following the fall of strongman Mohamed Siad Barre in 1991).

It’s not an enviable position for Kenyatta.

If Kenyatta withdraws into what has been the traditional comfort zone of Kenya’s military and civilian leadership, it will mean that the most powerful (and still, even after today, by far the most stable) east African country is backing away from its vital role in solving east Africa’s most pressing regional security challenge.  But if Kenyatta launches a hasty, retributive wave into southern Somalia in the weeks or months ahead, he could also risk drawing Kenyans further into a quagmire — with the possibility of future al-Shabab terrorist attacks within Kenya.  Striking the right balance will be crucial.

somalia Continue reading Westgate Mall siege the first test of Uhuru Kenyatta’s mettle as Kenya’s new president

U.S. says ‘very little doubt’ Assad responsible for Syrian chemical warfare, preps possible intervention

usnavy

The international response to last Wednesday’s chemical warfare attack on the outskirts of Damascus is fast congealing, with U.S., British and French intelligence all pointing to the regime of Bashar al-Assad as the culprit.USflagfreesyria Syria Flag Icon

An official in the administration of U.S. president Barack Obama said Sunday morning that there’s ‘very little doubt’ that Assad perpetrated the attack.  French president François Hollande said earlier today that there was ‘a body of evidence indicating that the August 21 attack was chemical in nature, and that everything led to the belief that the Syrian regime was responsible for this unspeakable act.’

Obama and U.K. prime minister David Cameron have discussed the possibility of some form of military intervention, according to The Guardian and other news sources.  Meanwhile, the Syrian regime, under pressure from its Russian and Iranian allies, has agreed to allow U.N. weapons experts to inspect the site of the attacks.  In a sour irony, U.N. inspectors were already in Damascus earlier this week when the attack occurred for the purpose of determining the extent of potential chemical warfare earlier this spring.

The outset burden on Western governments is to connect the dots to make clear why they believe Assad is responsible — a decade ago, U.S. and British intelligence claimed they had a ‘slam dunk’ case that Iraqi president Saddam Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction,  launching a unilateral attack on what turned out to be incorrect intelligence.  If anything, there’s ample evidence in the revelations about PRISM and the Internet snooping by the U.S. National Security Agency that we shouldn’t necessarily take the governments of even liberal democracy at their word.

Remember that the timing of the chemical attacks is incredibly suspicious — Assad’s forces are generally winning via-à-vis the opposition forces in Syria, so it’s not incredibly clear why Assad would order a chemical attack now, especially under the noses of U.N. chemical weapons inspectors.  But given the Obama administration’s position that use of chemical weapons is a ‘red line’ that, if crossed, will merit an international response, there’s every reason for opposition forces to use a small-scale attack to try to draw U.S. and European power against Assad, and other radical Sunni elements sympathetic to both the anti-Assad forces and terrorist groups like al-Qaeda are more than happy to bait the West into intervening in the Syrian civil war.   But while it’s generally accepted that Assad has access to chemical weapons, it’s far less clear that any of the disparate rebel groups have them or have access to them.

Even if Assad is guilty of what amounts to a war crime, there’s still reason to tread lightly.  If Assad is responsible, he should face a wide berth of sanction under international law — those might include further tightening economic and diplomatic sanctions against Assad, his inner circle and the Syrian military, action sanctioned by the United Nations Security Council to destroy Assad’s chemical weapons or destroy his ability to deploy them in the future (including a no-fly zone), a fully empowered U.N. peacekeeping force, and an indictment from the International Criminal Court against Assad and the top military or other Syrian officials directly responsible for the chemical attack.

But even though U.S. defense secretary Chuck Hagel is preparing for ‘all contingencies,’ and U.S. warships in the eastern Mediterranean are already positioning for a potential attack, the international community can still respond in an affirmative way short of immediate U.S.-led military action.  Moreover, if Assad were removed tomorrow, Syria would still face a power vacuum, the potential for even more intense fighting between Shi’a/Alawite and Sunni Muslims within Syria and jockeying among various opposition groups, which range from secular Assad opponents to very conservative Islamic fundamentalists.  Those are just the known potential downsides for Syria — the unknown consequences and the potential adverse reaction in Iraq, Lebanon and elsewhere in the Middle East are more reason to tread lightly.

The next week is likely to bring even louder calls for the United States and/or the United Nations to act. To do something.

But the challenge for the Obama administration is that foreign policymaking in real time is very difficult, while political soundbytes are as easy as they are worthless.  There’s obviously a role for U.S. and international leadership to register a stand for human rights and against crimes of humanity.  But don’t trust anyone — in the United Kingdom, in the United States, in the Middle East — who has a ‘clear’ answer in mind for how the international community should now respond.

Don’t let hawks like U.S. senator John McCain convince you otherwise — the response to the latest turn in Syria’s conflict is more complicated than the polar choice of ‘doing nothing’ and launching a U.S.-led attack on Syria, guns-a-blazin’.  Given the U.S. history of intervention in the Middle East, and the horrific sectarian violence that followed the U.S.-led removal of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, it would be less controversial for the United Nations — not the United States — to take the lead in the organizing the international response.  Also don’t let liberal interventionists try to convince you that the United States should act immediately in order to avoid a Rwanda-style genocide in the Middle East.  Though the international community largely stood aside while 800,000 Tustis were hacked to death by Hutus in the 1994 Rwandan genocide, they welcomed the belated French intervention that served to provide relief and refuge to the genocidaires themselves.

Why the ICC should drop its case against Kenyan president Uhuru Kenyatta

kenyattaelect

Uhuru Kenyatta, after winning a seven-point victory in the March 4 presidential election, will be sworn in later this month as Kenya’s fourth post-independence president.kenya

But he’ll do so with a significant cloud hanging over his head — an indictment from the International Criminal Court on charges of crimes against humanity stemming from the last election in 2007, which precipitated two months of post-election violence that followed allegations of fraud in the narrow victory of incumbent Mwai Kibaki over challenger Raila Odinga.

What’s more, Kenyatta’s running mate, the next vice president of Kenya, William Ruto, is also a defendant on similar charges.

But Kenyatta, who comes from the Kikuyu ethnic group, and Ruto, who comes from the Kalenjin ethnic group, were on opposing sides five years ago, with Kenyatta backing Kibaki and with Ruto backing Odinga.

Those differences weren’t enough to stop Kenyatta and Ruto from joining forces this time around. Their partnership led to yet another defeat for Odinga and, this time around, the election result met with none of the civil turmoil that followed the previous election.

Nearly everyone in Kenya want to move beyond the 2007-08 violence.

Moreover, the ICC’s case against Kenyatta remains an evidentiary weak case by the standard of other ICC efforts. The ICC’s prosecution has already intruded bluntly into Kenya’s domestic politics and governance in a way that the entire Kenyan political elite opposes and that risks the court’s own legitimacy in sub-Saharan Africa, and the Kenyan people — in a free and fair vote — have elected Kenyatta their president, ICC charges or not.

The ICC indictments threaten to transform Kenya into somewhat of a pariah state — the European Union has pompously declared before the election that it would only engage in ‘essential conduct’ with Kenyatta in the event of his presidential victory, and U.S. secretary of state for African affairs Johnnie Carson was widely criticized for trying to subtly ‘warn’ Kenyans to make its choice carefully because it would have ‘global consequences.’

Kenya remains a key regional ally in the otherwise tough neighborhood east Africa, so Western governments will need to walk a tight diplomatic line, notwithstanding the ICC’s role:

A diplomatic fumble in dealing with Kenyatta could damage ties with a nation that has helped quell militant Islamists in the region and push a traditionally pro-Western state closer to China and other emerging powers hungry for openings in Africa.

Kenya’s supreme court earlier this year pointedly cleared Kenyatta, the son of Kenya’s first president Jomo Kenyatta, and Ruto to run in the election despite the ICC charges.

If that weren’t enough, the ICC may have already warped Kenyan politics by boosting Kenyatta’s bid through a sort of rallying effect — giving Kenyans a nationalist cri de coeur in a country where politics are still largely fought and won on ethnic lines.   Continue reading Why the ICC should drop its case against Kenyan president Uhuru Kenyatta

Uhuru Kenyatta is the next president of Kenya

KUhuru

With all constituencies now in, Uhuru Kenyatta has been elected the fourth president of Kenya with 50.03% of the vote, triumphing over prime minister Raila Odinga, who won 43.28%, avoiding an April runoff by just 4,099 votes.

Kenyatta is the son of Kenya’s first president, Jomo Kenyatta, and is the candidate of the Jubilee coalition, an alliance of parties featuring mostly Kenyans of Kenyatta’s own Kikuyu ethnic group and the Kalenjin ethnic group of his running mate, William Ruto, who will now become vice president.  Kenyatta ran for president — and lost by a wide margin — in 2002 to the outgoing president, Mwai Kibaki.  He served briefly in the current government as finance minister from 2009 to 2012.

Odinga, the son of Kenya’s first vice president, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, was the runner-up in the 2007 presidential election that was widely believed to have been fraudulent.  Following the post-election tumult, Odinga was appointed prime minister in 2008 in a power-sharing agreement with Kibaki.  He was the candidate of the Coalition for Reforms and Democracy (CORD) alliance, comprise of Odinga’s Luo ethnic group and other ethnic groups.

What comes next?

The International Elections and Boundaries Commission is set to meet early Saturday morning, Nairobi time, to audit the results and announce an official winner.

First off, provided that this count stands (and it’s the final count, not the provisional count, so it should, pending a court challenge from Odinga), Kenyatta needs to strike a tone of unity to avoid any chance of a repeat of the violence that followed the previous election.  There’s not much of a hint that violence will erupt, but 50.03% is an incredibly narrow margin, Odinga’s Luo ethnic group will be unhappy to have been shut out once again from power, and it’s clear that Kenya remains very much split on ethnic lines in terms of governance.  Nonetheless, there are a lot of reasons why, this time around, Kenya is unlikely to repeat anything like what happened in 2007-08.

Secondly, it appears that Kenya will avoid anything similar to the power-sharing of the last five years, with the Jubilee coalition set to take control of both houses of Kenya’s parliament.  Under a new constitution adopted in 2010, Kenya will have for the first time a bicameral parliament, with both a National Assembly and a Senate, each of which has allotted a set number of seats particularly for women.

Thirdly, there’s the matter of an indictment of each of Kenyatta and Ruto for crimes against humanity by the International Criminal Court and the awkward position of Kenya’s head of state accused of atrocities pending trial in The Hague.  Governments in Europe and the United States will need to find a way to work with Kenyetta, though, because Kenya, with 40 million people, and a relatively stable nation, is a key regional partner for all sorts of strategic, humanitarian and economic purposes.  The next hearing for Kenyatta, however, was postponed until June, and given the relative weakness of the case, there’s a chance prosecutors may simply drop the case altogether.

Finally, of course, there’s the matter of governing Kenya — Kenya faces sluggish growth and high unemployment, especially among its explosively robust young population, and that will (or should) certainly be at the top of Kenyatta’s governing agenda.  Corruption should come a close second, and the joke is that Kenyatta, thought to be the richest man in Kenya, is so wealthy that he’s particularly immune to corruption.

Kenyatta will also oversee the continuation of reforms that began under Kenya’s new 2010 constitution, including the coordination of the Independent Land Commission and its recommendations for sorting out the mess of land ownership in Kenya and determining the best economic use for land with no titles — or too many titles.  He will also sort out the minor issues that arise from devolution — under the 2010 constitution, Monday’s elections also saw each of Kenya’s newly drawn 47 counties elect their own governors and county-wide assemblies.

In Depth: Kenya

nairobi concert

Kenya — a country of 41 million people in east Africa  — widely seen as a relatively stable hub for international actors in the east African region will go to the polls on March 4, 2013, to select a new president and the members of Kenya’s newly redesigned parliament.

The most high-profile race is the one to replace Kenya’s third president since independence, Mwai Kibaki, who is stepping down after his election in 2002 and his controversial reelection in 2007, widely seen as a fraudulent victory and a catalyst for political violence that lasted for two months following the 2007 election.

The two leading candidates are Uhuru Kenyatta, a former finance minister and the son of Jomo Kenyatta, the country’s first president, and Raila Odinga, the son of Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, Kenya’s first prime minister. Odinga (the son) narrowly lost — officially, at least — the 2007 election to Kibaki, and since a 2008 power-sharing deal with Kibaki, has served as prime minister.

Kenyatta leads an alliance of parties known as the Jubilee alliance, which is dominated by members of Kenyatta’s own Kikuyu ethnic group, the largest in Kenya (17%) and the Kalenjin people.  Odinga leads the Coalition for Reforms and Democracy (CORD) alliance, comprised in turn of Odinga’s own Luo people, as well as the Kamba people.

The key issues in the race have involved corruption, Kenya’s somewhat lackluster economic growth and unemployment, the indictment of Kenyatta (and his running mate, William Ruto) for crimes against humanity by the International Criminal Court springing from the 2007-08 political violence, the ongoing devolution of power from the central government to Kenya’s eight provinces and 47 counties, and the progress of land reform resulting from the Independent Land Commission established by the 2010 constitution.

Six other candidates are contesting the race, although none of them receive more than single digits in polls.  They include:

  • Musalia Mudavadi, deputy prime minister, a former vice president, former running mate of Kenyatta in 2002 and a former running mate of Odinga in 2007, who is running as the candidate of the Amani coalition, which includes many supporters from the Luhya people and the once-dominant Kenya African National Union (KANU), and Mudavadi has the support of former president Daniel arap Moi, who served from 1978 to 2002.
  • Peter Kenneth, an MP who is running as the candidate of the Eagle Alliance, and is running on an explicitly national basis (i.e., not on the basis of a particular ethnic group).
  • Martha Karua, an anti-corruption MP and a former minister of justice.
  • Mohammed Abdula Dida, a high school teacher known mostly for his folksy one-liners in Kenya’s two presidential debates.
  • James ole Kiyiapi,  a former permanent secretary in the ministries of education and local government.
  • Paul Muite, a former MP.

Under new election rules resulting from a new constitution promulgated in 2010, a presidential candidate must win in excess of 50% of the vote and win 25% of the vote in at least 24 of Kenya’s 47 counties.  If neither condition is met, the two candidates will face off in a runoff to be held on April 11.

Kenya’s parliament is also gaining a house after the 2010 constitutional reforms — the formerly unicameral National Assembly will remain as the lower house, while the new Senate will become the parliament’s upper house.

The National Assembly, formerly consisting of 224 members, will now have 350 members, 290 of which are directly elected in single-member districts and 47 of which must be women (one in each Kenyan county).

Kenyans will elect members of the Senate for the first time ever on March 4 as well — it’s expected that there will be 68 senators, one elected in each of the 47 counties, with 16 additional special representatives for women, two representatives for youth and two representatives for persons with disabilities.

Currently, the largest bloc in the National Assembly is the Odinga-led Orange Democratic Movement (100 seats), followed by Kibaki’s Party of National Unity (43 seats), though because of the transient nature of many Kenyan political parties and movements, it’s uncertain whether pro-Kenyatta or pro-Odinga forces will actually win the new elections for the National Assembly and the Senate.

See below Suffragio‘s coverage of the Kenyan races:

Kenyan Supreme Court upholds Kenyatta victory
March 30, 2013

Uhuru Kenyatta is the next president of Kenya
March 8, 2013

Tense Thursday finds both Uhuru, Raila under 50% in Kenya election results
March 7, 2013

The latest on Kenya’s election results: IEBC targets Friday finale
March 6, 2013

What we know so far about the Kenyan election results
March 5, 2013

Could Kenya enter another period of power-sharing after its general election?
March 4, 2013

Mudavadi likely to become kingmaker in Kenya’s presidential runoff
March 3, 2013

Five reasons why Kenya is unlikely to repeat 2007’s post-election violence
March 1, 2013

Live-blogging the final Kenyan presidential debate
February 25, 2013

Making sense of Kenya’s ethnopolitical alliances
February 19, 2013

Kenyatta, Ruto cleared to run in Kenyan election despite ICC woes
February 18, 2013

Making sense of Kenya’s ethnopolitical alliances

uhuru rally

To understand what’s going on in Kenya’s politics and to understand the nature of its upcoming March 4 presidential election, you have to understand that Kenyan politics are based on ethnic identity, not ideology.kenya

Due to the nature of Kenyan election rules, a presidential candidate has to build an electoral coalition larger than any single ethnic group in the country — a candidate must win not only a 50% majority of the votes, but 25% of the vote in at least 24 of Kenya’s 47 counties.

So it’s not enough for deputy prime minister and former finance minister Uhuru Kenyatta to win a plurality of the vote based largely on the support of his Kikuyu ethnic group, Kenya’s largest.  Nor would it be enough for Kenyan prime minister Raila Odinga to win a plurality on the strength of his own Luo ethnic group.

That means the winning candidate will have to craft a coalition based on many different ethnic groups, and Kenyatta and Odinga have both named running mates of differing ethnic groups.  In light of the aftermath of the 2007 election, when incumbent Mwai Kibaki won narrow reelection against Odinga amid charges of rigging the vote count, political riots quickly descended into ethnic violence.  But the 2013 elections will also largely be determined on the basis of ethnicity-based coalitions, which only underscores the fear that Kenya could undergo another round of destabilizing political violence.

Identifying Kenya’s ethnic groups

In the broadest terms, Kenya’s ethnic groups can be divided into the Bantu and the Nilotic peoples.

The Bantu comprise by far the largest group of Kenyans, roughly two-thirds of Kenya’s 43 million people.  The Bantu ethnic groups derive from people who originally came to Kenya from western and central Africa 2,000 years ago during the so-called Bantu expansion.  The Bantu languages are derived from the Niger-Congo language family — you are likely to be most familiar with Swahili, a Bantu language that, along with English, is one of Kenya’s two official languages.

The Nilotic peoples are the second-largest group, comprising about one-third of Kenyans.  Unlike the Bantu, they originally came to Kenya from what is today South Sudan, and they are somewhat more rural than their Bantu counterparts.  They speak languages derived from the Nilo-Saharan language family, which includes the Dholuo language of Kenya, but also Nubian and other languages throughout Sudan and north-central Africa.

But that only explains so much about Kenya’s incredibly complex range of ethnic groups, which are divided even further on the basis of regional, linguistic and other cultural and historical criteria.  Notably, as the useful map below shows, much of Kenya’s population resides in the highlands that stretch from the Rift Valley and along the western border through the central heartland of Kenya.

kenyamap

Accordingly, there are five major ethnic groups and countless others that form a mosaic of politically mobilized chess pieces, any of which can come together to form a political and governing alliance.  Alliances are not based on Bantu / Nilotic lines, and from one election to the next, one ethnic group may support a candidate that it virulently opposed in the prior election, making Kenyan politics incredibly unique — and also difficult to understand.

As recently as 2005, Odinga and Kenyatta found themselves on the same side, politically, in opposition to a constitutional referendum

The five largest groups are as follows:

  • The Kikuyu, a Bantu group, comprise 17% of the population (according to the 2009 census) that, as the map shows, reside largely in the central highlands of Kenya around Mount Kenya north of Nairobi.
  • The Luhya, also a Bantu group, comprise 14% of the population and reside in the highlands of Western Province, along the Ugandan border just north of Lake Victoria.
  • The Kalenjin, a Nilotic group, comprise 13% of the population and reside in the Rift Valley highlands and are perhaps best known for producing some of the Kenya’s best runners, who routinely rank among the fastest in the world.
  • The Luo, a Nilotic group, comprise 10% of the population and reside in the highlands of Nyanza province, adjacent to Lake Victoria, bordering both Uganda and Tanzania — Barack Obama, Sr., the father of the current U.S. president, was from the Luo ethnic group.
  • The Kamba, another Bantu group, comprise 10% of the population and reside in the area east of Nairobi, where the highlands begin to level off into Kenya’s lowlands.

Continue reading Making sense of Kenya’s ethnopolitical alliances

Kenyatta, Ruto cleared to run in Kenyan election despite ICC woes

rutokenyatta

Friday’s ruling from the Kenyan High Court has — for now, at least, and through the duration of the presidential campaign, barring any last-minute intervention from Kenya’s supreme court — cleared the legal obstacles for Uhuru Kenyatta to run for president in the March 4 election.kenya

Kenyatta’s legal issues stem from Kenyatta’s indictment for crimes against humanity by the International Criminal Court, on the basis of orchestrating ethnic violence following the previous presidential election in 2007 when over 1,000 Kenyans were killed during tumult that upturned hundreds of thousands more from their homes, pummeled the reputation Kenya’s political system and damaged its economy.

Kenyatta’s running mate, William Ruto (pictured above right, with Kenyatta at left), is one of five other Kenyan officials also charged for crimes against humanity, and the High Court’s ruling also clears him.  Kenyatta and Ruto were actually on opposite political sides in 2007, though they’ve now found common cause through, among other things, the pariah status that’s come from ICC indictment.

It’s more accurate, however, to say that the court refused to intervene — the basis of the case was whether Kenyatta and Ruto had demonstrated sufficient ‘personal integrity, competence and suitability’ for the presidency, as stated under Kenya’s constitution.  The court claimed it lacked the jurisdiction to disqualify the candidates, though it noted that the Supreme Court holds jurisdiction to make such a determination.

Kenyatta and Ruto head the Jubilee alliance, a merger of various parties, but really an alliance that binds together members from Kenyatta’s Kikuyu ethnic group (Kenya’s largest, comprising around 22% of the population) and Ruto’s Kalenjin ethnic group.

Kenyatta’s main opponent, Raila Odinga, heads the CORD (Coalition for Reforms and Democracy) alliance, which binds together Odinga’s Luo ethnic group and the Kamba ethnic group of Odinga’s running mate, Kalonzo Musyoka.

Kenyatta, currently a deputy prime minister since 2008 and minister of finance from 2008 to 2012 under Kenya’s outgoing, term-limited president Mwai Kibaki, is the son of Kenya’s first president, Jomo Kenyatta.

Odinga, currently Kenya’s prime minister following the power-sharing agreement that resulted in the wake of the 2007 presidential election, is the son of Kenya’s first vice president, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, whose falling out with Jomo Kenyatta in the 1960s serves as prologue to much of this year’s presidential election.  In 2007, Odinga only narrowly lost the presidency to Kibaki, and he’s held a narrow lead throughout much of the 2013 campaign, though Kenyatta has waged a spirited campaign and was generally seen as the winner of Kenya’s first presidential debate on February 11.

Within Kenya, the ICC charges themselves matter little to voters — though Odinga is more to the left and Kenyatta is more to the right, Kenya’s election has been polarized into tribal ethnic lines, not on standard ideological lines.  So Kenyatta’s supporters could care less about international charges they believe are unfair, though Odinga has used the ICC charges to taunt Kenyatta, most recently during their presidential debate when Odinga scoffed that it would be impractical to run a government from the Hague using Skype.

Even Odinga, nonetheless, has called for the Kenyan courts to validate Kenyatta’s presidential candidacy, and he’s even called for any trials over the 2007-08 violence to be settled in Nairobi, not through the ICC.

In a sense, while the ICC charges themselves are a fringe issue, they are also at the heart of the campaign, given the ethnic tensions involved in the current campaign and the desire among all of Kenya’s leaders to avoid a devastating replay of the 2007 and 2008 political violence that followed the last election.

Continue reading Kenyatta, Ruto cleared to run in Kenyan election despite ICC woes