|
Post by OtishOtish on Feb 13, 2013 21:44:27 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on Feb 14, 2013 1:17:38 GMT 3
According to Raila Odinga, the church lost the moral authority to guide anyone on anything political in 2007. Raila said that? That settles it then, doesn't it? Better rush it to the bank. Anything else Raila has said that we should pay particular attention to?
|
|
|
Post by mwalimumkuu on Feb 14, 2013 5:25:28 GMT 3
According to Raila Odinga, the church lost the moral authority to guide anyone on anything political in 2007. Raila said that? That settles it then, doesn't it? Better rush it to the bank. Anything else Raila has said that we should pay particular attention to? Otish, The reportage in the article you provide is defective and I have to take back my words after listening to Canon Karanja himself. Here he is: I however insist just as rightly as Karanja has observed that the church has no platform to advise the voter one way or the other, same with the international community.
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on Feb 14, 2013 6:14:36 GMT 3
Mwalimu:
You may insist, but the messages are going out leader and clear: sanctions and no going to heaven, if you vote for criminals. But, of course, you have your freedom of choice.
|
|
|
Post by mwalimumkuu on Feb 14, 2013 6:55:02 GMT 3
Mwalimu: You may insist, but the messages are going out leader and clear: sanctions and no going to heaven, if you vote for criminals. But, of course, you have your freedom of choice. Otish,I am actually wishing that the elections were today so that I could put Uhuru in statehouse before the status conference. It would have been very good for him to skype from the oval table in that big, white colonial building, but for some reason the court found it wise to have the conference on Valentine's day, two short weeks before the elections. Why? Your guess is as good as mine, but they will fail. These guys are as good as elected, it is too late to play any games.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2013 7:36:43 GMT 3
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 2013 - 00:00 -- BY THE POLITICAL DESK
More than a US$100 million belonging to a senior politician was last week blocked as it was being moved from a Swiss bank account to an account in Turkey. Worried that the west could punish Kenya if Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta and his running mate William Ruto who are both ICC suspects are elected, the senior politician has reportedly been moving his financial assets to "friendly' countries where he can access the same quickly and easily. www.the-star.co.ke/news/article-108368/corridors-power
|
|
|
Post by mwalimumkuu on Feb 21, 2013 7:44:59 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Feb 21, 2013 8:01:35 GMT 3
A former Republican appointee criticizing a Democrat appointee is not news. Keep in mind she is a private citizen now so she is "free" to speak. Her words will be encouraging to Uhuruto supporters though....
|
|
|
Post by Omwenga on Feb 21, 2013 8:21:20 GMT 3
Jendayi Frazer is a nobody and known Kenyatta family friend who has no credibility whatsoever to speak to any issue affecting Kenya, let alone ICC of which she knows nothing about other than what her buddy ICC indictee Uhuru Kenyatta tells her. Her opinion on this is as credible as that of a comatose toad. She was part of the reason our country nearly plunged into a civil war because of her wrong information she fed Washington during the crisis in her capacity as Assistant Secretary of State that it took a few of us to undo with our own contacts in Washington. Her comments are what is reckless and irresponsible worthless as they are, not Ambassador Carson's as she claims.
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Feb 21, 2013 8:27:46 GMT 3
Jendayi Frazer is a nobody and known Kenyatta family friend who has no credibility whatsoever to speak to any issue affecting Kenya, let alone ICC of which she knows nothing about other than what her buddy ICC indictee Uhuru Kenyatta tells her. Her opinion on this is as credible as that of a comatose toad. She was part of the reason our country nearly plunged into a civil war because of her wrong information she fed Washington during the crisis in her capacity as Assistant Secretary of State that it took a few of us to undo with our own contacts in Washington. Her comments are what is reckless and irresponsible worthless as they are, not Ambassador Carson's as she claims. [/quote Omwenga, I beg your pardon but did you say you have contacts in Washington? Really?!!!! ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Feb 21, 2013 9:01:02 GMT 3
Jendayi Frazer is a nobody and known Kenyatta family friend who has no credibility whatsoever to speak to any issue affecting Kenya, let alone ICC of which she knows nothing about other than what her buddy ICC indictee Uhuru Kenyatta tells her. Her opinion on this is as credible as that of a comatose toad. She was part of the reason our country nearly plunged into a civil war because of her wrong information she fed Washington during the crisis in her capacity as Assistant Secretary of State that it took a few of us to undo with our own contacts in Washington. Her comments are what is reckless and irresponsible worthless as they are, not Ambassador Carson's as she claims. [/quote Omwenga, I beg your pardon but did you say you have contacts in Washington? Really?!!!! ;D ;D B6k Just when you thought it was only a part of Nyanza that had this problem of flossing....as in JFP and then this!
|
|
|
Post by Omwenga on Feb 21, 2013 11:28:46 GMT 3
Jendayi Frazer is a nobody and known Kenyatta family friend who has no credibility whatsoever to speak to any issue affecting Kenya, let alone ICC of which she knows nothing about other than what her buddy ICC indictee Uhuru Kenyatta tells her. Her opinion on this is as credible as that of a comatose toad. She was part of the reason our country nearly plunged into a civil war because of her wrong information she fed Washington during the crisis in her capacity as Assistant Secretary of State that it took a few of us to undo with our own contacts in Washington. Her comments are what is reckless and irresponsible worthless as they are, not Ambassador Carson's as she claims. [/quote Omwenga, I beg your pardon but did you say you have contacts in Washington? Really?!!!! ;D ;D b6k,Of what use is it to answer your question? Please do not answer as this is a rhetorical question. FYI, unlike those of you who post under handles, I use my real name and there are many on this very forum who know me in person and would tell you what you see and read is real. It's idiotic to think I would floss as I saw someone claim--a charge usually lobbed by people with limited opportunities in life and therefore assume everyone is in the same boat. I not only worked for the late Senator Edward M Kennedy and have great contacts in Washington since and others added on, as I have previously blogged, my Open Letter To President George Bush, omwenga.com/2011/04/02/countdown-to-ocampo-six-at-the-hague/ penned during the PEV crisis was hand carried and given to him by the then all powerful Dick Cheney, who in turn was given the letter by hand from Senator Lieberman who in turn received it from his doctor and friend who is also my friend. That was the beginning of shifting of US stance on the crisis and I am proud to have been a part of that effort. People who have no such connections and otherwise limited opportunities can't even comprehend that it's possible to have these types of connections. It's why they think it's flossing. What a shame. There, you now have the answer to your question I really didn't want to get into as it's irrelevant but for this irritant who thinks its flossing when we state facts.
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Feb 22, 2013 16:19:38 GMT 3
Jendayi Frazer is a nobody and known Kenyatta family friend who has no credibility whatsoever to speak to any issue affecting Kenya, let alone ICC of which she knows nothing about other than what her buddy ICC indictee Uhuru Kenyatta tells her. Her opinion on this is as credible as that of a comatose toad. She was part of the reason our country nearly plunged into a civil war because of her wrong information she fed Washington during the crisis in her capacity as Assistant Secretary of State that it took a few of us to undo with our own contacts in Washington. Her comments are what is reckless and irresponsible worthless as they are, not Ambassador Carson's as she claims. [/quote Omwenga, I beg your pardon but did you say you have contacts in Washington? Really?!!!! ;D ;D b6k,Of what use is it to answer your question? Please do not answer as this is a rhetorical question. FYI, unlike those of you who post under handles, I use my real name and there are many on this very forum who know me in person and would tell you what you see and read is real. It's idiotic to think I would floss as I saw someone claim--a charge usually lobbed by people with limited opportunities in life and therefore assume everyone is in the same boat. I not only worked for the late Senator Edward M Kennedy and have great contacts in Washington since and others added on, as I have previously blogged, my Open Letter To President George Bush, omwenga.com/2011/04/02/countdown-to-ocampo-six-at-the-hague/ penned during the PEV crisis was hand carried and given to him by the then all powerful Dick Cheney, who in turn was given the letter by hand from Senator Lieberman who in turn received it from his doctor and friend who is also my friend. That was the beginning of shifting of US stance on the crisis and I am proud to have been a part of that effort. People who have no such connections and otherwise limited opportunities can't even comprehend that it's possible to have these types of connections. It's why they think it's flossing. What a shame. There, you now have the answer to your question I really didn't want to get into as it's irrelevant but for this irritant who thinks its flossing when we state facts. Omwenga, kudos to you & your efforts with the US State Department back in '08. Getting directly involved in politics (indeed geopolitics as in your case) is not without its own risks. I'd hazard to say maybe the fruits of your activism put a spotlight on you which may have eventually been to your own detriment much later. But, I digress. Back to the matters at hand. African leaders have now jointly requested the western powers to back off & respect the wish of Kenyan voters. They also demand that no sanctions should be placed upon the nation if Uhuruto end up winning the election. Read more below.... www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000077825&story_title=Kenya---Let%E2%80%99s-respect-Kenyans%E2%80%99-choice-for-president,-urges-Kikwete
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on Feb 22, 2013 16:51:09 GMT 3
They also demand that no sanctions should be placed upon the nation if Uhuruto end up winning the election. Ha, ha, ha, .... they have demanded? Just as they demanded that the West stay out of Libya? Just as they have demanded this and that? Yes, they will definitely be listened to. Let's briefly consider their history in the Kenyan and Sudanese ICC cases: * After three years, African countries are still working to get Sudan's request for a deferral onto the agenda of the Security Council. * African countries promised a "mass walkout" out of the ICC if the Kenyan cases weren't deferred. Wapi walkout? * The EAC resolved, a year ago, to extend the jurisdiction of the East African Court of Justice and have the Kenyan cases transferred there. Wapi EAJC And so on and so forth. Does anyone really believe that government in Western countries are going to say hold on a minute we can't do this because those four African guys have demanded that we don't?
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Feb 22, 2013 17:25:52 GMT 3
They also demand that no sanctions should be placed upon the nation if Uhuruto end up winning the election. Ha, ha, ha, .... they have demanded? Just as they demanded that the West stay out of Libya? Just as they have demanded this and that? Yes, they will definitely be listened to. Let's briefly consider their history in the Kenyan and Sudanese ICC cases: * After three years, African countries are still working to get Sudan's request for a deferral onto the agenda of the Security Council. * African countries promised a "mass walkout" out of the ICC if the Kenyan cases weren't deferred. Wapi walkout? * The EAC resolved, a year ago, to extend the jurisdiction of the East African Court of Justice and have the Kenyan cases transferred there. Wapi EAJC And so on and so forth. Does anyone really believe that government in Western countries are going to say hold on a minute we can't do this because those four African guys have demanded that we don't? Otishotish, there's no harm in them making their demands. As you say, worst that can happen is they will be ignored. However, that doesn't take away from the fact that they will be on record at the UN & wherever else they deem fit....
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on Feb 22, 2013 17:28:45 GMT 3
Otishotish, there's no harm in them making their demands. As you say, worst that can happen is they will be ignored. However, that doesn't take away from the fact that they will be on record at the UN & wherever else they deem fit.... And merely being on the record helps how? Maybe when we all get to heaven St. Peter will check what is on the record? By the way, it's not the worst that can happen; it's what will actually happen.
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Feb 23, 2013 13:12:10 GMT 3
Jendayi Frazer is a nobody and known Kenyatta family friend who has no credibility whatsoever to speak to any issue affecting Kenya, let alone ICC of which she knows nothing about other than what her buddy ICC indictee Uhuru Kenyatta tells her. Her opinion on this is as credible as that of a comatose toad.
She was part of the reason our country nearly plunged into a civil war because of her wrong information she fed Washington during the crisis in her capacity as Assistant Secretary of State that it took a few of us to undo with our own contacts in Washington.
Her comments are what is reckless and irresponsible worthless as they are, not Ambassador Carson's as she claims. www.cmu.edu/dietrich/sds/people/faculty/jendayi-frazer.htmlI suggest somebody should do a little bit of saving my inlaw Omwenga from himself. I am a harsh critic of Jendayi myself. But she is not a nobody. Omwenga, start by reading her policy determining works with relevance to Afrika, and why she was the Bush admininstrations architect on the same. The idea super-star Condy Rice would suffer a fool in that department! Ha ha ha! Kenyans! If I were a real Jaluos [and not fake ;D], it would worry me to have people who think like Ori Omwenga advising a Jaluo president on USA-Kenya relations!
|
|
|
Post by furaha on Feb 23, 2013 14:41:52 GMT 3
I think I understand the sentiments expressed by all sides in this debate. But in the heat of the campaigns and under the growing pressure of the approaching election date, the importance of some points threatens to become overemphasized to the detriment of others. Like many I do not know what the exact meaning of 'choices have consequences' is. Such warnings are not new. After Kofi Annan's first carefully worded reference in October 2012 quite a number of Kenyans welcomed his comments and expounded on them. One can debate the wisdom of the more recent foreign comments but the core message is actually true. Choices have consequences. That is what we teach our children. Elecitions without consequences do not exist. It's a contradiction in terms. One can differ about the nature of the consequences. I do no see much scope for foreign sanctions. The general rule applied by the EU and others to avoid contact with persons accused by the ICC of crimes against humanity is not new. It has been a rule of thumb for several years. And if you go back to Uhuru Kenyatta's last months as finance minister (after the confirmation of charges) you will be hard-pressed to find reports of meetings between him and senior western representatives, expect perhaps a few that dealt with matters where direct contact was absolutely critical. So there is little here that is new. Other "sanctions". Yes, there will be greater reluctance to sell arms to Kenya once an ICC indictee reaches State House. That reluctance or refusal actually hurts the selling state more than the purchasing state. The latter can go to other states which do not have such hang-ups. But I do not see many other "sanctions" being imposed. So let's not equate consequences with sanctions. The consequences are broader and include reluctance on the part of foreign investors to continue to see Kenya as an important in investment hub, the potential impact on tourism and so on. For another perspective read Prof Karuti Kanyingi's perspective in today's Nation which I copy below. elections.nation.co.ke/Blogs/-/1632026/1701738/-/1187g0l/-/index.htmlFuraha Every election has consequences but this time our choices are starkKenya’s General Election has become an international must-watch game. It has attracted attention of many governments and policy think tanks, for both good and bad reasons. Some are watching us to see what a radical Constitution can give birth to. They want to know whether our leaders learnt anything from the violence that ended in 2008. Kenya is gaining attention also for bad reasons. The world is keenly watching how we circumvent the Constitution in the name of sovereignty. There is concern that Parliament watered down the laws to operationalise this Constitution so as to safeguard interests of those who were in the Tenth Parliament. This is the context in which we are holding the March 4 election. It is for this reason that the choices we make will have consequences in future. The idea of consequences after the elections is not new. In fact, from 1992, our choices have had consequences. Electoral consequences are the result of how we frame the main theme for our elections. Organising question Every election contains a framework on which issues are built and leaders elected. In 1992 and 1997, the theme was ‘Moi and Kanu must go.’ This platform led to violence in Moi’s and Kanu’s strongholds. The organising question and theme for 2002 was ‘We want change’. There was support for change everywhere, including in areas supporting Moi’s political project at that time, Uhuru Kenyatta. The country did not witness repeat of the cycle of violence associated with previous polls. The organising question for 2007 lacked clarity. There was the question of whether the country should appreciate economic recovery, the main success of President Kibaki’s five-year term, or chide the Kibaki government for excluding from power leaders who were not from Mount Kenya region. So vicious were the arguments for and against these two issues that the country imploded after ODM rejected the results. The theme and the organising question for the March 4 election is complex. There is no consensus on the defining platform. Intervention by the International Criminal Court (ICC) and implementation of reforms under the new Constitution are the emerging issues. But ICC has gained traction for obviously bad reasons. Failure to address the problem of impunity and develop a society based on rule of law has meant an increase in the number of leaders who seek to prevent accountability. They are ready to block the ICC intervention. They see the intervention as interference with the status quo. They are afraid it will trigger demands to bring everyone to account for their actions; be it theft of public property, grand corruption or other breaches. Results of ICC intervention Campaigning and winning the election on the platform of ICC, therefore, has several consequences, too. The ICC platform implies that leaders elected at county level will comprise those who are vocal in shouting against the court. Those who are vocal in preventing accountability will be elected. Such leaders will not be passionate about development issues. They will promote self-interest. A review of nomination lists by different parties reveals this. There was no public check on the character of those nominated to run for offices. Those suspected of having been involved in abuse of office at the local level either as councillors or leaders of local cooperatives will still be gunning for some of these offices. Because we have not resolved the question of the big elephant in the room, no attempt has been made to address this challenge. The ICC platform also has consequences on the character of our Senate. A review of those seeking to be senators shows that the Senate is likely to be compromised, especially by the old politicians and ethnic chauvinists. Third is the consequence on gender. Debate on ICC intervention has distracted our attention from discussing the quality of women leadership. In many instances, men sat down and agreed on which woman leader should be on the ballot for which particular seat. The consequences for our electoral choices will be most pronounced at the national level. Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta and Mr William Ruto have spent the last two years, from January 2011, fighting to lift ICC yoke off their shoulders. They have been so preoccupied with ICC that they finally settled on running for the leadership of the country, probably to fight from a position of advantage. They had on their side Vice-President Kalonzo Musyoka, who was shuttling to many cities seeking support from African leaders to fight the ICC. What is now referred to as UhuRuto alliance will present several consequences on Kenya if it won and assumed office. First, other governments will adopt a ‘wait and see’ approach in their dealing with Kenya. Official transaction of business will be so limited that Kenya’s economy will thaw like ice rolling down a hill. Investors and governments will be waiting to see what will happen; and it could take long. Secondly, no major economic activities will be taking place during the ‘wait and see’ period. The economy will be on a downward trend. Development agencies, private businesses, and even individual entrepreneurs, will plan their activities and contractual obligation with March 2013 as the end point. The third consequence of UhuRuto leadership will be on the economy. Contrary to the thinking of many Kenyans, the government does not wholly finance development expenditure. Flows of official assistance contribute about five per cent share to GDP. Development aid supports 18 per cent of the budget. The significance of development assistance is visible when one examines the pattern of development expenditure. In 2011, net official development assistance as a share of development expenditure was about 60 per cent. Some sectors are likely to have even more than this share. One cannot wish away development assistance on the assumption that Kenya finances, on its own, its development budget. The choices we make will certainly affect this pattern of development assistance and expenditure. It will affect service delivery. The only choices that Kenyans can make for the good of the country is to support respect for the rule of law and building a strong foundation for constitutionalism. The rising ethnic nationalism, based purely on the ICC intervention, erodes the foundation of rule of law and future prospects for democracy in Kenya. Prof Karuti Kanyinga is based at the Institute for Development Studies (IDS), University of Nairobi, karuti@south.co.ke
|
|
|
Post by furaha on Feb 23, 2013 14:49:21 GMT 3
And for completeness sake here is Kwamchetsi Makokha's take on the meddling foreigners. elections.nation.co.ke/Blogs/-/1632026/1701682/-/1187fce/-/index.htmlFuraha Politically correct Foreigners should stop meddling in Kenya’s forthcoming elections. Just about time, too that a member of the National Cohesion and Integration Commission has called on the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission to bar foreign observers from polling stations, lest they make statements that could cause tension and perhaps even announce their own manufactured results. Nosy foreigners must not be allowed to interfere with the country’s pristine polls, which have been painstakingly planned since August 2010 when Kenya promulgated a new Constitution. Had it not been for these self-same foreign spies, masquerading as observers, the Electoral Commission of Kenya, now dearly departed, would not have kicked off a storm with its announcement of results in the 2007 elections. Although there is a provision in law for IEBC to accredit a person or institution to observe and report on an election, this privilege should not be extended to outsiders. Local lackeys of these foreign spies have ganged up and branded themselves with a name that sounds very analogue at a time we are going digital. The next thing you know, they will be miscalculating simple sums, multiplying votes instead of adding them up and producing results that do not agree with what Isaak Hassan team announces. Busybodies in the civil society must know that they have not been elected by anyone to supervise the IEBC. Watching over our electoral body too closely as it performs this delicate operation for which it has been preparing itself for two years can produce unnecessary nervousness. Anyone who distrusts IEBC’s ability to count and tally ballots is inviting stress, tension and chaos. Their desire to consult with IEBC in case of differences is a smokescreen for declaring results they intend to cook up. These local analogue spies, working at the behest of foreign masters, are even boasting how they will tally results alongside those of IEBC in what they call parallel vote tabulation (PVT). PVT involves observing the administration of an election, the process of voting and the counting of ballots at polling stations, as well as collection of official polling station results and independent tabulation, parallel to election authorities. This is spying. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then it is a duck. It is not a good thing at all. If it was good, they would have invented it in time to save Al Gore’s stolen presidency in the US in 2000. Since it was only being used in remote places like the Philippines, PVT must be exposed for what it is - a poorly disguised rigging methodology in the same typology of rigging tools as exit and opinion polls. Foreigners have maintained an unhealthy interest in our affairs. They keep commenting, issuing statements, threats and unsolicited advice. Yet, Kenya hardly interferes in the internal affairs of other states. When Sudan was at war with itself, Kenya crossed its arms and watched respectfully from a distance. When Somalia was going to seed, Kenya sat by like a good neighbour until they were able to organise their democratic elections. It is not too much to ask the international community to extend to it the same courtesy. Had the international community left Kenya alone in 2007, the crisis that followed that year’s election would not have occurred. The international community should know that Kenyans have matured democratically and can elect their leaders without assistance from any quarter. kwamchetsi@formandcontent.co.ke
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on Feb 23, 2013 19:01:23 GMT 3
I think I understand the sentiments expressed by all sides in this debate. But in the heat of the campaigns and under the growing pressure of the approaching election date, the importance of some points threatens to become overemphasized to the detriment of others. Like many I do not know what the exact meaning of 'choices have consequences' is. Such warnings are not new. After Kofi Annan's first carefully worded reference in October 2012 quite a number of Kenyans welcomed his comments and expounded on them. One can debate the wisdom of the more recent foreign comments but the core message is actually true. Choices have consequences. That is what we teach our children. Elecitions without consequences do not exist. It's a contradiction in terms. One can differ about the nature of the consequences. I do no see much scope for foreign sanctions. The general rule applied by the EU and others to avoid contact with persons accused by the ICC of crimes against humanity is not new. It has been a rule of thumb for several years. And if you go back to Uhuru Kenyatta's last months as finance minister (after the confirmation of charges) you will be hard-pressed to find reports of meetings between him and senior western representatives, expect perhaps a few that dealt with matters where direct contact was absolutely critical. So there is little here that is new. Other "sanctions". Yes, there will be greater reluctance to sell arms to Kenya once an ICC indictee reaches State House. That reluctance or refusal actually hurts the selling state more than the purchasing state. The latter can go to other states which do not have such hang-ups. But I do not see many other "sanctions" being imposed. So let's not equate consequences with sanctions. The consequences are broader and include reluctance on the part of foreign investors to continue to see Kenya as an important in investment hub, the potential impact on tourism and so on. For another perspective read Prof Karuti Kanyingi's perspective in today's Nation which I copy below. elections.nation.co.ke/Blogs/-/1632026/1701738/-/1187g0l/-/index.htmlFuraha Every election has consequences but this time our choices are starkKenya’s General Election has become an international must-watch game. It has attracted attention of many governments and policy think tanks, for both good and bad reasons. Some are watching us to see what a radical Constitution can give birth to. They want to know whether our leaders learnt anything from the violence that ended in 2008. Kenya is gaining attention also for bad reasons. The world is keenly watching how we circumvent the Constitution in the name of sovereignty. There is concern that Parliament watered down the laws to operationalise this Constitution so as to safeguard interests of those who were in the Tenth Parliament. This is the context in which we are holding the March 4 election. It is for this reason that the choices we make will have consequences in future. The idea of consequences after the elections is not new. In fact, from 1992, our choices have had consequences. Electoral consequences are the result of how we frame the main theme for our elections. Organising question Every election contains a framework on which issues are built and leaders elected. In 1992 and 1997, the theme was ‘Moi and Kanu must go.’ This platform led to violence in Moi’s and Kanu’s strongholds. The organising question and theme for 2002 was ‘We want change’. There was support for change everywhere, including in areas supporting Moi’s political project at that time, Uhuru Kenyatta. The country did not witness repeat of the cycle of violence associated with previous polls. The organising question for 2007 lacked clarity. There was the question of whether the country should appreciate economic recovery, the main success of President Kibaki’s five-year term, or chide the Kibaki government for excluding from power leaders who were not from Mount Kenya region. So vicious were the arguments for and against these two issues that the country imploded after ODM rejected the results. The theme and the organising question for the March 4 election is complex. There is no consensus on the defining platform. Intervention by the International Criminal Court (ICC) and implementation of reforms under the new Constitution are the emerging issues. But ICC has gained traction for obviously bad reasons. Failure to address the problem of impunity and develop a society based on rule of law has meant an increase in the number of leaders who seek to prevent accountability. They are ready to block the ICC intervention. They see the intervention as interference with the status quo. They are afraid it will trigger demands to bring everyone to account for their actions; be it theft of public property, grand corruption or other breaches. Results of ICC intervention Campaigning and winning the election on the platform of ICC, therefore, has several consequences, too. The ICC platform implies that leaders elected at county level will comprise those who are vocal in shouting against the court. Those who are vocal in preventing accountability will be elected. Such leaders will not be passionate about development issues. They will promote self-interest. A review of nomination lists by different parties reveals this. There was no public check on the character of those nominated to run for offices. Those suspected of having been involved in abuse of office at the local level either as councillors or leaders of local cooperatives will still be gunning for some of these offices. Because we have not resolved the question of the big elephant in the room, no attempt has been made to address this challenge. The ICC platform also has consequences on the character of our Senate. A review of those seeking to be senators shows that the Senate is likely to be compromised, especially by the old politicians and ethnic chauvinists. Third is the consequence on gender. Debate on ICC intervention has distracted our attention from discussing the quality of women leadership. In many instances, men sat down and agreed on which woman leader should be on the ballot for which particular seat. The consequences for our electoral choices will be most pronounced at the national level. Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta and Mr William Ruto have spent the last two years, from January 2011, fighting to lift ICC yoke off their shoulders. They have been so preoccupied with ICC that they finally settled on running for the leadership of the country, probably to fight from a position of advantage. They had on their side Vice-President Kalonzo Musyoka, who was shuttling to many cities seeking support from African leaders to fight the ICC. What is now referred to as UhuRuto alliance will present several consequences on Kenya if it won and assumed office. First, other governments will adopt a ‘wait and see’ approach in their dealing with Kenya. Official transaction of business will be so limited that Kenya’s economy will thaw like ice rolling down a hill. Investors and governments will be waiting to see what will happen; and it could take long. Secondly, no major economic activities will be taking place during the ‘wait and see’ period. The economy will be on a downward trend. Development agencies, private businesses, and even individual entrepreneurs, will plan their activities and contractual obligation with March 2013 as the end point. The third consequence of UhuRuto leadership will be on the economy. Contrary to the thinking of many Kenyans, the government does not wholly finance development expenditure. Flows of official assistance contribute about five per cent share to GDP. Development aid supports 18 per cent of the budget. The significance of development assistance is visible when one examines the pattern of development expenditure. In 2011, net official development assistance as a share of development expenditure was about 60 per cent. Some sectors are likely to have even more than this share. One cannot wish away development assistance on the assumption that Kenya finances, on its own, its development budget. The choices we make will certainly affect this pattern of development assistance and expenditure. It will affect service delivery. The only choices that Kenyans can make for the good of the country is to support respect for the rule of law and building a strong foundation for constitutionalism. The rising ethnic nationalism, based purely on the ICC intervention, erodes the foundation of rule of law and future prospects for democracy in Kenya. Prof Karuti Kanyinga is based at the Institute for Development Studies (IDS), University of Nairobi, karuti@south.co.ke Furaha: Thanks for posting that sober article. (About the other demented one the you posted for "balance", hmmm.) I too do not believe that in the event of a Uhuru-Ruto win there would be the type of sanctions that many appear to be thinking of. But there would be consequences of the type you and Kanyinga point to. One point I wish to highlight is the claim, often boasted about, that we finance most of our budget. That is true, and it leads people to think that our economy has grown in a way that makes us financially independent. The complete truth, however, is that GoK decided some years ago that almost all aid would not be included in the budget. The aid is still there and has been increasing, but it is almost all "off-budget" and being spent on things that the GoK would otherwise have to borrow money and pay for. As an example, US "off-budget" to our health sector greatly exceeds the entire Ministry-of-Health Budget. As a somewhat different example of our "dependence", consider how many times in the last 5 years the IMF has had to intervene to stabilize the shilling. In all this, something we should keep in mind is that the West managed to bring considerable financial pressure to bear on Moi and without implementing sanctions. (I hear somebody getting ready to yell "we'll go to China!". That somebody should stop and think before yelling.) As the article suggests, it is the "non-sanctions" consequences that people should worry about---the slowdown of investments, etc. About a week ago, I was invited to an international event where there were quite a few senior diplomats from several countries. I got to talk to a couple of European ones and asked them about this issue, in the event that Uhuru and Ruto were elected and chose to hide from the law. Among the consequences they mentioned were cutting of aid except for badly needed "humanitarian assistance". But they also mentioned something that many have not considered---that their citizens, acting on their own, might stop visiting Kenya for tourism, stop buying Kenyan products, etc. That article also makes other points that produce nothing but gloom. For example "A review of those seeking to be senators shows that the Senate is likely to be compromised, especially by the old politicians and ethnic chauvinists."Are Kenyans really ready for the change that is required? The other unknown here is how Kenyans themselves would react to a declaration of an Uhuru-Ruto victory. Considering that it appears to be a close competion and bearing in mind that the two feel they must win, things could get very ugly. Perhaps not as ugly as 2007-2008 but still very ugly. I expect that regardless of who is declared the winner, the results of the elections will be bitterly contested, and even if there no planned violence this time, we can expect that there will be those who will "act on their own initiative". To all that, add the likely involvement of the Supreme Court, something that is already being "spiced" with death-threats to the Chief Justice.
|
|
|
Post by furaha on Feb 23, 2013 20:05:15 GMT 3
Otishotish, Thanks for your comments. As for that 'other' article that you say I posted for balance, it's called satire. It's true that if you look at Kenya's development cooperation income as share of the government's budget, it is usually somewhere between 5 and 10 percent and declining. Of course it is great news that Kenya has become less and less dependent on foreign aid. That being said, if you look at development cooperation as share of the government's development budget it is much, much more substantial. The government is actually quite dependent on foreign assistance for its development activities. The much bigger general budget is largely spent on recurrent costs, i.e. salaries for the public sector (including ever higher salaries for the growing political class) and maintenance costs. In early 2008 Kenya's main donors, in a rare display of unity, actually froze their development assistance with the exception of humanitarian assistance and assistance that, if withdrawn, would threaten peoples' lives (think of anti-retrovirals and other life-saving drugs). They did not resume their assistance until after the coalition government was sworn in on 16 April 2008. And even then, some withdrew support to sectors thought to have been instrumental in the PEV, eg the police. If the upcoming election is judged to be free and fair (I wonder whether it still can be - but that's an issue for another time) and Uhuruto are sworn in, I doubt whether there would be immediate consequences for development assistance. Ongoing programmes would continue but once these are completed we might see a gradual turn-down or a shift to more assistance via NGO's or multilateral agencies. And about your fears for contested election outcomes, I share them. And it might be worse than last time because there is now much more at stake at the county level. 47 power struggles? I hope I am wrong. Furaha
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on Feb 23, 2013 20:28:42 GMT 3
Otishotish, Thanks for your comments. As for that 'other' article that you say I posted for balance, it's called satire. Got that ... but I have noticed that on at least one Kenyan cyberforum it is being taken seriously! I agree with that. I don't think the mere fact of their election would necessarily be the biggest issue, although it's bound to have some effect. I think the real crunch will come when they choose to defy the ICC.
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Feb 24, 2013 10:20:09 GMT 3
.....& here's a clip of Professor Joel Barkan on why the international community's hands are tied as "all politics are local" & the Uhuruto juggernaut may be unstoppable until it comes to its logical end. NB: The clip is from an interview on Straight Talk Africa recorded last year, but the sentiments remain relevant, in fact more so now, that the "Unholy Alliance" has managed to hold up until the eve of the elections. In KE's case, all politics may be loco ;D ...
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on Feb 28, 2013 18:12:16 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Feb 28, 2013 18:33:46 GMT 3
|
|