Montreal, February 28
More news today, bringing a sigh of relief. The power sharing deal has been signed in a public ceremony. The basics are that the each party will get cabinet posts reflecting its numbers in parliament, and there will be a Prime Minister (for the first time since 1964) and two Deputy PMs. The PM will, according to the report: have "authority to co-ordinate and supervise the execution of government functions". A little vague.
Great first step, and only two months overdue.
Well, actually, more like 10 years overdue, but that's a whole other story.
I fully expect Kenya to recede from international headlines now, as it had already done to a large extent because there was no sexy violence going on for reporters to cover. What this will mean for the rest of a program of reform is very unclear.
In a way, I don't imagine Kenyan leaders moving forward or making much progress without international pressure to keep things going. There's a lot of opportunity to just stall and stall and stall, unless at least one of the main players (I'll speculate, optimistically, that it'll be ODM) keeping up the pressure and using its position to leverage some of the reforms they want to make.
As far as violence goes, it remains to be seen how well this political agreement will be received by the masses, and by the makeshift and not so makeshift ethnic gangs that carried out a lot of the attacks. If they see it as a reasonable agreement, things should remain calm and get better. If, for some reason, either side sees it as threatening their position (and I would speculate that this might come from Kibaki's "supporters"), we might see more clashes. I think it's unlikely in the short term, but what do I know?
I suppose the image of Raila and Kibaki, Luo and Kikuyu, agreeing to work and live together is a positive one for Kenya.
Without further reform, this deal will essentially be meaningless.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Communication breakdown
Montreal, February 26
The BBC is reporting that the mediation talks in Kenya have been suspended. This is not altogether unexpected, given that the discussions which seemed to be proceeding so well over the past couple of weeks hit some serious snags over the past seven to ten days. The main sticking point, it appears, is the powers to be associated with a new position of Prime Minister, and how that person is to be selected.
The ODM wants an executive prime minister, whose job will be created through a constitutional amendment, and who will be selected through General Election (that is, the leader of the party with the most seats in Parliament will automatically become the PM). They want this person to have a fair amount of power in directing government business in Parliament, just like many other PMs around the world, which would remove some of the executive powers from the imperial Presidency that Kenya currently has in place.
The PNU disagrees with this, and while they apparently agreed to the creating of a PM post last week, they have argued that the PM should be a simple cabinet member, to be appointed (and fired) by the President, more or less at will. This, they say, should be done through a simple act in Parliament.
Kofi Annan, trying to reassure everyone involved (including those of us keeping score at home), has said that the talks have not 'broken down' but that he has temporarily suspended discussions so he can meet directly with Raila and Kibaki to try to move things along more quickly than their negotiating teams will allow.
ODM, meanwhile, has called for mass, peaceful, public demonstrations to be held on Thursday. They made the call late last week when it looked like talks were going to get seriously bogged down on the power-sharing issue, and formally notified the police on Monday evening. Now, from what I can tell, there should be no reason for the police to disallow the protests, since the blanket ban on political meetings appears to have been withdrawn, and the ODM have followed the necessary steps by providing notice three days in advance. Of course, a protest in Kenya, even if it's intended to be peaceful, is a risky proposition for public safety and maintaining order. Whether thugs from either side will try to use the mob effect to stir up serious trouble, or the police decide to bust things up for no apparent reason, things could easily get out of hand. Let's hope they don't. It's time to start a new precedent in public demonstrations in Kenya anyways.
This whole situation is a bit absurd.
First of all, ODM and Raila are basically negotiating to get themselves a stake in governing the country with a regime that effectively stole the election. At first, it seemed to be about trying to come up with a resolution to the crisis that would likely see a short-term transitional phase to oversee constitutional reform and a new election. Now the transitional aspect of it seems to be more in doubt.
Second, Raila and ODM appear to be basically willing to settle for a Prime Minister's post, if it has enough executive power and is entrenched by a constitutional amendment, despite earlier having rejected outright the possibility of even entertaining an offer. That's fine, I suppose, but they have to know that unless things are done quickly and with enough legal weight to make them stick, there's a pretty good chance that Kibaki and his team will do what they did in 2003: break the agreement at the earliest opportunity and continue to make use of their power as they have been.
If these negotiations actually lead to fundamental, constitutional change in Kenya, Raila and ODM accepting the creation of an executive Prime Minister would be a potentially positive step. That would be better than having the presidential results overturned (or annuled) and then taking up office to perpetuate the same intentional neglect to effect reforms that Kenya saw after the NARC coalition came to power in 2003. But, if the PMship is being used as a tool to bring Raila into the fold of PNU, so to speak, and if he goes along with it, he will have proven once and for all that he's no better than the rest of the so-called leaders who have brought this crisis upon their people.
Meanwhile, if talks actually do break down, rather than being slowed down as Annan says, there's a very real threat of renewed violence. The uneasy calm that has prevailed since the beginning of February has given the ethnically oriented gangs of youth time to recharge their batteries. In a worst case scenario, they will also have taken the time to organize and prepare.
The first step to lasting peace and reform in Kenya is to prevent the thugs and gangs from getting an opportunity to cause further damage. That will require the 'leaders' to strengthen their resolve to solve the political crisis so that they can go on to the next steps: constitutional reform and a truth and reconciliation effort that goes as far back in time as necessary to deal with the root causes of these conflicts. The question is, can Kibaki and his team put their death-grip on power aside for the good of the nation, and can Raila and his team show a level of integrity that forces PNU to do so?
The BBC is reporting that the mediation talks in Kenya have been suspended. This is not altogether unexpected, given that the discussions which seemed to be proceeding so well over the past couple of weeks hit some serious snags over the past seven to ten days. The main sticking point, it appears, is the powers to be associated with a new position of Prime Minister, and how that person is to be selected.
The ODM wants an executive prime minister, whose job will be created through a constitutional amendment, and who will be selected through General Election (that is, the leader of the party with the most seats in Parliament will automatically become the PM). They want this person to have a fair amount of power in directing government business in Parliament, just like many other PMs around the world, which would remove some of the executive powers from the imperial Presidency that Kenya currently has in place.
The PNU disagrees with this, and while they apparently agreed to the creating of a PM post last week, they have argued that the PM should be a simple cabinet member, to be appointed (and fired) by the President, more or less at will. This, they say, should be done through a simple act in Parliament.
Kofi Annan, trying to reassure everyone involved (including those of us keeping score at home), has said that the talks have not 'broken down' but that he has temporarily suspended discussions so he can meet directly with Raila and Kibaki to try to move things along more quickly than their negotiating teams will allow.
ODM, meanwhile, has called for mass, peaceful, public demonstrations to be held on Thursday. They made the call late last week when it looked like talks were going to get seriously bogged down on the power-sharing issue, and formally notified the police on Monday evening. Now, from what I can tell, there should be no reason for the police to disallow the protests, since the blanket ban on political meetings appears to have been withdrawn, and the ODM have followed the necessary steps by providing notice three days in advance. Of course, a protest in Kenya, even if it's intended to be peaceful, is a risky proposition for public safety and maintaining order. Whether thugs from either side will try to use the mob effect to stir up serious trouble, or the police decide to bust things up for no apparent reason, things could easily get out of hand. Let's hope they don't. It's time to start a new precedent in public demonstrations in Kenya anyways.
This whole situation is a bit absurd.
First of all, ODM and Raila are basically negotiating to get themselves a stake in governing the country with a regime that effectively stole the election. At first, it seemed to be about trying to come up with a resolution to the crisis that would likely see a short-term transitional phase to oversee constitutional reform and a new election. Now the transitional aspect of it seems to be more in doubt.
Second, Raila and ODM appear to be basically willing to settle for a Prime Minister's post, if it has enough executive power and is entrenched by a constitutional amendment, despite earlier having rejected outright the possibility of even entertaining an offer. That's fine, I suppose, but they have to know that unless things are done quickly and with enough legal weight to make them stick, there's a pretty good chance that Kibaki and his team will do what they did in 2003: break the agreement at the earliest opportunity and continue to make use of their power as they have been.
If these negotiations actually lead to fundamental, constitutional change in Kenya, Raila and ODM accepting the creation of an executive Prime Minister would be a potentially positive step. That would be better than having the presidential results overturned (or annuled) and then taking up office to perpetuate the same intentional neglect to effect reforms that Kenya saw after the NARC coalition came to power in 2003. But, if the PMship is being used as a tool to bring Raila into the fold of PNU, so to speak, and if he goes along with it, he will have proven once and for all that he's no better than the rest of the so-called leaders who have brought this crisis upon their people.
Meanwhile, if talks actually do break down, rather than being slowed down as Annan says, there's a very real threat of renewed violence. The uneasy calm that has prevailed since the beginning of February has given the ethnically oriented gangs of youth time to recharge their batteries. In a worst case scenario, they will also have taken the time to organize and prepare.
The first step to lasting peace and reform in Kenya is to prevent the thugs and gangs from getting an opportunity to cause further damage. That will require the 'leaders' to strengthen their resolve to solve the political crisis so that they can go on to the next steps: constitutional reform and a truth and reconciliation effort that goes as far back in time as necessary to deal with the root causes of these conflicts. The question is, can Kibaki and his team put their death-grip on power aside for the good of the nation, and can Raila and his team show a level of integrity that forces PNU to do so?
Thursday, February 7, 2008
Stalemate
Montreal, February 7
The political stalemate continues in Kenya. After easy agreement on the fact that there's a humanitarian crisis in the country, the Kofi Annan mediation extravaganza hit a major roadblock (no burning tires or machetes here) by trying to address the elections. ODM says it was stolen, wants a change, and is suggesting a transitional government of some sort. PNU says there's no problem and ODM should have gone to court (but has now missed the opportunity because they didn't file a petition before the deadline to do so), and is refusing any suggestion of a re-run or a transition. They did, however, agree that there are fundamental problems with the Electoral Commission of Kenya which need to be addressed. Great work fellas.
What seems absurd, at the moment, is that people seem to believe that these same politicians can somehow control the 'rowdy youths' who periodically erect blockades or chase people from other tribes in (and out of) various rural parts of the country. It seems to me, watching from a distance as I am, that the politicians have little to no control over what goes on on the ground.
True, it would make a difference if they continued to promote peace and speak out against violence. That might convince some of the fence-sitters among the youth not to join in on fighting when it erupts. But the hardcore, some of whom may well be directed as parts of gangs which are controlled at the local level or more or less independently from the politicians who are almost always linked to them by rumour and innuendo, will not easily be swayed by words.
The underlying problems, tensions over resources that should be more linked to class and less linked to ethnicity, need to be addressed, and assuming that the political elite is in control of 'supporters' who are then sent out to attack opponents or 'enemies' will not help the situation. That's the legacy of the ethnic clashes of the 1990s, which were passed off as politically instigated and orchestrated while it should have been clear to almost everyone that it was not simply a matter of politicians running militias (although that was there, too), but far more complex.
Until Kenya sorts out the deeper issues, the potential for repeated explosions along ethnic lines, such as those that have happened over the past several weeks, will continue to exist.
The political stalemate continues in Kenya. After easy agreement on the fact that there's a humanitarian crisis in the country, the Kofi Annan mediation extravaganza hit a major roadblock (no burning tires or machetes here) by trying to address the elections. ODM says it was stolen, wants a change, and is suggesting a transitional government of some sort. PNU says there's no problem and ODM should have gone to court (but has now missed the opportunity because they didn't file a petition before the deadline to do so), and is refusing any suggestion of a re-run or a transition. They did, however, agree that there are fundamental problems with the Electoral Commission of Kenya which need to be addressed. Great work fellas.
What seems absurd, at the moment, is that people seem to believe that these same politicians can somehow control the 'rowdy youths' who periodically erect blockades or chase people from other tribes in (and out of) various rural parts of the country. It seems to me, watching from a distance as I am, that the politicians have little to no control over what goes on on the ground.
True, it would make a difference if they continued to promote peace and speak out against violence. That might convince some of the fence-sitters among the youth not to join in on fighting when it erupts. But the hardcore, some of whom may well be directed as parts of gangs which are controlled at the local level or more or less independently from the politicians who are almost always linked to them by rumour and innuendo, will not easily be swayed by words.
The underlying problems, tensions over resources that should be more linked to class and less linked to ethnicity, need to be addressed, and assuming that the political elite is in control of 'supporters' who are then sent out to attack opponents or 'enemies' will not help the situation. That's the legacy of the ethnic clashes of the 1990s, which were passed off as politically instigated and orchestrated while it should have been clear to almost everyone that it was not simply a matter of politicians running militias (although that was there, too), but far more complex.
Until Kenya sorts out the deeper issues, the potential for repeated explosions along ethnic lines, such as those that have happened over the past several weeks, will continue to exist.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)