Uhuru Kenyatta (below) comes to power on a wave of cautious optimism. But he must tackle a host of national shortcomings if he is to make a success of his new job
IN A terse ruling on March 30th the judges of Kenya’s Supreme Court threw out petitions claiming that the presidential election held (with an array of others) earlier that month was stolen under the cover of a chaotic count. Uhuru Kenyatta, one of the richest men in the country, will be inaugurated on April 9th into the same office that his father Jomo held from 1964 until his death 14 years later.
The loser and departing prime minister, Raila Odinga, won plaudits for accepting the court’s ruling, despite the “dismay” he expressed at the elections’ conduct. Though many of the 43% who voted for Mr Odinga feel aggrieved, most Kenyans have heaved a collective sigh of relief that the wide-scale violence and chaos that ruined the last election, in 2007, have mercifully been avoided. Yet the country remains badly split, largely along ethnic lines.
Still, the stock exchange in Nairobi, the capital, responded bullishly to the judges’ verdict, with its strongest one-day rally in five years when trading recommenced on April 2nd. The Kenyan shilling reached its highest point for six months against the dollar. In the city’s glittering towers that have shot up in the past decade or so, traders spoke of Kenya reaching an “inflection point” presaging a drop in political risk. Foreign investors are expected to pile in. In the past, says Aly-Khan Satchu, a local financial pundit, it was political risk that held back the economy.
Business leaders, many of whom hail from Mr Kenyatta’s Kikuyu tribe, the country’s biggest and richest, see him as one of their own. His first two appointments after the judges’ ruling were to inspect a port-development scheme worth $5 billion near the island of Lamu, at the northern end of Kenya’s coast, and to meet the country’s association of manufacturers.
By most forecasts the economy should grow by 6% this year, up from 4% last. Recent oil and gas finds, added to geothermal and wind-power projects, may help the balance of payments and improve its erratic electricity supply. On the other hand, Kenya’s bloated government and the devolution required under the new constitution mean that money for even more essential infrastructure may be harder to find. The elections ushered in a bunch of senators and governors—posts that did not previously exist—whose costs may take at least 15% out of the national budget.
But Kenya’s ratio of debt to GDP is a relatively healthy 45%, according to the IMF. And the country has a more robust tax base than most of its African peers, with revenues equivalent to 23% of GDP. With Mr Kenyatta in charge, the free-wheeling economy is expected to surge ahead.
Three worries may, however, continue to dog the country—and its new leader. The first is corruption, which wastes vast amounts of public money, including aid from foreign governments. It also fuels anger among the mass of Kenyans, who resent the opulence of the political elite. Mr Kenyatta’s father, though revered as the founding president, is also held responsible for entrenching a system of corruption, greed and patronage that besmirches the country to this day. His son hails from an extended family that has long luxuriated in its wealth. To be sure, had Mr Odinga won, the scourge of corruption would have remained scarcely less potent.
Second, and more egregiously, the election did little to dispel the old bane of tribalism. Mr Kenyatta’s victory was thanks more to his canniness in building tribal alliances that numerically outweighed those that Mr Odinga put together, than to any set of policies. Even Kenya’s burgeoning middle class seemed unable, as voters, to move much beyond tribal identities.
Since the poll, Kenyans have been spitting ethnic vitriol at each other in their social media. John Githongo, a leading anti-corruption campaigner and advocate of political reform, says the election failed as a nation-building event. “Kenya emerged from this process far more polarised than ever before along tribal lines,” he laments. Though political violence has been averted for the time being and Mr Kenyatta is bound to appoint a cabinet that reflects the country’s ethnic diversity, tribal grievances over land and politics could yet erupt.
The third worry is the new president’s indictment by the International Criminal Court at The Hague on charges related to the violence that followed the previous election, in 2007. Many of the Western governments and lobbies that invested heavily in trying to secure a fair election hoped Mr Odinga would win. Now they have to decide how to handle the new president. European Union ambassadors are already divided between self-proclaimed pragmatists who say it is essential, given Kenya’s position at the hub of a volatile region, to co-operate warmly with him, and those who are keener to uphold international justice, even if it harms relations with Kenya’s new government. Britain and America have publicly congratulated Mr Kenyatta and his new government, while privately warning that if he or his running mate and fellow indictee, William Ruto, cease to co-operate with the court, relations with the West could deteriorate fast.
That seems unlikely at present. Mr Kenyatta’s lawyers are pressing the court to drop the charges against him after the case against one of his co-accused, Francis Muthaura, a former head of the civil service, collapsed. Witnesses who were brave enough to give evidence against a well-known politician must now weigh the risk of testifying against a head of state who controls a formidable security and intelligence service. Mr Kenyatta’s defence may be among the “best financed and most intimidating ever seen,” says a lawyer close to the international court. Several key witnesses have dropped out. The court is not expected to ask Messrs Kenyatta and Ruto to visit The Hague before August.
Meanwhile, editorials in newspapers friendly to the new president have begun to call for tighter controls on foreign funding for anything from helping human-rights groups to digging wells in the arid north. Those who want to hold the new government to account fear this could be a prelude to a crackdown on dissent. Kenyans are hoping that their country’s 42m-odd people can cope with adversarial politics without coming to real blows.
The loser and departing prime minister, Raila Odinga, won plaudits for accepting the court’s ruling, despite the “dismay” he expressed at the elections’ conduct. Though many of the 43% who voted for Mr Odinga feel aggrieved, most Kenyans have heaved a collective sigh of relief that the wide-scale violence and chaos that ruined the last election, in 2007, have mercifully been avoided. Yet the country remains badly split, largely along ethnic lines.
Still, the stock exchange in Nairobi, the capital, responded bullishly to the judges’ verdict, with its strongest one-day rally in five years when trading recommenced on April 2nd. The Kenyan shilling reached its highest point for six months against the dollar. In the city’s glittering towers that have shot up in the past decade or so, traders spoke of Kenya reaching an “inflection point” presaging a drop in political risk. Foreign investors are expected to pile in. In the past, says Aly-Khan Satchu, a local financial pundit, it was political risk that held back the economy.
Business leaders, many of whom hail from Mr Kenyatta’s Kikuyu tribe, the country’s biggest and richest, see him as one of their own. His first two appointments after the judges’ ruling were to inspect a port-development scheme worth $5 billion near the island of Lamu, at the northern end of Kenya’s coast, and to meet the country’s association of manufacturers.
By most forecasts the economy should grow by 6% this year, up from 4% last. Recent oil and gas finds, added to geothermal and wind-power projects, may help the balance of payments and improve its erratic electricity supply. On the other hand, Kenya’s bloated government and the devolution required under the new constitution mean that money for even more essential infrastructure may be harder to find. The elections ushered in a bunch of senators and governors—posts that did not previously exist—whose costs may take at least 15% out of the national budget.
But Kenya’s ratio of debt to GDP is a relatively healthy 45%, according to the IMF. And the country has a more robust tax base than most of its African peers, with revenues equivalent to 23% of GDP. With Mr Kenyatta in charge, the free-wheeling economy is expected to surge ahead.
Three worries may, however, continue to dog the country—and its new leader. The first is corruption, which wastes vast amounts of public money, including aid from foreign governments. It also fuels anger among the mass of Kenyans, who resent the opulence of the political elite. Mr Kenyatta’s father, though revered as the founding president, is also held responsible for entrenching a system of corruption, greed and patronage that besmirches the country to this day. His son hails from an extended family that has long luxuriated in its wealth. To be sure, had Mr Odinga won, the scourge of corruption would have remained scarcely less potent.
Second, and more egregiously, the election did little to dispel the old bane of tribalism. Mr Kenyatta’s victory was thanks more to his canniness in building tribal alliances that numerically outweighed those that Mr Odinga put together, than to any set of policies. Even Kenya’s burgeoning middle class seemed unable, as voters, to move much beyond tribal identities.
Since the poll, Kenyans have been spitting ethnic vitriol at each other in their social media. John Githongo, a leading anti-corruption campaigner and advocate of political reform, says the election failed as a nation-building event. “Kenya emerged from this process far more polarised than ever before along tribal lines,” he laments. Though political violence has been averted for the time being and Mr Kenyatta is bound to appoint a cabinet that reflects the country’s ethnic diversity, tribal grievances over land and politics could yet erupt.
The third worry is the new president’s indictment by the International Criminal Court at The Hague on charges related to the violence that followed the previous election, in 2007. Many of the Western governments and lobbies that invested heavily in trying to secure a fair election hoped Mr Odinga would win. Now they have to decide how to handle the new president. European Union ambassadors are already divided between self-proclaimed pragmatists who say it is essential, given Kenya’s position at the hub of a volatile region, to co-operate warmly with him, and those who are keener to uphold international justice, even if it harms relations with Kenya’s new government. Britain and America have publicly congratulated Mr Kenyatta and his new government, while privately warning that if he or his running mate and fellow indictee, William Ruto, cease to co-operate with the court, relations with the West could deteriorate fast.
That seems unlikely at present. Mr Kenyatta’s lawyers are pressing the court to drop the charges against him after the case against one of his co-accused, Francis Muthaura, a former head of the civil service, collapsed. Witnesses who were brave enough to give evidence against a well-known politician must now weigh the risk of testifying against a head of state who controls a formidable security and intelligence service. Mr Kenyatta’s defence may be among the “best financed and most intimidating ever seen,” says a lawyer close to the international court. Several key witnesses have dropped out. The court is not expected to ask Messrs Kenyatta and Ruto to visit The Hague before August.
Meanwhile, editorials in newspapers friendly to the new president have begun to call for tighter controls on foreign funding for anything from helping human-rights groups to digging wells in the arid north. Those who want to hold the new government to account fear this could be a prelude to a crackdown on dissent. Kenyans are hoping that their country’s 42m-odd people can cope with adversarial politics without coming to real blows.
No comments :
Post a Comment