Connect with us



10 min read.

Despite giving Kenyans the best access to civil services since Independence, Jubilee could be laid low by economic and increasing mistrust in the Rift Valley



Raila Wins
Download PDFPrint Article

In late 2016, some people who had earlier come looking for my views in another confusing lifetime circa 2007, returned hoping that I would be able to repeat my prediction magic.

Very easy this time, I told them, the Jubilee government will be re-elected and they will not even need to break into a sweat to get back into office. My view was informed by the moves Uhuruto made early in their administration to distribute all manner of goodies including title deeds in counties where the alliance had been weak in the 2013 polls. The Coast was one area that really hit the headlines with an unprecedented confirmation of title deeds that year and in subsequent years too.

In places like western Kenya, popular politicians were wooed into the Jubilee camp, the most notable being Budalangi legislator Ababu Namwamba.

Not many perceived what was happening then but clearly the ruling duo were starting their re-election campaign early.

Today, less than a month to the polls, my prediction barely a few months back is clearly not going to come to pass. Indeed, every analyst seems to agree that if the incumbent Jubilee government does win re-election, it will certainly not be without plenty of sweat.

So, what happened here? What shifted the political equation so dramatically and so quickly, turning a confident incumbent into a struggling one?

Recent polls by reputable pollsters like Ipsos Synovate have shown Raila Odinga rapidly gaining on Uhuru, with the latest showing that 47 per cent of Kenyans would vote for the Uhuruto duo while 42 per cent would vote for the Raila-Kalonzo ticket. It is instructive that the polls have shown Uhuru hardly gaining in popularity while the graphs have shown huge Raila leaps in contrast.

There is still a fear of government in many rural areas, and there is often a deep instinct that it is better to give the answer that will please the officials rather than what they actually think

Travelling through most of Kenya outside the erstwhile central province and the Rift Valley, one would begin to think that Raila Odinga will win the polls easily, contrary to the scientific polls. For many years now, I have done regular surveys using my contacts on the ground. Since early this year, they have shown a rapid rise in Raila’s popularity. So much so that I suspected they may be more than a little exaggerated. More so when compared with scientific opinion polls. And so in early June I visited Eldoret, Uasin Gishu, Kitale, Kitui, Mwingi, Meru and Embu. Coupled with what I saw in Mombasa where I resided at the time, the general impression I got was that the Nasa candidate’s potential votes in most of the country was in fact being grossly understated in the information I had been seeing in the mainstream media and opinion polls.

Still, there is an interesting aside here that may explain why the figures never seem to favour a challenger to the incumbent in Kenya.


I witnessed a fascinating scenario during the 2010 census somewhere in rural Kiambu. As census officials took a neighbour through the questions, an older member of the family warned them in vernacular to be careful not to give the wrong answers to the government. Over the years I have witnessed a few other such instances. It stems from the fact that there is still a fear of government in many rural areas, especially among older Kenyans and there is often a deep instinct that it is better to give the right answer rather than the wrong one. An answer that they feel will please the government rather than what they actually think. To make matters worse, it is taboo in many Kenyan cultures to support somebody who has not gone through the traditional rites of circumcision. As primitive as it may sound, these are factors that could easily affect Raila Odinga numbers with a pollster. And they are factors that may not be easy for pollsters to capture and compensate for in their samples and analyses.


The IEBC released the final voter register as I was putting finishing touches to this article. It may be a good idea to delve a little deeper into the figures by crunching the numbers based on the 2013 results and bearing in mind that voting patterns in the country are predictably tribal.

Putting Musalia Mudavadi’s 2013 votes into the Nasa basket, the opposition voter tally improves dramatically but still falls short of victory

This time, putting Musalia Mudavadi’s 2013 votes into the Nasa basket, the opposition voter tally improves dramatically but still falls short of victory. Assuming the same voter turnout percentages, Nasa would lose by polling 8.28 million votes to Jubilee’s 8.57 million. Bearing in mind the very unpredictable nature of voter turnout, these figures would make the race much closer than any poll has seen so far.

If anything, these estimates are based on registered voters, underlining once again just how terribly important voter turnout is going to be for both candidates on August 8.


So the burning question would be what has made opposition leader and Nasa flagbearer Raila Odinga so popular so suddenly?

It emerges that asking the same question the other way around has a higher chance of getting you the answer. And that question would be: What made Uhuruto so unpopular so quickly?

Indeed, this is one of the many similarities the 2017 election has to the ill-fated 2007 one. In that earlier election, Raila Odinga received widespread support and votes right across the country but it was not his popularity that triggered it. Rather, Kenyans were registering an emphatic protest vote against president Mwai Kibaki and his administration. What we have here are very similar sentiments against the Uhuruto administration that have created a huge block of protest votes.

The sober truth is that, in comparison with past governments, the Jubilee administration is the best the country has ever had. Even with its glaring mega-corruption scandals, Kenyans actually have not had a better government to show. Huduma Centres countrywide and even in opposition strongholds like Kisumu have dramatically eased the public’s access to government services and wiped out the corruption cartels on that front at least. Infrastructural projects are visible and even with the county governments in place, there is a lot of solid progress that the Uhuruto duo can take credit for. And that is the truth.

But alas, in politics, elections are won or lost on the emotions of voters and on this front Jubilee has had some rather rotten luck. A number of factors, some of which are outside the control of the government, have coalesced as we go into the polls, suddenly making the incumbent a hard sell. Or at the very least, harder to sell than he was just a few months ago to the majority of voters outside his home turf in the former central province.

The sober truth is that the Jubilee administration is the best the country has ever had… even with its glaring megacorruption scandals. But alas, in politics, elections are won or lost on the emotions of voters and on this front Jubilee has had some rather rotten luck

The clearest illustration of the bad mood of voters on the ground currently is an Ipsos survey in March this year that revealed that seven out of every ten Kenyans felt that the country was headed in the wrong direction. The shocking translation from that statistic was that even those who support the Jubilee government are not happy with things the way they are. Although they will probably still vote Jubilee anyway, based on ethnic considerations.


The hard times most Kenyans are facing currently have to top the list of things upsetting the voter just now. Here the opposition has cleverly managed to link recent corruption headlines to the hard times, thus solidifying their support and releasing pent-up emotions that make for a bigger voter turnout on August 8 that much easier to achieve.


But the most decisive factor in deciding the 2017 presidential poll will end up being the strong and escalating anti-Kikuyu sentiments sweeping right across the country.

If Jubilee ends up losing these elections, then analysts will have the glee of including in their pieces the story of how the government knowingly helped grow the very monster that ultimately felled it.

And here is how it has happened: Uhuruto handlers, missing the rallying factor of the ICC cases that they rode into power on in 2013, have been looking for another emotive factor to rally their troops. They have resorted to actively provoking anti-Raila rhetoric and feelings while promoting among their core supporters a feeling of being under siege from enemies of the Kikuyu, thus leaving the community with no option but to fight for an emphatic win at all costs. Mwai Kibaki used a similar strategy in 2007. One of the deadly by-products of this kind of approach is intensifying anti-Kikuyu feelings among the other tribes in the country, not just among the Luo whom it is mainly targeted at.

The result is that today most Nasa supporters can hardly wait to vote out the Jubilee administration. This kind of tribal war leaves virtually no room to talk issues or to analyse development achievements. Little wonder that the biggest development project since Independence, albeit weighed down by many issues, has not had even a fraction of the anticipated impact most analysts, including this writer, thought it would have. I am of course referring to the single gauge railway (SGR) project. Reducing the travel time between Mombasa and Nairobi is something that is expected to revolutionise many Kenyan lives and create numerous business and work opportunities that would otherwise not have been possible. Still, the political impact has been disappointing, at best.


These anti-Kikuyu feelings could not have come at a worse time because there is mounting evidence that they could end up impacting on Uhuruto’s vital support base in the Rift Valley.

Uhuru Kenyatta swept into State House on the solid support base of not only central Kenya (his own community of Kikuyus) but also Deputy President William Ruto’s Kalenjin community. Both regions are vote-rich and the numbers impressive enough to almost guarantee one the presidency. Naturally, it is expected that the same support base will play a key role in the president’s re-election. The long and short of it is that any slight dent in Uhuruto’s chunk of Rift Valley Kalenjin votes will almost certainly spell disaster for the incumbent.

The opposition has very cleverly managed to link recent corruption headlines to the hard times, thus releasing pent-up emotions that make for a bigger voter turnout on August 8

Actually, the growing anti-Kikuyu sentiments in the region could snatch away much more than just a chunk if recent developments are anything to go by. Two very scary events related to anti-Kikuyu sentiment in the region are worth noting here.

Uasin Gishu is a county at the heart of the Rift Valley, where incumbent Governor Jackson Mandago is fighting the political fight of his life to retain his seat against a strong and well-financed challenger called Zedekiah Kiprop Bundotich, better known as simply Buzeki. Buzeki has won the hearts of the sizeable local Kikuyu community, who see him as a breath of fresh air in comparison with the controversial and ethnic-oriented Mandago. Mandago is from the Nandi, who make up about a third of the voters, while Buzeki is a Keiyo who has managed to also muster the support of other non-Nandi Kalenjin voters in the county.

Mandago has felt the heat of this challenge so much that he has openly threatened the Jubilee high command that if they do not force the wealthy businessman to withdraw from the race, he and his Nandi community will influence most of Rift Valley to vote for Nasa instead of Jubilee. Despite a flurry of meetings, the issue is yet to be resolved. And meanwhile the Kikuyu community in the county is feeling threatened and have clearly been warned that a Buzeki win in August will result in dire consequences for them. Not all these warnings have been conveyed in secret and some have in fact been captured by various media houses and news outlets. In one chilling instance widely quoted in the media, the Governor declared that on voting day his aides would carefully monitor the first 100 votes cast by members of the Kikuyu tribe in Uasin Gishu and if they turned out to be for Buzeki, he would signal the entire Rift Valley Kalenjin community to vote for the Nasa presidential candidate.

It is not clear how Mandago’s aides will be able to “monitor” actual voting in the secret ballot setup we have in the country.

Whatever the outcome in Uasin Gishu, it is hard to imagine a situation where President Kenyatta’s vote tallies will go unscathed with so much anti-Kikuyu venom flying around.


The second possible game-changing thing happening in the Rift Valley is credited mainly to the efforts of Bomet Governor Isaac Rutto. Isaac is a bitter rival of DP Ruto, who was a close ally in 2007. The Governor has helped fan anti-DP Ruto sentiments right across the Rift Valley. The result today is that there are many areas in the region where the DP cannot give a speech without being heckled. Despite the opinion polls and what many analysts are saying, it is indeed difficult to envisage the same voters agreeing with Isaac Rutto’s sentiments but voting for the president who is on the same ticket as the man they now love to hate.

Uasin Gishu Governor Jackson Mandago has openly threatened the Jubilee high command that if they do not force his wealthy businessman rival Buzeki to withdraw from the race, Mandago and his Nandi community will influence most of Rift Valley to vote for Nasa instead of Jubilee

But even more telling is a development widely reported in the media but ignored by most analysts looking at Rift Valley voting patterns. Early in the year and before Isaac Rutto announced his decision to join the opposition Nasa as one of the principals, the populous Kispsigis community gave him their blessings and pledged support for his Chama cha Mashinani political party. The community also gave him the green light to join the opposition. Such arrangements in the Rift Valley are taken very seriously indeed and this can only mean one thing. That virtually all the Kipsigis vote will go to Chama cha Mashinani and the presidential candidate that the party supports, namely one Raila Odinga.

Below are population figures of the various sub-tribes of the Kalenjin nation from the 2009 census; you can see that the Kispsigis outnumber all communities by a significant margin:




Keiyo…..313, 925




The long and short of all this is that the Rift Valley could easily turn out very differently from what everybody is expecting. This is because, although it already seems that almost half of the Kalenjin vote will go to the opposition, the Rift Valley has never been divided in the past. That means one of two things could happen at the last minute: The vote could end up being divided, which is unprecedented; or it could all shift at the last minute to the opposition, which has happened before and is precisely what happened in 2007. A Nandi revolt, which as we have seen has already been threatened, coupled with Kipsigis influence spreading to the other smaller Kalenjin sub-tribes, could well deliver such a shocking turn of events. The growing anti-Kikuyi sentiment in the Rift Valley makes a strong Jubilee comeback in the area highly unlikely.


One of the reasons why many analysts have always said that the peace in the Rift Valley after the 2007 troubles is fragile at best is obvious enough. And it is the fact that the ethnic issues that were used to trigger the bloodletting have remained largely unresolved.

It is a no-brainer that reviving anti-Kikuyu sentiment in the region will help turn the Kalenjin vote away from Jubilee. Isaac Rutto’s handlers are reported to have repeatedly asked voters in the region to show what they have gained from being in government

Amazingly, the approach has been that if people do not talk about it, or make any efforts to revive debate on it, the issue will eventually go away, somehow. Somebody should have had the foresight to remember that politics has a way of digging out dirt and unearthing what has been buried if only it will help win votes.

This has already started happening in the Rift Valley. It is a no-brainer that reviving anti-Kikuyu sentiment in the region will help turn the Kalenjin vote away from Jubilee. Isaac Rutto’s handlers are reported to have repeatedly asked voters in the region to show what they have gained from being in government through DP Ruto. This has been followed by an assertion that their man in government is in fact being used in the same way that Daniel arap Moi was used as vice president under Jomo Kenyatta. This is very effective vote-winning political rhetoric. Unfortunately, given the circumstances of 2007, it is also very dangerous.

The bottom line is that any vote expectations that Uhuruto may have that are pegged on the Rift Valley are extremely shaky at best. Which means that fate has just handed Raila Odinga his best chance yet of winning the presidency.

Support The Elephant.

The Elephant is helping to build a truly public platform, while producing consistent, quality investigations, opinions and analysis. The Elephant cannot survive and grow without your participation. Now, more than ever, it is vital for The Elephant to reach as many people as possible.

Your support helps protect The Elephant's independence and it means we can continue keeping the democratic space free, open and robust. Every contribution, however big or small, is so valuable for our collective future.


Kumekucha is an independent blogger based in Nairobi.

Continue Reading


Asylum Pact: Rwanda Must Do Some Political Housecleaning

Rwandans are welcoming, but the government’s priority must be to solve the internal political problems which produce refugees.



Asylum Pact: Rwanda Must Do Some Political Housecleaning
Download PDFPrint Article

The governments of the United Kingdom and Rwanda have signed an agreement to move asylum seekers from the UK to Rwanda for processing. This partnership has been heavily criticized and has been referred to as unethical and inhumane. It has also been opposed by the United Nations Refugee Agency on the grounds that it is contrary to the spirit of the Refugee Convention.

Here in Rwanda, we heard the news of the partnership on the day it was signed. The subject has never been debated in the Rwandan parliament and neither had it been canvassed in the local media prior to the announcement.

According to the government’s official press release, the partnership reflects Rwanda’s commitment to protect vulnerable people around the world. It is argued that by relocating migrants to Rwanda, their dignity and rights will be respected and they will be provided with a range of opportunities, including for personal development and employment, in a country that has consistently been ranked among the safest in the world.

A considerable number of Rwandans have been refugees and therefore understand the struggle that comes with being an asylum seeker and what it means to receive help from host countries to rebuild lives. Therefore, most Rwandans are sensitive to the plight of those forced to leave their home countries and would be more than willing to make them feel welcome. However, the decision to relocate the migrants to Rwanda raises a number of questions.

The government argues that relocating migrants to Rwanda will address the inequalities in opportunity that push economic migrants to leave their homes. It is not clear how this will work considering that Rwanda is already the most unequal country in the East African region. And while it is indeed seen as among the safest countries in the world, it was however ranked among the bottom five globally in the recently released 2022 World Happiness Index. How would migrants, who may have suffered psychological trauma fare in such an environment, and in a country that is still rebuilding itself?

A considerable number of Rwandans have been refugees and therefore understand the struggle that comes with being an asylum seeker and what it means to receive help from host countries to rebuild lives.

What opportunities can Rwanda provide to the migrants? Between 2018—the year the index was first published—and 2020, Rwanda’s ranking on the Human Capital Index (HCI) has been consistently low. Published by the World Bank, HCI measures which countries are best at mobilising the economic and professional potential of their citizens. Rwanda’s score is lower than the average for sub-Saharan Africa and it is partly due to this that the government had found it difficult to attract private investment that would create significant levels of employment prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Unemployment, particularly among the youth, has since worsened.

Despite the accolades Rwanda has received internationally for its development record, Rwanda’s economy has never been driven by a dynamic private or trade sector; it has been driven by aid. The country’s debt reached 73 per cent of GDP in 2021 while its economy has not developed the key areas needed to achieve and secure genuine social and economic transformation for its entire population. In addition to human capital development, these include social capital development, especially mutual trust among citizens considering the country’s unfortunate historical past, establishing good relations with neighbouring states, respect for human rights, and guaranteeing the accountability of public officials.

Rwanda aspires to become an upper middle-income country by 2035 and a high-income country by 2050. In 2000, the country launched a development plan that aimed to transform it into a middle-income country by 2020 on the back on a knowledge economy. That development plan, which has received financial support from various development partners including the UK which contributed over £1 billion, did not deliver the anticipated outcomes. Today the country remains stuck in the category of low-income states. Its structural constraints as a small land-locked country with few natural resources are often cited as an obstacle to development. However, this is exacerbated by current governance in Rwanda, which limits the political space, lacks separation of powers, impedes freedom of expression and represses government critics, making it even harder for Rwanda to reach the desired developmental goals.

Rwanda’s structural constraints as a small land-locked country with no natural resources are often viewed as an obstacle to achieving the anticipated development.

As a result of the foregoing, Rwanda has been producing its own share of refugees, who have sought political and economic asylum in other countries. The UK alone took in 250 Rwandese last year. There are others around the world, the majority of whom have found refuge in different countries in Africa, including countries neighbouring Rwanda. The presence of these refugees has been a source of tension in the region with Kigali accusing neighbouring states of supporting those who want to overthrow the government by force. Some Rwandans have indeed taken up armed struggle, a situation that, if not resolved, threatens long-term security in Rwanda and the Great Lakes region. In fact, the UK government’s advice on travel to Rwanda has consistently warned of the unstable security situation near the border with the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Burundi.

While Rwanda’s intention to help address the global imbalance of opportunity that fuels illegal immigration is laudable, I would recommend that charity start at home. As host of the 26th Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting scheduled for June 2022, and Commonwealth Chair-in-Office for the next two years, the government should seize the opportunity to implement the core values and principles of the Commonwealth, particularly the promotion of democracy, the rule of law, freedom of expression, political and civil rights, and a vibrant civil society. This would enable Rwanda to address its internal social, economic and political challenges, creating a conducive environment for long-term economic development, and durable peace that will not only stop Rwanda from producing refugees but will also render the country ready and capable of economically and socially integrating refugees from less fortunate countries in the future.

Continue Reading


Beyond Borders: Why We Need a Truly Internationalist Climate Justice Movement

The elite’s ‘solution’ to the climate crisis is to turn the displaced into exploitable migrant labour. We need a truly internationalist alternative.



Beyond Borders: Why We Need a Truly Internationalist Climate Justice Movement
Download PDFPrint Article

“We are not drowning, we are fighting” has become the rallying call for the Pacific Climate Warriors. From UN climate meetings to blockades of Australian coal ports, these young Indigenous defenders from twenty Pacific Island states are raising the alarm of global warming for low-lying atoll nations. Rejecting the narrative of victimisation – “you don’t need my pain or tears to know that we’re in a crisis,” as Samoan Brianna Fruean puts it – they are challenging the fossil fuel industry and colonial giants such as Australia, responsible for the world’s highest per-capita carbon emissions.

Around the world, climate disasters displace around 25.3 million people annually – one person every one to two seconds. In 2016, new displacements caused by climate disasters outnumbered new displacements as a result of persecution by a ratio of three to one. By 2050, an estimated 143 million people will be displaced in just three regions: Africa, South Asia, and Latin America. Some projections for global climate displacement are as high as one billion people.

Mapping who is most vulnerable to displacement reveals the fault lines between rich and poor, between the global North and South, and between whiteness and its Black, Indigenous and racialised others.

Globalised asymmetries of power create migration but constrict mobility. Displaced people – the least responsible for global warming – face militarised borders. While climate change is itself ignored by the political elite, climate migration is presented as a border security issue and the latest excuse for wealthy states to fortify their borders. In 2019, the Australian Defence Forces announced military patrols around Australia’s waters to intercept climate refugees.

The burgeoning terrain of “climate security” prioritises militarised borders, dovetailing perfectly into eco-apartheid. “Borders are the environment’s greatest ally; it is through them that we will save the planet,” declares the party of French far-Right politician Marine Le Pen. A US Pentagon-commissioned report on the security implications of climate change encapsulates the hostility to climate refugees: “Borders will be strengthened around the country to hold back unwanted starving immigrants from the Caribbean islands (an especially severe problem), Mexico, and South America.” The US has now launched Operation Vigilant Sentry off the Florida coast and created Homeland Security Task Force Southeast to enforce marine interdiction and deportation in the aftermath of disasters in the Caribbean.

Labour migration as climate mitigation

you broke the ocean in
half to be here.
only to meet nothing that wants you
– Nayyirah Waheed

Parallel to increasing border controls, temporary labour migration is increasingly touted as a climate adaptation strategy. As part of the ‘Nansen Initiative’, a multilateral, state-led project to address climate-induced displacement, the Australian government has put forward its temporary seasonal worker program as a key solution to building climate resilience in the Pacific region. The Australian statement to the Nansen Initiative Intergovernmental Global Consultation was, in fact, delivered not by the environment minister but by the Department of Immigration and Border Protection.

Beginning in April 2022, the new Pacific Australia Labour Mobility scheme will make it easier for Australian businesses to temporarily insource low-wage workers (what the scheme calls “low-skilled” and “unskilled” workers) from small Pacific island countries including Nauru, Papua New Guinea, Kiribati, Samoa, Tonga, and Tuvalu. Not coincidentally, many of these countries’ ecologies and economies have already been ravaged by Australian colonialism for over one hundred years.

It is not an anomaly that Australia is turning displaced climate refugees into a funnel of temporary labour migration. With growing ungovernable and irregular migration, including climate migration, temporary labour migration programs have become the worldwide template for “well-managed migration.” Elites present labour migration as a double win because high-income countries fill their labour shortage needs without providing job security or citizenship, while low-income countries alleviate structural impoverishment through migrants’ remittances.

Dangerous, low-wage jobs like farm, domestic, and service work that cannot be outsourced are now almost entirely insourced in this way. Insourcing and outsourcing represent two sides of the same neoliberal coin: deliberately deflated labour and political power. Not to be confused with free mobility, temporary labour migration represents an extreme neoliberal approach to the quartet of foreign, climate, immigration, and labour policy, all structured to expand networks of capital accumulation through the creation and disciplining of surplus populations.

The International Labour Organization recognises that temporary migrant workers face forced labour, low wages, poor working conditions, virtual absence of social protection, denial of freedom association and union rights, discrimination and xenophobia, as well as social exclusion. Under these state-sanctioned programs of indentureship, workers are legally tied to an employer and deportable. Temporary migrant workers are kept compliant through the threats of both termination and deportation, revealing the crucial connection between immigration status and precarious labour.

Through temporary labour migration programs, workers’ labour power is first captured by the border and this pliable labour is then exploited by the employer. Denying migrant workers permanent immigration status ensures a steady supply of cheapened labour. Borders are not intended to exclude all people, but to create conditions of ‘deportability’, which increases social and labour precarity. These workers are labelled as ‘foreign’ workers, furthering racist xenophobia against them, including by other workers. While migrant workers are temporary, temporary migration is becoming the permanent neoliberal, state-led model of migration.

Reparations include No Borders

“It’s immoral for the rich to talk about their future children and grandchildren when the children of the Global South are dying now.” – Asad Rehman

Discussions about building fairer and more sustainable political-economic systems have coalesced around a Green New Deal. Most public policy proposals for a Green New Deal in the US, Canada, UK and the EU articulate the need to simultaneously tackle economic inequality, social injustice, and the climate crisis by transforming our extractive and exploitative system towards a low-carbon, feminist, worker and community-controlled care-based society. While a Green New Deal necessarily understands the climate crisis and the crisis of capitalism as interconnected — and not a dichotomy of ‘the environment versus the economy’ — one of its main shortcomings is its bordered scope. As Harpreet Kaur Paul and Dalia Gebrial write: “the Green New Deal has largely been trapped in national imaginations.”

Any Green New Deal that is not internationalist runs the risk of perpetuating climate apartheid and imperialist domination in our warming world. Rich countries must redress the global and asymmetrical dimensions of climate debtunfair trade and financial agreements, military subjugation, vaccine apartheidlabour exploitation, and border securitisation.

It is impossible to think about borders outside the modern nation-state and its entanglements with empire, capitalism, race, caste, gender, sexuality, and ability. Borders are not even fixed lines demarcating territory. Bordering regimes are increasingly layered with drone surveillance, interception of migrant boats, and security controls far beyond states’ territorial limits. From Australia offshoring migrant detention around Oceania to Fortress Europe outsourcing surveillance and interdiction to the Sahel and Middle East, shifting cartographies demarcate our colonial present.

Perhaps most offensively, when colonial countries panic about ‘border crises’ they position themselves as victims. But the genocide, displacement, and movement of millions of people were unequally structured by colonialism for three centuries, with European settlers in the Americas and Oceania, the transatlantic slave trade from Africa, and imported indentured labourers from Asia. Empire, enslavement, and indentureship are the bedrock of global apartheid today, determining who can live where and under what conditions. Borders are structured to uphold this apartheid.

The freedom to stay and the freedom to move, which is to say no borders, is decolonial reparations and redistribution long due.

Continue Reading


The Murang’a Factor in the Upcoming Presidential Elections

The Murang’a people are really yet to decide who they are going to vote for as a president. If they have, they are keeping the secret to themselves. Are the Murang’a people prepping themselves this time to vote for one of their own? Can Jimi Wanjigi re-ignite the Murang’a/Matiba popular passion among the GEMA community and re-influence it to vote in a different direction?



The Murang’a Factor in the Upcoming Presidential Elections
Download PDFPrint Article

In the last quarter of 2021, I visited Murang’a County twice: In September, we were in Kandiri in Kigumo constituency. We had gone for a church fundraiser and were hosted by the Anglican Church of Kenya’s (ACK), Kahariro parish, Murang’a South diocese. A month later, I was back, this time to Ihi-gaini deep in Kangema constituency for a burial.

The church function attracted politicians: it had to; they know how to sniff such occasions and if not officially invited, they gate-crash them. Church functions, just like funerals, are perfect platforms for politicians to exhibit their presumed piousness, generosity and their closeness to the respective clergy and the bereaved family.

Well, the other reason they were there, is because they had been invited by the Church leadership. During the electioneering period, the Church is not shy to exploit the politicians’ ambitions: they “blackmail” them for money, because they can mobilise ready audiences for the competing politicians. The politicians on the other hand, are very ready to part with cash. This quid pro quo arrangement is usually an unstated agreement between the Church leadership and the politicians.

The church, which was being fund raised for, being in Kigumo constituency, the area MP Ruth Wangari Mwaniki, promptly showed up. Likewise, the area Member of the County Assembly (MCA) and of course several aspirants for the MP and MCA seats, also showed up.

Church and secular politics often sit cheek by jowl and so, on this day, local politics was the order of the day. I couldn’t have speculated on which side of the political divide Murang’a people were, until the young man Zack Kinuthia Chief Administrative Secretary (CAS) for Sports, Culture and Heritage, took to the rostrum to speak.

A local boy and an Uhuru Kenyatta loyalist, he completely avoided mentioning his name and his “development track record” in central Kenya. Kinuthia has a habit of over-extolling President Uhuru’s virtues whenever and wherever he mounts any platform. By the time he was done speaking, I quickly deduced he was angling to unseat Wangari. I wasn’t wrong; five months later in February 2022, Kinuthia resigned his CAS position to vie for Kigumo on a Party of the National Unity (PNU) ticket.

He spoke briefly, feigned some meeting that was awaiting him elsewhere and left hurriedly, but not before giving his KSh50,000 donation. Apparently, I later learnt that he had been forewarned, ahead of time, that the people were not in a mood to listen to his panegyrics on President Uhuru, Jubilee Party, or anything associated to the two. Kinuthia couldn’t dare run on President Uhuru’s Jubilee Party. His patron-boss’s party is not wanted in Murang’a.

I spent the whole day in Kandiri, talking to people, young and old, men and women and by the time I was leaving, I was certain about one thing; The Murang’a folks didn’t want anything to do with President Uhuru. What I wasn’t sure of is, where their political sympathies lay.

I returned to Murang’a the following month, in the expansive Kangema – it is still huge – even after Mathioya was hived off from the larger Kangema constituency. Funerals provide a good barometer that captures peoples’ political sentiments and even though this burial was not attended by politicians – a few senior government officials were present though; political talk was very much on the peoples’ lips.

What I gathered from the crowd was that President Uhuru had destroyed their livelihood, remember many of the Nairobi city trading, hawking, big downtown real estate and restaurants are run and owned largely by Murang’a people. The famous Nyamakima trading area of downtown Nairobi has been run by Murang’a Kikuyus.

In 2018, their goods were confiscated and declared contrabrand by the government. Many of their businesses went under, this, despite the merchants not only, whole heartedly throwing their support to President Uhuru’s controversial re-election, but contributing handsomely to the presidential kitty. They couldn’t believe what was happening to them: “We voted for him to safeguard our businesses, instead, he destroyed them. So much for supporting him.”

We voted for him to safeguard our businesses, instead, he destroyed them. So much for supporting him

Last week, I attended a Murang’a County caucus group that was meeting somewhere in Gatundu, in Kiambu County. One of the clearest messages that I got from this group is that the GEMA vote in the August 9, 2022, presidential elections is certainly anti-Uhuru Kenyatta and not necessarily pro-William Ruto.

“The Murang’a people are really yet to decide, (if they have, they are keeping the secret to themselves) on who they are going to vote for as a president. And that’s why you see Uhuru is craftily courting us with all manner of promises, seductions and prophetic messages.” Two weeks ago, President Uhuru was in Murang’a attending an African Independent Pentecostal Church of Africa (AIPCA) church function in Kandara constituency.

At the church, the president yet again threatened to “tell you what’s in my heart and what I believe and why so.” These prophecy-laced threats by the President, to the GEMA nation, in which he has been threatening to show them the sign, have become the butt of crude jokes among Kikuyus.

Corollary, President Uhuru once again has plucked Polycarp Igathe away from his corporate perch as Equity Bank’s Chief Commercial Officer back to Nairobi’s tumultuous governor seat politics. The first time the bespectacled Igathe was thrown into the deep end of the Nairobi murky politics was in 2017, as Mike Sonko’s deputy governor. After six months, he threw in the towel, lamenting that Sonko couldn’t let him even breathe.

Uhuru has a tendency of (mis)using Murang’a people

“Igathe is from Wanjerere in Kigumo, Murang’a, but grew up in Ol Kalou, Nyandarua County,” one of the Mzees told me. “He’s not interested in politics; much less know how it’s played. I’ve spent time with him and confided in me as much. Uhuru has a tendency of (mis)using Murang’a people. President Uhuru wants to use Igathe to control Nairobi. The sad thing is that Igathe doesn’t have the guts to tell Uhuru the brutal fact: I’m really not interested in all these shenanigans, leave me alone. The president is hoping, once again, to hopefully placate the Murang’a people, by pretending to front Igathe. I foresee another terrible disaster ultimately befalling both Igathe and Uhuru.”

Be that as it may, what I got away with from this caucus, after an entire day’s deliberations, is that its keeping it presidential choice close to its chest. My attempts to goad some of the men and women present were fruitless.

Murang’a people like reminding everyone that it’s only they, who have yet to produce a president from the GEMA stable, despite being the wealthiest. Kiambu has produced two presidents from the same family, Nyeri one, President Mwai Kibaki, who died on April 22. The closest Murang’a came to giving the country a president was during Ken Matiba’s time in the 1990s. “But Matiba had suffered a debilitating stroke that incapacitated him,” said one of the mzees. “It was tragic, but there was nothing we could do.”

Murang’a people like reminding everyone that it’s only they, who have yet to produce a president from the GEMA stable, despite being the wealthiest

It is interesting to note that Jimi Wanjigi, the Safina party presidential flagbearer is from Murang’a County. His family hails from Wahundura, in Mathioya constituency. Him and Mwangi wa Iria, the Murang’a County governor are the other two Murang’a prominent persons who have tossed themselves into the presidential race. Wa Iria’s bid which was announced at the beginning of 2022, seems to have stagnated, while Jimi’s seems to be gathering storm.

Are the Murang’a people prepping themselves this time to vote for one of their own? Jimi’s campaign team has crafted a two-pronged strategy that it hopes will endear Kenyans to his presidency. One, a generational, paradigm shift, especially among the youth, targeting mostly post-secondary, tertiary college and university students.

“We believe this group of voters who are basically between the ages of 18–27 years and who comprise more than 65 per cent of total registered voters are the key to turning this election,” said one of his presidential campaign team members. “It matters most how you craft the political message to capture their attention.” So, branding his key message as itwika, it is meant to orchestrate a break from past electoral behaviour that is pegged on traditional ethnic voting patterns.

The other plunk of Jimi’s campaign theme is economic emancipation, quite pointedly as it talks directly to the GEMA nation, especially the Murang’a Kikuyus, who are reputed for their business acumen and entrepreneurial skills. “What Kikuyus cherish most,” said the team member “is someone who will create an enabling business environment and leave the Kikuyus to do their thing. You know, Kikuyus live off business, if you interfere with it, that’s the end of your friendship, it doesn’t matter who you are.”

Can Jimi re-ignite the Murang’a/Matiba popular passion among the GEMA community and re-influence it to vote in a different direction? As all the presidential candidates gear-up this week on who they will eventually pick as their running mates, the GEMA community once more shifts the spotlight on itself, as the most sought-after vote basket.

Both Raila Odinga and William Ruto coalitions – Azimio la Umoja-One Kenya and Kenya Kwanza Alliance – must seek to impress and woe Mt Kenya region by appointing a running mate from one of its ranks. If not, the coalitions fear losing the vote-rich area either to each other, or perhaps to a third party. Murang’a County, may as well, become the conundrum, with which the August 9, presidential race may yet to be unravelled and decided.

Continue Reading