The violence following the Kenya election has brought what had been one of Africa's most stable countries to the brink of civil war. Over 350 people have been killed in this stable democracy—now in its fourth election campaign since 1992—a fact that has come as a considerable shock even to seasoned observers of Africa's volatile politics.
Shocking as these events may be, they are not surprising. In a hotly fought electoral campaign, the likelihood of a bitter struggle over the authenticity of the results has been apparent for months.
The parliamentary ballot, held on 27th and 28th December, was contested between more than 20 parties, while three contenders dominated the presidential race. President Mwai Kibaki ran for re-election on a Party of National Unity (PNU) ticket, while Raila Odinga headed the largest opposition party, the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM). In a closely fought race that was too close to call right to the end, the third contender, Kalonzo Musyoka (ODM-Kenya), was never going to win but had a strong chance of holding the balance of power in a hung parliament.
As the elections approached, the finer points of the Kenyan constitution determined the strategies of the protagonists. Though Odinga's ODM maintained a steady lead in opinion polls, and seemed likely to win a majority of parliamentary seats, this alone would not be enough to bring them into government. The nightmare scenario for Odinga was that his ODM would triumph in parliament, but that Kibaki would hold on to the presidency and then cobble together a minority government that would exclude the ODM from power.
The possibility of this outcome was realised long before the campaign got under way in September. Over the previous year, Kibaki's government had stacked the 22-man Electoral Commission of Kenya (ECK) with its supporters as vacancies came up. The commission's role is to oversee the election administration and to report and verify the results. In the weeks leading up to the ballot, there were dark mutterings among Nairobi commentators that the real battle for votes would take place inside the offices of the ECK. Samuel Kivuitu, head of the commission, was rumoured to be on the point of resignation.
The ODM accused the PNU of interfering with the ECK, and of trying to manipulate opinion poll results that continued to show Odinga and the ODM with a healthy lead. One of the party's key messages during the campaign was to urge Kenyans not to let the PNU steal the election.
As Kenyans went to the polls, both leading parties were preparing for the struggle to come. PNU had conceded control of parliament long before polling day, and so concentrated on ensuring that Kibaki would win the presidency. Meanwhile, ODM prepared to call foul on any announcement of a Kibaki victory, and laid plans for a campaign of civil unrest should he try to hold on to the presidency.
As had been feared, the ECK was at the centre of the drama that unfolded after the polls closed. Over the weekend, a clearly nervous Samuel Kivuitu had to be protected from enraged ODM agents at the press conference called to announce the provisional results that showed Kibaki to have won the presidency. Odinga immediately claimed the result had been rigged, alleging that figures had been doctored within the ECK. EU observers endorsed this view, and then four members of the ECK made public statements about "interference" with the result.
On Tuesday evening the drama took a further twist, as Kivuitu appeared on Kenyan television from his hospital bed to admit irregularities in the election count. Visibly shaken, Kivuitu alleged that he had been pressured "by both sides," although he did not elaborate. But by then rumours were swirling around Nairobi's political circles that Kivuitu and several of his staff had been physically threatened, and that they acted in fear of their lives.
Democracy is only as strong as the institutions put in place to uphold it, and in Kenya the key institution has fallen prey to a ravenous and greedy politics. There is no doubt that this election was corrupt, and that Kibaki should not have been so hastily sworn in for a second term. But the failure goes deeper than that. While it is understandable that ODM should refuse to negotiate unless the presidential result is annulled, things will not be put right simply by putting Raila Odinga into office.
While all the evidence points to the presidential result having been fiddled within the ECK, the results from the constituencies do not seem likely to stand up to close scrutiny either. There appears to have been massive inflation of the voting figures in favour of each of the main parties in their stronghold areas—the size of the PNU vote in the Kikuyu-dominated Central Province does not seem credible, but neither does the ODM vote in Nyanza and in key constituencies in the Rift Valley.
The scenes of violence that have animated this sorry tale can too easily be portrayed as "tribal." This is how those who mobilise the thugs want it to be seen, but it is not a useful explanation. Some of the violence was spontaneous, as frustrated citizens vented their anger on their opponents. But much of it was pre-planned and systematic, intended on ODM's part to make it difficult for the state to fight fires in so many parts of the country, and on PNU's part to provoke Odinga's supporters into acts that would undermine their popular "clean" image.
The worst violence has occurred in areas where it is easy to mobilise violent thuggery, such as the slums of Nairobi, and in places where there is a long history of animosity between neighbouring communities, such as the resettlement schemes of Rift Valley. In many of the constituencies of the northern Rift Valley, where ODM's William Ruto holds sway, villages and towns dominated by Kikuyu and Gusii settlers have been targeted in a pattern familiar in previous outbreaks of violence in 1992 and 1997. The thugs who make these attacks, and those who seek to defend the intended victims, are closely linked with politicians who pay for their services. In this economy of fear, there is a market for violence, and in recent days thugs have been hired by those representing prominent members of both PNU and ODM.
There is little point in pretending that everything would improve with a new government. Bribery and corruption are the meat and drink of Kenyan politics, a fact encapsulated in the often heard local political slogan "our turn to eat." During the election campaign, the local press made much about voters who had refused bribes from candidates. But less was said of the queues of supplicants who presented themselves at the doors of even the most lowly candidate, seeking "a little something" to secure their support.
"Expenses" of this kind inevitably increase the costs of political participation, raising the stakes for winners and losers alike. The winners will expect to recoup their investment when in office, through corruption and malpractice; and the costs of losing will be so great that many are driven to employing whatever tactic may be necessary, including violence, to avoid defeat.
Kenya's trauma may appear to be driven by tribal animosity, but that merely describes the pattern that instrumental violence inevitably takes. Kenya is not Rwanda, and ill-informed commentators who suggest there is a comparison only play into the hands of unscrupulous politicians who want to use the fear of violent insurrection to achieve their narrow ends. The cause, and the cure, for Kenya's present dreadful affliction lie in the desperate need for wholesale reform of the political process itself.
To achieve that will take time. For now, Kenya's leaders need cooler heads. The violence will end if Odinga, Kibaki and their allies make it clear that it must end, and if they sit down to thrash out a solution. Kibaki will have to swallow a large slice of humble pie to do this, but Odinga must not assume that victory is his if negotiations do begin. And both must get a grip of those around them and discipline their supporters. Whether either man is strong enough to take on the responsibility that now confronts them will prove a stern test of leadership, and will ultimately determine who has the courage to steer Kenya toward a more peaceful political future.
