By Elias Okwara

As Uhuru Kenyatta looks to form a cabinet, the American administration that he has at times been at odds with offers important lessons. Like Barack Obama, Kenyatta should appoint a Hillary Clinton as the foreign secretary.

When Obama assumed the presidency, his immediate assignment was dealing with the financial crisis. By appointing Clinton, Obama ensured that his foreign policy could capably be conducted by the State Department.

This ‘freed’ him to focus primarily on the domestic issues of stimulating the economy, reforming Wall Street and pushing health care reform.

Domestic issues will more so consume Kenyatta’s agenda because Kenya’s game-changing constitution makes it virtually impossible for the new president to focus on much else than overseeing the successful devolution of power to the 47 newly created county governments.

Kenyatta will have to address the divisive issue of land, which has long been perceived an Achilles heel because of his family’s landholdings. The March 4th elections were peaceful but the country remains divided – Kenyatta has to unify the Kenyan people, and ensure that county governments do not degenerate into ethnic kingdoms.

Like Obama, who had to deal with the threat from al Qaeda, Kenyatta also inherits a homeland security problem.

The series of terrorist attacks from the Shabaab militia since the Kenya Defence Forces invasion of Somalia in 2011 betrays a weak security and intelligence infrastructure that is too often a step behind terrorist networks on Kenyan soil.

The August 2012 violent riots that erupted in Mombasa after the killing of Muslim cleric Aboud Rogo (accused by Kenya, the US and the United Nations of supporting al Qaeda affiliates in Somalia) forcefully demonstrates how complex a challenge it is to stem terrorism.

The appointment of the right foreign affairs cabinet secretary will be all the more critical because of the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) indictment of Kenyatta and his deputy William Ruto.

The election of Kenyatta and Ruto in spite of the ICC charges has taken the conduct of international affairs to unchartered waters.

On one hand, the ICC is faced with a conundrum of pursuing charges against duly elected leaders when Kenyans have arguably chosen reconciliation over international justice. On the other hand, the Kenyatta administration is tainted by the ICC charges, so long as they exist, and this weakens Kenya’s position globally.

Hillary Clinton had two great assets, acquired through her years in the US Senate and as First Lady, which she used to execute Obama’s foreign policy. Not only did Clinton possess deft political skills, she was also competent in policy.

President Kenyatta’s foreign affairs secretary will need these qualities to navigate the uncertain relations with Europeans and Americans who had expressed reservations about a Kenyatta presidency. Despite disagreements, Kenya’s economic and security interests are too closely tied to Europe and USA to ignore these powers.

The ICC process could go either way, but the Kenyatta administration has the opportunity to rally international support should things go south. This strategy has a better chance of succeeding now that Kenyatta and Ruto have been elected in a credible democratic process.

Unlike Omar al-Bashir, who was indicted while in office and is considered a dictator, the Europeans and Americans cannot ignore the implications of the March 4th elections.

They must also balance their own interests with the desire to support a fledgling institution against the wishes of the Kenyan people — the foreign affairs secretary has to make this choice stark.

Beyond dealing with the inherent challenges of his administration, Kenyatta has to deliver on promises made to the people. As president, Kenyatta will have to walk and chew gum at the same time; and so like Obama’s White House, State House will ultimately determine foreign policy.

But in order to set a viable path for Kenya globally, Kenyatta’s chief foreign policy executive should provide him with the best advice and run an effective foreign relations machine. Too much depends on the right choice.

The way I see it, the sessional paper is not tackling all the issues that contribute to a universal healthcare scheme than can be drawn from contributions by multiple in a consultative forum.

And since the requires that citizens participate in policy development, the Ministry of Medical Services may have to consider taking this route to avoid developing a half-baked scheme.

The writer is a Peace and Security Analyst with Brussels-based Global Governance Institute.