By Ken Opalo
All week there has been talk about the announcement of President Uhuru’s Cabinet. Many Kenyans were eagerly waiting to see if President Uhuru would continue the reform of Government that he signaled by capping the size of the Cabinet at 18.
On this score the President tried not to disappoint. The announcement was made on the steps of State House, in an Obama-esque fashion, complete with a no coat, get-down-to-business look. More importantly, despite the inevitable questions on regional balance that will arise, Kenya is set for a Cabinet of professionals.
Many people I have talked to, both who voted and who did not vote for the President, were cautiously optimistic following the Cabinet appointments. Now the question is, will President Uhuru remain true to this new way of doing things and actually deliver for Kenyans?
I think the answer to the question lies in the circumstances under which Uhuru was elected President.
It is no secret that a sizeable proportion of Kenyans did not vote for him, and indeed continue to hold reservations about the integrity of the process that led to his victory.
The President also faces challenges from a section of the international community in relation to his and his deputy’s ongoing cases at the ICC.
These challenges, in my view, have raised the stakes for the Uhuru presidency. Uhuru realises he must perform to win the trust of half the country and bolster his position domestically and internationally.
It would not be the first time a President with a point to prove is driven to higher performance for the benefit of his country.
The historical record shows countries that faced the toughest challenges often outperformed their peers simply because they had slimmer margins of error.
The untold story of why Botswana, South Korea, Taiwan (Chinese Taipei), and others achieved stellar economic performance is the fact that for a long time their leaders faced real threats.
Botswana faced a hostile apartheid South Africa to the south, ready to use the slimmest excuse to overrun Gaborone. South Korea had North Korea to contend with, and Taiwan had China. Uhuru has half of Kenyans and a section of the West to convince that despite their doubts he is up to the job. The nagging feeling of having to prove himself domestically and internationally will keep the President’s gaze trained on effective service delivery and Government reforms.
A keen reader may ask why the same dynamic is not playing out in Sudan. After all, they also have a president facing ICC charges. But Kenya is not Sudan. We are a democracy, with a vibrant opposition and a civil society with far superior capacity, not to mention strong and independent Parliament and Judiciary. Unlike Bashir, President Uhuru knows he must perform. Otherwise the opposition and civil society will certainly use his failures in the eyes of Kenyans to compound his legitimacy woes.
One of Africa’s biggest problems over the last half-century has been the lack of leaders with a mission.
After independence, few African states and leaders faced real threats, and those that did mostly had domestic threats that they thought could be simply quashed using armed force. The result has been decades of brutal dictatorships and woefully inept governments continent-wide.
A few leaders have had to prove themselves in one form or another. The best example is Paul Kagame of Rwanda. After his RPF ascended to power following the genocide, Kagame knew his government faced serious legitimacy issues.
A famous political economist once said men make history, but not in circumstances of their choosing. This truism applies to Uhuru’s presidency. For the sake of the country, one hopes he will use the legitimacy challenges he faces at home and abroad as a call to action to prove his detractors wrong. Delivering for Kenyans by staking his presidency on performance is the best possible way to go about this, especially with 2017 in mind.
