Why PM’s tables are overturning in RV

By Kipchumba Some

The raging power battles between ODM and PNU have once again exposed the fickleness of local politics as illustrated by the surprise change of fortunes for Prime Minister Raila Odinga and President Kibaki in the Rift Valley.

Barely two years ago both leaders were at the opposite ends of the popularity scale in the province with Raila at the head and Kibaki the tail.

Raila, whom the Kalenjin named arap Mibey (the one from the lake) has turned villain in the community’s eyes. In the words of one critic MP, Raila did not even win the presidential election they fought to defend.

Kibaki, whom the Kalenjins considered a persecutor, a man they fought, literally, to dislodge from power has suddenly assumed the status of protector of the community’s interests.

At the heart of this dissent is Agriculture Minister William Ruto who many believe to be engineering the backlash against Raila to promote personal political ambitions.

So what is exactly informing the current Kalenjin dissent against Raila?

Community interests

"Politics is all about taking care of your interests," said Cherangany MP Joshua Kutuny. "Kalenjin voted for Raila in 2007 in the belief he would take care of the community’s interests."

Political observers note that the objects of Kalenjin dissent against Raila are in many ways similar to those factors that fuelled the community’s rebellion against President Kibaki during his first term.

At the time, the perceived purge of Kalenjin from the Civil Service and the new Government’s suspect handling of the emotive land issues, were the twin factors that fomented anti-Kikuyu sentiment that resulted in the chaos of 2008.

There was a feeling among the community the Kibaki regime had embarked on a witch-hunt of Kalenjin civil servants in the guise of enacting reforms he promised during campaigns.

Matters were worsened by comments by former Lands Minister Amos Kimunya when he said title deeds were nothing more than pieces of paper. To the community, it signalled Government intent to disposses them.

"The Kalenjins were duped into believing Kibaki and the Kikuyu community were their persecutors," said Molo MP Joseph Kiuna. "But now they have realised to judge leaders by their actions and not words."

But Kenneth Simala of Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology accuses the Kalenjin leadership of playing victim to advance a political agenda. "They have made the electorate feel special than other Kenyans," he says.

He also questioned to what extent the community’s grievances have been addressed by the Kibaki regime to justify the rebellion they are waging against Raila. "Have they gotten more jobs, have their land issues been settled?" he asks.

In reply, Kutuny cites Kibaki’s decision to overturn Raila’s suspension of William Ruto and his commitment to resettling and compensating the Mau evictees as proof enough of the President’s goodwill.

However, Otieno Charles Otieno of the Institute for Polity and Policy says these are simplistic solutions to inherently deep-rooted problems. "It shows a lack of appreciation of the depth of historical injustices and land disputes in the province."

Otieno says the current Kalenjin rebellion is borne out of individual differences between Raila and Ruto and not out of ideological differences between their communities.

"The Kalenjin have long-standing differences with the Kikuyu that would make a political union almost impossible, but not with the Luos or Luhyas. So to me this rebellion is about the political egos of the two leaders," he adds.

Who benefits?

He further says Kibaki was silently encouraging the rebellion in the hope that it might benefit his successor. "But as it stands, it seems the rebellion is only benefiting Ruto."

The Eldoret North MP has come to symbolise the Kalenjin rebellion against Raila. The object of his rebellion, observers note, is to position himself well for president in 2012.

However, it is important to point out that there is a difference between community politics and individual ambitions of Ruto, says an MP from the community, who did not wish to be named. Equally important to note is that these interests have not always been mutual, he adds.

A good example that illustrates this divergence of interests, according the legislator, is that long after the community had generally decided to back Raila for the presidency in 2007, Ruto was yet to make up his mind on who to support.

It took a meeting between local councillors and elders at his home in Sugoi, in August 2007, where he was told the community would support Raila to forced Ruto to switch allegiances. Up until then, it was believed Ruto was in favour of Vice-President Kalonzo Musyoka.

"Ruto needed ODM and Raila to retain his parliamentary seat, while Raila needed a youthful, eloquent person to drive his campaign and cement his position in Rift Valley. That person was Ruto," states the MP.

On that basis therefore Raila and Ruto did not share a political ideology. Their union was for the convenience of weathering the political storms.

The falling out between the two began immediately after the formation of the Grand Coalition Government. But observers say it was not falling out between Ruto and Raila. Rather, it was a falling out between Raila and the Kalenjin, which Ruto exploited.

Raila’s statement that the youth arrested in connection with post-election violence ought to be prosecuted was an affront to the community, considering they had fought to defend Raila’s ‘stolen’ presidency.

A series of subsequent controversies only served to strengthen Ruto’s power grip on the Kalenjin. They include the contentious issue of where to try suspects of post-election violence, and the Mau conservation.

"It would be imprudent to say that Kalenjin love Kibaki now. But as Raila continued to cast himself as the Kalenjin persecutor through the stand he took on these issues, Kibaki, by simply remaining aloof became saviour to the Kalenjin," says Prof Simala.