Kenya looks East as changing needs call for policy shift

BY JUMA KWAYERA

KENYA: Over the past 50 years, Kenya’s foreign policy shift has been drastic, helped by changing economic and political interests at home and abroad. From a ‘subservient’ policy that defined engagement with the developed world, Kenya’s friends have equally changed. In the last few decades, Nairobi has eschewed the capitalist West in preference to the communist East.

However, in Africa the policy takes a more Pan-Africanist form, as relations with nearly all the countries are generally warm.

The relations are need-based, which is why when primary products were Kenya’s main foreign earners, it kept close contacts with West, which imported most of her products. Today, discovery of minerals, oil and need for investment capital seems to inform how to engage with neighbours and rest of the world.

Former assistant Minister of State John Keen says President Jomo Kenyatta and President Daniel arap Moi preferred quiet diplomacy because of the country’s strategic and economic interests.

“We sell our flowers, tea and coffee to the West. President Kenyatta and President Moi were more tactical, preferring quiet diplomacy over (current) reckless and aggressive diplomacy laden with serious consequences to the country.”

The economic interests Mr Keen refers to placed Kenya at loggerheads with the rest of the region. Tanzania and Uganda, more socialist at the inception of statehood, perceived Nairobi a ‘hostile neighbour’ favoured by the West. Such ‘sibling’ rivalry precipitated the collapse of the first attempt to integrate the three countries economically. The collapse of the first phase of East African Community was caused by ideological differences that also reflected the diplomatic inclinations of Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania.

At independence, Kenya’s foreign policy was heavily influenced by bipolar politics pitting the capitalist West against the communist East. The struggle for independence had a smattering of communism with rhetoric about the peasant revolution fuelling the uprising against the colonial government.

Ideological interests

Once independence was attained in 1963, the foreign policy orientation changed, although rivalry in government mirrored the competing ideological interests.

Founding President Jomo Kenyatta who came to power after toying with communism, allied his government with the West, while his Vice President Jaramogi Oginga Odinga looked East.

In a treatise, ‘Studying Foreign Policy: Seminal Events that Shaped Foreign Policy 1963-66’, author Andrew Maina says of the West-East conflict in government:

“The ideological struggle brought out an imperative issue. Which way would Kenya go in the bi-polar international system? Those in the moderate camp, notably Kenyatta and Mboya were of the view Kenya should lean westward while those in the radical camp – Odinga, Ochieng Aneko among others – saw fortunes in both the East and West.

However, the latter group was more inclined to the East than the West owing to the anti-imperialist stance that Union Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR) was using in gathering support within and outside the United Nations framework. That battle lines were drawn was clear from certain political events between 1963 and 1967.”

Mr Maina says Sessional Paper No.10 passed by Parliament in 1965 set the premise upon which Kenya relations with the rest of the world revolves.

“The aim of this document was to firmly put Kenya on the capitalist path and thereby aligning Kenya to the West. This, as one could imagine, may not have gone down well with those from the radical camp,” he says.

It is against this backdrop – a weakness – to some that Kenya’s economy slumped into the doldrums when donors began to change terms of lending to hold the government to account.

According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs website, Kenya’s foreign policy is a tool used to pursue, promote and protect national interests and project national values.

“Kenya’s world view builds on the foundation of its struggle for freedom. This engagement gave rise to the national principles that have guided Kenya’s international relations. It is for this reason that Kenya participated in the creation of the Organisation of African Unity (later African Union) in 1963, and is committed to the principles of the Non-Aligned Movement,” it says.

The government says its foreign policy is guided by principles, a rule-based international system, environmentally sustainable and equitable development, and a secure world.

Global peace

“As a member of the United Nations, Kenya has remained firmly committed to the organisation’s underlying principles and objectives, particularly in ensuring global peace and security. In this regard, Kenya has over the years been a leading troop-contributing nation to the United Nations peacekeeping operations and UN-sanctioned African Union Missions,” it adds.

However, a brush with the international law has somewhat altered this position. The charges facing President Uhuru Kenyatta and Deputy President William Ruto at he International Criminal Court (ICC) have affected relations with the traditions. This has hastened the drift to East, ties that come with massive investments in infrastructure.

Since the ICC confirmed the criminal charges against Uhuru and Ruto, Kenya has tried with success to mobilise African countries against the court. Last month, Kenya, through the African Union tried to push UN Security Council to their side.

Political science lecturer Amukowa Anagwe says the shift in policy is not viable because Kenya’s development funding still comes from the West in form of foreign direct investments.

“With a strong presence of multinationals compared to neighbouring countries, the shift in policy can affect investments flow through multinational corporations. They cannot operate in a hostile environment. They can abandon their investments here without blinking an eye because what they have here is small cog in the wheel. Going East is not viable because Chinese investments are not substantial compared with what the West has done since independence,” points out Prof Anangwe.

On changes in foreign policy through the years, Prof Maria Nzomo of the University of Nairobi, says the shift is ‘need-based.’

She says the aggressive foreign policy of the current government is guided by aspirations of the regime.

“Because it is pragmatic and expedient to do so in-order to advance the goals he wishes to advance during his presidency. The Look East policy is based on similar rationale that guides inter-African relations. Africa, is Uhuru’ s “comfort zone” right now, as opposed to the West that still views him with suspicion and only begrudgingly works and maintains low key relations with his government, due to the ICC issue,” says Prof Nzomo, Director, Institute of Diplomacy and International Studies of the University of Nairobi.  She explains the aggressive foreign policy is a “tit-for-tat” reaction to the West that in recent years relegated Kenya’s interests to the backburner.

“Uhuru is trying to show the West whereas ‘choices have consequences’, he has real alternative choices to traditional dependence on Western economic, political and security support. He has reliable allies in Africa and Eastern countries - China, Japan, Russia and India. The President is telling the West Kenya has come of age and is ready to chart out an independent minded foreign policy approach no longer dependent on ‘bending over backwards” to please the US and other major powers,” the don observes.