A fresh wave of ‘shuttle diplomacy’

By Lillian Aluanga-Delvaux

Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta’s recent visit to Tanzania is raising eyebrows over what is perceived as renewed ‘shuttle diplomacy’ to build support for presidential aspirants facing trial at The Hague.

The visit by Uhuru and representatives of The National Alliance, United Republican Party, and New Ford-Kenya, to Dar-es-salaam, where they met President Jakaya Kikwete, has sparked speculation that more countries may be lined up for similar visits.

Those accompanying the DPM included Justice minister Eugene Wamalwa, assistant minister Kazungu Kambi, Kajiado North MP Moses ole Sakuda, and nominated MP Rachel Shebesh. Kenya’s High Commissioner to Tanzania Mutinda Mutiso was also present at the meeting.

This is seen as an attempt by Uhuru and Eldoret North MP William Ruto who are scheduled to stand trial at the International Criminal Court to get assurance of support among friendly nations should either of them win the March 2013 elections.

The visit has also sparked speculation over whether it had the ‘blessing’ of the Executive, as well as implications to the political stature of Uhuru and Ruto, whose trial at the ICC starts in April 2013.

“There is no way a politician or any other individual would meet the Head of State of another country without involvement of the Foreign Affairs Ministry. Uhuru is neither a member of Cabinet nor government official. In what capacity therefore is he meeting a Head of State unless we are saying he got the go-ahead from State House, if it was an official State function? If it was simply a political visit, are we saying other aspirants will also be facilitated by the Foreign Affairs Ministry to meet Heads of State?” poses Haki Focus Executive director Harun Ndubi.

According to Mr Ndubi, Uhuru’s current position as DPM does not grant him authority to discuss issues concerning Kenya with other countries, unless such a move has been sanctioned by the Head of State.

 According to media reports of the Dar-es Salaam meeting, Kikwete said, “Kenyans should be allowed to elect their leaders in the next General Election without undue interference”.

This follows comments made by former UN Secretary General Kofi Anan, who while on a visit to Kenya two weeks ago, said an Uhuru or Ruto presidency would not be good for the country. Uhuru, Ruto, former Civil Service boss Francis Muthaura, and radio journalist Joshua arap Sang are to stand trial over crimes against humanity at the ICC in April.

The DPM and Eldoret North MP maintain they will seek the presidency, and argue that only the electorate should decide their fate.

The visit to Tanzania, according to some media reports, is one of several planned to other African countries. 

But Uhuru’s director of Communications, Munyori Buku dismisses such claims.  “Those are baseless reports with no thrust. Where did they get such information? They certainly did not ask us,” he says.

Logistical arrangements

Just days after the Tanzania trip, Uhuru met South Sudan’s Vice- President Riek Machar in Nairobi – the second meeting with a regional leader since Annan’s departure.

Buku questions why similar visits by Prime Minister Raila Odinga and VP Kalonzo Musyoka, with neighbouring Heads of State, have not attracted attention.

“I cannot explain why Kikwete said what he did concerning elections. But why is it that when he says so there is an issue, but when Kofi Annan comments on the same then it is okay?”asks Buku. Kambi, who was part of the delegation that met Kikwete, supports Buku’s view.  He says Uhuru, in his capacity as a senior official, could meet other leaders.

But there are those who disagree.

“Uhuru and Deputy Prime Minister Musalia Mudavadi can never be equal in stature to either the Prime Minister or Vice-President. The PM and VP can meet Heads of State in their official capacities because this gives them the right to exercise certain executive authority that the DPMs do not have,” says International Centre for Policy and Conflict Executive Director Ndung’u Wainaina.

While refusing to comment on whether the visit had the blessings of the Executive, Shebesh also sidestepped the issue of the Foreign Affairs Ministry involvement in logistical arrangements of the meeting, arguing she was “not an expert on protocol issues”.

 “I don’t know about that. You would have to ask State House,” she said, in response to whether Uhuru’s visit had the approval of the Executive.

“Uhuru was there in his capacity as DPM and party leader and the delegation was well received by Kikwete,” she said.

Media reports indicate besides discussing Annan’s comments, another concern that arose at the meeting was that Kenya should not slide back into the violence witnessed after the disputed 2007 poll. Kikwete is among those who brokered the ceasefire that stabilising the country following disputed elections.

It has been argued that Annan’s stand on the eligibility of Uhuru and Ruto could not have been arrived at without consultations with other members of the panel, including Mkapa. This would then make an Uhuru-Kikwete meeting akward given his (Uhuru) dismissal of Mkapa and Annan as ‘tourists’.

“It wasn’t the best thing to say particularly when one is looking for an accommodative environment should they win the presidency,” says African Centre for International Legal and Policy Research director Godfrey Musila.

He says the meetings with regional leaders may have no effect to the cases at the ICC and were largely about gaining regional support incase one is elected president. “I think it’s a smart move given there has been a general unease on the continent over individuals facing cases at the ICC,” he says. Mr Musila, however, says there is a probability that ‘friendly countries’ may dance to a different tune in future; depending on their interests and how this will be best served depending on who gets elected.