Uhuru’s vision for Kenya’s prosperity

There were two ceremonies at Kasarani, two weeks apart, involving the same person but the hype, the excitement, and the tone were remarkably different. The first was on November 28, 2017 and it was all about the second swearing of Uhuru Kenyatta for his second and final term. The air of un-believability attracted lots of people to witness ability to overcome local and global obstacles. The second was the December 12, 2017 Jamhuri Day celebration to commemorate the day Kenya attained both independence in 1963 and “Republican” status in 1964. Being a routine annual ceremony, it did not generate much interest. It was comparatively low key in terms of hype and attendance. 

Uhuru, the man of the moment on both occasions, made agenda setting speeches but the stresses were different. On the inauguration day, probably addressing his peers and guests, Uhuru was PanAfricanistic. On Jamhuri Day, his focus was domestic and legacy building.

The hype and turnout on Jamhuri Day was low but the presidential message was tough, ambitious, forward looking, and agenda setting at the domestic front. It appeared to have five broad and interlinked categories of promises, challenges and warnings. These were unity, generational transition, offensive thinking, politics as a tool for promoting well-being, and respect for the constitution.

Exhortation

In the first two categories, unity and generational change, was earnestly appealing for people to avoid divisiveness, adopt a sense of mutual dependence, and to realise that while the youth of independence delivered under the guidance of a few elders, the current youth too can deliver. He promised to ensure that the youth get that chance to deliver within the context of a united Kenya.

The third category, “Offensive Thinking”, was a painful reprimand to Kenyans who plot how to bring others down by pretending that the weak can be strengthened by weakening the strong. It is “Offensive Thinking,” Uhuru asserted, to imagine that weakening the strong uplifts the weak. Destructive pseudo economic theorists pander to laziness, discourage productivity and pander to laziness. Allergic to thoughts on growing the economies through equitable wealth creation, they instead are extremely noisy about equitable “redistribution” of the wealth that others produce.

It was in the fourth category that Uhuru started talking about paradigm shifts in terms of political economy thinkin. Stressing his “Big Four”, a kind of evolving political economy theory to use political power for job creation, food security, provision of adequate health for all, and increased shelter. The emphasis on making politics the tool of doing good has worked before. Uhuru’s father, Jomo, believed in using politics to do “good” and so he urged his colleagues at Manchester in 1945 and at Lancaster House in 1962, to acquire political power in order to do the rest.

Offering solutions

The voters having given him five additional years, Uhuru should use his political power to tackle his “Big Four” challenges. He should make subsidised wealth production through manufacturing, intensified agricultural activities, and more construction. It would mean protecting markets, marine natural resources, increasing value addition for export but not import, and destroying fake goods cartels. These would create jobs, reduce hunger and diseases, and provide housing.       

Implementing his “Big Four” dream, however, Uhuru confronts category five challenges that threaten the country’s survival. Having received the instruments of authority, the constitution and the sword of state, he swore to defend the unitary state and the Constitution. He warned mischief makers, domestic or international, not to dare. These are secessionists and various saboteurs, including elected officials. The elected officials abdicate responsibility to constitutionally unknown entities and strangely still expect to enjoy benefits from the national treasury. 

Fulfilling the promises largely depends on Uhuru’s choice of “advisors” to surround him in the cabinet, State House, or key state organs/corporations. In theory, he should strive for loyal and highly competent “advisors” in all ways and from all over. While critics will try hard to undercut his second term, it is uncontrolled cronyism engaging in “territorial” warfare within his camp that will surely sabotage his “Big Four” aspiration.

Prof Munene teaches at USIU