Politicians owe their alliance-building skills to Raila Odinga's handshakes

The ongoing political formations emerging from the just concluded elections have raised questions around principles that guide political alliances. The movement of the United Democratic Movement Party and Movement for Development and Growth Party from the Azimio la Umoja One Kenya Coalition to the Kenya Kwanza Alliance has particularly irked sections of the political space in recent days.

Commentators have raised concerns about the legal provisions that should guide the formation of such alliances. Questions around what motivates parties and party leaders to join or leave one political alliance for another have also emerged. Yet political alliance building is as old as the art of politics itself.

A quick reading of our history will reveal that nobody in Kenya's political history has cobbled, nurtured, established and mobilised political alliances like Raila Amollo Odinga. Give it to him, the enigma of Kenya's politics has formed coalitions, co-operations and political unions with gusto and flamboyance that is unprecedented. All the current political players in both sides of the major political formations owe their political alliance-building skills, both theoretical and practical to Raila. How does Baba do it?

While laws, like the Political Parties Act, are key in guiding the formation of alliances and coalitions, the freedom of association has largely informed the success of the past coalitions. In cobbling together political alliances, political leaders joining political formations or leaving others have cited trust, disclosure, acceptance and recognition as major factors for consideration. Coalitions, alliances or co-operations are purely voluntary and are largely formed out of goodwill between the partners. The law cannot successfully force people to coalesce. The right of association cannot be forced by the law.

Trust is fundamental for the success of coalitions. It means that individuals or parties choosing to sit in a coalition or an alliance do not have matters they cannot share amongst each other. Trust deficit in political formations leads to exclusion of those distrusted from major decision making thereby compromising the smooth operation of such formations. Lack of trust also means that important information that should guide the operation of such formations, including memoranda of understandings or articles of association, are not disclosed to all partners of a coalition thereby negatively impacting on the health of such coalitions.

Importantly, partners in political alliances appreciate acceptance into the association which comes with recognition and clear assignment of roles to be played by each and every partner of an alliance. Acceptance means that no partner is viewed suspiciously and all partners are included in plans, execution and review of decisions that concern members of such an alliance. Each participant of a coalition is recognised particularly for their comparative advantage and the unique set of skills and constituency that the partner contributes to the coalition.

This is also based on the probative value of each partner so that the benefits from the proceeds of such a coalition are based on the strength and weight of the partner. Coalitions are therefore better built on freedom, trust, disclosure, acceptance and recognition. Coalitions built on the law are good but associations are hardly sustainable if they are not voluntary.

The writer is a Masters in Development Studies Graduate and a Strategic Planning Consultant