Why Kenya feels like 1895 all over again

Fort Smith in Upper Kabete. Mr Ttus Njonjo here showed me around. [XN Iraki]

The next time you are in Upper Kabete, take time to visit Fort Smith.

That is where Captain Frederick Lugard and Major John Smith himself planted the seeds of colonialism.

Their efforts culminated in Kenya becoming a British protectorate in 1895.

Near Fort Smith, there is a village with an odd name, like ‘N’, not far away – Karía-ngo, which simply means a shield eater!

Think of when the local warriors faced Britons in the 1890s; their only weapons were spears, arrows and shields.

We had no guns. It was natural to use the shield to protect oneself against bullets, which “ate” the shield, legend says.

Why take you back 140 years ago? It’s simple; Kenya feels like 1895. The Britons were determined to take Kenya and expand the empire.

They already had Canada, India, Australia, the Caribbean and many other colonies.

The US was gone, which might have energised them to look for new colonies.

They used two approaches to get the colonies.

One was soft through treaties and indirect rule.

The latter was really ingenious, using existing governance structures like chiefs.

This reduced the cost and made them more acceptable.

Remember Captain Lugard’s treaty with Waiyaki wa Hinga and the Maasai agreements?

Some religions have used a similar approach to gain acceptance, fusing evangelisation with local cultures expounded by dances and music.

The second approach was through violence, using the weapon of choice, the gun. Let’s call it the “karía-ngo strategy”.

Ever imagined the terror the natives faced when confronted with guns they had never seen? Another form of violence was the confiscation of livestock and crops.

Remember expeditionary wars? What about new diseases? Several age sets (rika) in Kiambu are named after diseases such as mutun’gu (measles).

Today, Kenya is getting new owners through the two approaches. Softly through sale agreements facilitated by lawyers and stock markets.

That is how land is bought; that is how companies are bought and sold, and even wives are married off.

Add inheritance and secrecy.

It’s more about trust, emotions and, at times, information asymmetry, where one party has more information than the other.

A good example is buying land where a new road or rail will pass or a new institution will be built. Secrecy is the new currency; it raises less suspicion. You can guess why vibrant media are not popular.

What of the second approach, violence: the “karia-ngo strategy”? That is how individuals and institutions have lost land and other assets.

Goons are not from an exoplanet. They are procured to violently take over land and others’ assets, much like colonisers did 140 years ago.

Proximity to power can also help you get assets, just like the Crown 140 years ago. Haven’t we repeatedly said history has no manners?

Violence is not just through goons and closeness to legitimate government machinery, either.

It can be financial.

Think of a piece of land whose price is Sh100 million, and someone offers you Sh300 million.

Would you resist that offer even if the land has a curse over it? Financial violence is more pronounced when the source of money is unknown and likely to be illegitimate.

We should not forget that, just as in 1895, religion was not far. We have been very quiet on how colonialism and its excesses co-existed with religion and evangelisation.

What we can’t justify through traditions or law, religions can be handy for. Surprisingly, theocracies are gaining popularity even in secular countries. A curious question: would the Iranian regime have reacted the same if it were not a theocracy?

Where do we go from here? After 1895, Kenya was under the British for 68 years before violence forced them out. The violence was both physical, through Mau Mau, and financial; wars are costly. Britain was our suitor for this period.

In the last 60 years, we have had many quiet suitors. They are now more open and louder after pre-independence nationalism faded and fear started stalking the country.

Remember the 2024 protests? Before that, we had post-election violence and terror attacks.

This violence has subdued Kenyans. Add financial violence, espoused by a sharp rise in taxes and levies and the cost of living. Kenya is now “soft”.

The new suitors are coming in droves: Americans, Chinese, Arabs, Turks, South Africans, Nigerians (through the heart too) and, surprisingly, Tanzanians. Add to the list. 

The suitors, like Britons 140 years ago, want a piece of Kenya, mostly the market, profits and firms that serve it. Land is peripheral and old-fashioned, but we still hear the echoes of its ownership.

Let us be blunt: if you have ever lived through a winter, you probably understand why many foreigners would want to age gracefully in Kenya.

The big question: will the new, mostly economic suitors be better than Britons? Who will win the girl (Kenya)?

The best answer is to share an observation.

Most beautiful, well-mannered girls are married to the wrong people, often “bad boys”.

I will leave you to identify the most likely suitor for Kenya. But with a caveat, a second marriage (after the UK‘s 68 years) should be more stable, calculated and maybe negotiated.

But those in love have a habit of being unreasonable. Is Kenya in the same situation today?