A beacon of stability and prosperity compared with its five immediate neighbours, Kenya deserves its accolade as the undisputed business and diplomatic hub of east Africa (see map). Ethiopia hosts the headquarters of the African Union but is embroiled in a horrible civil war. Somalia is lacerated by a jihadist rebellion. South Sudan is an all-round catastrophe. Uganda and Tanzania have both dismally sullied their democratic credentials.
Kenya, by contrast, is the magnet that has drawn newcomers into the East African Community, a regional bloc, including Rwanda as it still recovers from genocide, and the vast but misnamed Democratic Republic of Congo. An array of un agencies and multinational companies have made Nairobi, Kenya’s burgeoning capital, their regional base. It is not just the most influential and successful country in its region but is also arguably the third most important democracy in sub-Saharan Africa (after Nigeria and South Africa). That is why the cleanliness and orderliness of its election on August 9th matter so much.
The performance of Uhuru Kenyatta, Kenya’s ruler for the past nine years, can be described as only adequate. He has lacked vision; some question his integrity. But he should be commended for stepping down after two terms, as the constitution requires. He will be Kenya’s third president in a row to do so, strengthening a cornerstone of democracy in the region.
Democracies require not just presidents who bow out, but elections that are seen to be free, fair and peaceful. Kenya’s record here is patchy. Since multi-party politics were re-established in 1992 several polls have been tainted by violence and allegations of vote-rigging. After a disputed vote in 2007 perhaps 1,400 people lost their lives in inter-ethnic fighting.
At least 16 people were killed after the most recent poll, in 2017, when the loser claimed the count had been fixed in favour of the incumbent. Fortunately, Kenya’s institutions held. Judges bravely stood up to the government, ordering a re-run after ruling that the electoral commission had failed to fulfil its “heavy yet noble” constitutional mandate. The killing did not spread. To avoid another bout of violence this time, it is crucial that the electoral commission oversee a transparently fair election and that its results be accepted by the losing candidates and their supporters.
The two leading presidential runners, Raila Odinga and William Ruto, are both flawed. Neither deserves a wholehearted endorsement. Kenyans deserve a better choice.
Mr Ruto, who has been deputy president for nine years, is a vigorous 55-year-old who proclaims himself a “hustler” seeking to dump the old regime and its corrupt beneficiaries. Opinion polls suggest he may win a majority of the votes of the millions of Kenya’s poor. In the eyes of many of the Kikuyu tribe, the country’s largest and most powerful, Mr Ruto, who hails from the traditionally rival Kalenjin group, seems to have wiped off the stain of his indictment by the International Criminal Court in The Hague for allegedly instigating murderous violence against them after the election in 2007; he denied the charge and the case against him was later suspended. In any event, he has an authoritarian streak. Critics suspect he has little time for constitutional niceties. In the words of a seasoned analyst, he could be Kenya’s best president—or its worst. He is a colossal risk.
This is Mr Odinga’s fifth shot at a prize he was probably cheated out of at least once before. In the past he has championed the underdog. His Luo tribe on the western shores of Lake Victoria has felt done down by the politically and commercially dominant Kikuyus. He has been a genuine crusader for democracy and was put behind bars several times during Kenya’s long spell as a one-party state before 1992. Now 77, Mr Odinga is in poor health, short of persuasive policies and dynamism. But he is a decent democrat—with a notably superior running-mate than his rival’s. He is the duller but safer bet. ■
