A History of Violence

0 0
Spread the love
Read Time:18 Minute, 58 Second

The Gema Numerical Strength and Democracy in Kenya
That is why they find it difficult to accept an electoral outcome that favors a candidate that they don’t control. Currently, the argument is muddled by those who do not want to accept the reality of Kenya’s demographics, which are such that any presidential candidate from the GEMA communities who manages to command the support of that constituency is always at a huge advantage. For a start, such a candidate starts of with 30 percent of the total national vote based on the larger GEMA population (Kikuyu, Embu, Meru) and has to work just to top up the vote and to garner the mandatory 25 percent of the vote in five of the eight provinces. In contrast, a candidate from, say, the Luo, starts of with 12 percent of the national vote. If such a Luo candidate manages to attract the entire Kalenjin vote, he starts with only 24 percent against the GEMA candidate’s 30 percent. In the recent election, that is what happened.

ODM’s strategy of vilifying the GEMA created a siege mentality that resulted in a huge voter turn out in a community that generally does not vote in large numbers. PNU candidates in GEMA areas had only one message for their people: get out and vote. And they did; voter turn out in GEMA areas increased significantly compared to the 2005 constitutional referendum figures. Unfortunately, the ODM candidate could not even command the total unadulterated Luhya vote which would have helped to tip the balance. And because Luhya’s did not feel fully invested in an ODM presidency –which they saw as Luo – they did not turn out in large numbers, denying the ODM candidate vital votes. Not to mention, of course, that the Bukusu, a sub-tribe of the Luhya, as immigrants into the Rift Valley, have more in common with Kisii and Kikuyu than with the Luo.

Any fair analysis of this electoral outcome has to take into account Kenya’s tribal politics and demographics. As Kiraitu Murungi asked in an article in the Sunday Nation of February 3 2008, are the 4.5 million Kenyans who voted for Kibaki not Kenyans? Kibaki’s first term was remarkable for its tolerance and freedom, besides the economic progress that has been noted by the World Bank, IMF, and notable international and credit rating agencies.

It is also remarkable for ensuring the kind of diversity Kenya has never seen since independence. This ethnic diversity and balance was has been noted by Dr. David Throup of John Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), an expert on Kenya, in an article published by the Center for International & Strategic Studies. Except for the Ministry of Finance, which Kibaki probably felt he needed to keep close reigns on, the administration was easily the most ethnically diverse ever.

However, it is true that Kibaki did retire a number of Kalenjin bureaucrats as it was felt that the government was susceptible to being undermined by some of the Kalenjin bureaucrats beholden to the ideology of Kalenjin nationalism. The reason why a number of senior Kalenjin civil servants were removed after Kibaki came to power, in addition to the need by Kibaki to reward his political supporters, has something to do with the view that the intricate Kalenjin networks established under Moi were a threat to the new regime. However, Kalenjin rank and file was not targeted and retained their jobs in the civil service.

Happy
Happy
0 %
Sad
Sad
0 %
Excited
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
Angry
0 %
Surprise
Surprise
0 %

Facebook Comments

Previous post Nigeria: The Role of Education in the Service Industry
Next post Chinua Achebe

Average Rating

5 Star
0%
4 Star
0%
3 Star
0%
2 Star
0%
1 Star
0%

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.