Kenyan move signaling new era

THESE are times of change. Little over two decades ago, the fiery US ambassador to Kenya at the time, Smith Hempstone, told Kenyan President Daniel Moi that following the end of the Cold War, it was no longer acceptable to continue running the country by a one-party rule. It was high time to allow for a multiparty system, otherwise Nairobi would risk losing the political and economic support of Western countries.
Moi got the message and almost singlehandedly managed to convince his lieutenants to change the constitution and allow for a multiparty political system to elect a new president and government.
Earlier this year, another US official, Johnnie Carson, assistant secretary for African affairs, sent a veiled threat to the Kenyan electorates that there would be “consequences” for their electoral choice. His advice was basically seen as supporting presidential candidate Railo Odinga against the ticket of Uhuru Kenyatta and his running mate Will Ruto, both indicted by the International Criminal Court (ICC).
Kenyan voters did not ignore the advice of the Big Brother, but Kenyatta and his team used the Western position to garner support against meddling in the country’s domestic affairs. That card played well into Kenyatta’s hands and won him elections that he had lost before.
It was ironic that Washington was so keen on supporting the ICC to the extent of threatening voters not to cast their vote for candidates indicted by the Hague-based body. After all, the United States does not recognize the ICC in the first place and was at pain trying to conclude bilateral deals with various countries to shield its citizens from it.
Its European allies, who recognize the ICC, in addition to Washington, will find themselves in the awkward position of shunning dealing with the president and his deputy if they are to be faithful to their tradition, thus cutting ties with the top decision makers in the country, or as the British suggest, keep their contacts with Kenyatta to a minimum, which will work gradually and over time to undermine the ICC case if they want to keep business as usual with an indicted president.
During the Bush administration, Jendayi Frazer, a former US official who used to run the African desk at the State Department, was criticized for the Carson statement and even the ICC. It called Carson’s advice “reckless and irresponsible.” Moreover, it described the ICC case against Kenyatta as heresay and that the whole institution is manipulated by the West for its political ends.
Kenyatta’s ticket-winning of the election is, in effect, pitting the will of the Kenyan people against a world organization seen as a byproduct of globalization. With the growing wave of globalization, some aspects of nation-state sovereignty will not be respected. And that is why institutions like the ICC were created to cater for a lack of justice in places that were unwilling or unable to uphold justice within their borders.
Kenyatta and his deputy were among a group of Kenyan politicians seen responsible for the violence that claimed lives of some 1,000 during the past elections. Initially, the Kenyans were supportive of the ICC, but that seems to be no longer the case.
The mostly peaceful and credible solution is giving the Kenyans a sense of national pride that makes them look differently at the ICC. More importantly, Western capitals are no longer calling the shots.
Africa in general and Kenya in particular is in a different plight now. Africa is the fastest growing continent and its economic growth is expected to average 6 percent over the next decade thanks mainly to foreign direct investment, which used to figure at $ 15 billion a decade earlier that has since more than doubled to $ 37 billion last year.
This strong economic performance in a continent that used to be plagued by war, famine and bad governance is painting a new picture contrasting that of the Western economic struggle with high unemployment, growing debt and ballooning budget deficits.
But more significant is the fact that Western capitals are no longer dictating the rules of the game. China, India and even Middle Eastern countries are now recognized players in the game with their own set of rules and goals.

Email: asidahmed@hotmail.com