Wednesday, June 16, 2010

Kenyans fear a repeat of 2007 bloodshed

The grenade attack in Kenya does not bode well for the forthcoming referendum on the country's constitution

Sunday 13 June 2010 will go down as a day of infamy in Kenya. It was the day a blast ripped through a park full of people who had attended what had been billed as a religious event but which turned out to be a campaign meeting for those opposed to the referendum on a new constitution.

The two grenades that detonated in Nairobi in the late hours of Sunday left at least six people dead and scores more injured, and immediately set off a blame game from both sides, those who are backing the proposed constitution (now dubbed the Greens) and those opposed to it (the Reds).

Who could have been behind the attack? A shocked country is searching for the answer. This is not the first time the country has experienced killer explosions – recall the August 1998 bomb blast in the US embassy in Nairobi – but it was the first serious attack at a referendum or election campaign.

In the last two months, Kenyans have been gripped by what is now being called referendum fever. The proposed constitution has polarised the country in much the same way it did in 2005, when the first serious attempt at a new constitution was made and defeated.

Just as in 2005, President Mwai Kibaki is supporting the proposed constitution. But he has found an unlikely ally in his prime minister, Raila Odinga, who was on the opposing side in 2005. Both are having to ride a fierce tide of opposition from some of their cabinet ministers led by higher education minister William Ruto, an erstwhile ally of Raila Odinga's and the Christian community.

The Reds have been traversing the country to drum up opposition to the document. Likewise, the Greens have been ratcheting up their yes campaign. But nobody thought that things could turn bloody until the grenade thrower struck on Sunday.

There are many unsubstantiated theories about who could have been behind it or what the motive could have been. Both sides have come out with strong reactions, with the Reds blaming the Greens and the Greens defending themselves. But it is generally agreed that such an attack would serve no side in any way. The Greens know that the last thing that they need is to be labelled violent. It is imperative for them to keep in check the intolerant elements among their ranks. The Reds know that nothing would serve them better than the perception that the Greens are intolerant. On the basis of public pity, they could hope to pick up a few followers here and there. But they also know that security for their followers is key to success of their future rallies. And if, in any event, Sunday's attack was the work of religious extremists, both sides know that this are not the kind of people to help their cause in any way.

Be that as it may, the Sunday incident buttressed calls from those opposed to the referendum that it be put aside until there was agreement on both sides. This is probably what those who planned the attack aimed to achieve.

Whatever the motive of the attack, Kenyans are, once again, fearing the worst: that this referendum, slated for 4 August, might lead to the kind of bloodshed witnessed after the 2007 general election. The government, which today offered a reward of Sh500,000 (about £4,200) for any information that could lead to the arrest of the attackers, will have a tough job reassuring the country that the forthcoming referendum will end well.

No comments:

Post a Comment