Photo/FILE The picture of John Michuki that emerges from the WikiLeaks cables is fascinating. He comes across at once as a stubborn patriot who would not be rushed into signing accords the Americans wanted Kenya to back.
By MURITHI MUTIGA mmutiga@ke.nationmedia.com
Posted Saturday, February 25 2012 at 22:30
Posted Saturday, February 25 2012 at 22:30
IN SUMMARY
- James Njenga Karume did not interact much with US diplomats during his time as Defence minister. There is only a slim volume of cables that mention Mr Karume.
- The analysis of diplomats on the veteran Kiambaa politician after one meeting was that he was “personable and animated”, a well-meaning member of Cabinet who was important because of his ties with the President ‘even if he was occasionally reduced to reading his talking points verbatim’ during the one-hour meeting with US ambassador William Bellamy.”
The beauty of the collection of hundreds of thousands of classified US State Department documents exposed by anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks is that they offer candid insights which neither government officials nor the diplomats who compiled them ever imagined would be made public.
The cables were compiled on the strength of private conversations between embassy diplomats and politicians and were meant for the eyes of officials in Washington only.
The picture of John Michuki that emerges from the WikiLeaks cables is fascinating.
He comes across at once as a stubborn patriot who would not be rushed into signing accords the Americans wanted Kenya to back, an ethnic nationalist who seemed to rule out the possibility of a tribe other than his own leading the country and a security hawk who was an early and vigorous proponent of a more aggressive strategy to tackle the Al-Shabaab menace.
Positive assessment
The diplomats’ assessment of the minister were largely positive.
One cable to Washington on April 19, 2007, ahead of a trip there by the minister, warns that it is “vitally important” that Mr Michuki receive a warm welcome to protect American interests in the country.
Ambassador Michael Ranneberger describes Mr Michuki as “smart, politically astute, and pragmatic” and a man whose methods may not win favour with all but who was nevertheless effective.
On the extra-judicial killings carried out in the war against the Mungiki gang, the US ambassador offers this assessment which runs counter to the public position of the Americans in condemning the crackdown.
“Michuki’s ‘shoot to kill’ orders to the police are not something that we can endorse, but it is a fact that the police are usually outgunned by gangs and that the gangs themselves tend to have the same policy. Michuki recognises the need to deal with the violent crime problem.”
While Mr Michuki is praised in the cables as “nothing short of indispensable” in helping tackle the problem of terrorism, he did not always give the Americans what they wanted.
On the morning of January 28, 2010, the US under-secretary for democracy and global affairs Maria Otero and Mr Ranneberger went to Mr Michuki’s office where they thought they would win the minister’s support for a US-backed version of the Copenhagen Accord, a document proposing ways to tackle climate change.
Mr Ranneberger records that Ms Otero “pressed Michuki to sign the accord as a matter of urgency”, but the minister declined.
He said Kenya would raise the matter at the African Union and support something the whole continent backed.
Mr Michuki also said it would be pointless to sign the accord early because there was the possibility some other countries would veto the document.
Mr Ranneberger reported to Washington that Mr Michuki appeared to be expressing disappointment at the way big powers were handling the issue and promised to “continue to press” on the matter.
Mr Michuki was at his most expressive during his stint at the helm of the Internal Security ministry where he was charged with tackling the problem of the rise of Al-Shabaab in Somalia.
He told Mr Ranneberger that Kenya needed to see the instability in Somalia as a real threat and that it needed to act quickly to avoid being sucked into the conflict.
The ambassador offered this summary in a cable dated October 27, 2006: “Kenya is watching its border with Somalia and the coast (Michuki said).
He raised the concern that it is easy for young men to go across to Somalia for indoctrination, and then return quietly to Kenya to work to expand extremist influence.
The border needs to be reinforced militarily, he said, not necessarily for the purpose of moving into Somalia but at least to ‘put the fear of God’ into the (Islamic courts) leadership, to show them Kenya will resist Somali expansion.”
Where Mr Michuki appeared to be supporting the national interest in discussing security issues, he came across as an unabashed ethnic chauvinist when the conversations with foreign diplomats turned to local politics.
One of the most revealing cables is an October 9, 2007, summary sent to Washington by the political counsellor at the US embassy summing up a discussion over lunch with Mr Michuki at his “swank hotel and country club”.
This was a grim observation, the diplomat noted, given “Kenya’s history of high-profile political assassinations”.Mr Michuki told the diplomat that an Odinga presidency would be catastrophic for the country and predicted that he would only last “a few months in office”.
An “unusually relaxed, philosophical, and somewhat detached” Michuki went on to offer this analysis of the 2007 presidential election contest.
“Not surprisingly for a Kibaki loyalist, Michuki trotted out a laundry list of anti-Odinga propaganda. He warned that Odinga, if elected, would behave like a dictator and build a Moi-style cult of personality.
“Michuki reminded PolCouns of Odinga’s studies in East Germany, alleging that his undergraduate thesis had been on building nail bombs.
“Michuki claimed that the Odinga family has long harboured a scheme to create a ‘Greater Luoland’ in western Kenya, uniting Luo-speaking peoples of Kenya, Uganda, and southern Sudan.
“He noted the close ties between former Ugandan President Milton Obote and the Odinga clan, adding that Odinga would create an oppressive Obote-style regime.”
The diplomat added a footnote that the claims by Michuki should not be taken at face value. “Michuki’s Odinga-bashing seemed perfunctory and lacking in conviction.
Much of the anti-Odinga rhetoric seemed designed to bait us into taking an explicit stance against Odinga based on his Cold War ties and socialist roots ... Overall, Michuki seemed worried about Kibaki’s prospects, but also proud of accomplishments.”
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment