US position sends mixed signals in Jubilee team

By Oscar Obonyo

KENYA: Politicians have interpreted a recent message by US President Barack Obama to the Kenya differently, thereby creating confusion and anxiety.

In the address, televised last Wednesday, Obama assured voters that the decision of who becomes president will be made by Kenyans and reiterated US would not support any candidate. 

Jubilee Alliance led by presidential candidate Uhuru Kenyatta and running mate William Ruto, quickly went public with their deduction. Speaking in West Pokot County, the duo claimed the US leader had given them the nod as suitable contenders. 

The clarificaton

But it is the apparent clarification by Johnnie Carson, Obama Administration’s top diplomat for Africa, that the people’s “choices have consequences” has irked Uhuru’s supporters and Office of the President officials, like Head of Civil Service, Francis Kimemia.

“They cannot say in one breath how they will respect the right of Kenyans to freely choose their leaders and in the next they threaten Kenyans with limited contact if Uhuru and Ruto are elected,” says former Gatanga MP, David Murathe, a member of the Uhuru campaign. 

Adds the candidate’s official spokesman, Munyori Buku: “Obama was unequivocal that Kenyans were free to elect a leader of their choice. But the statement coming later from a partisan assistant minister is contradictory. And knowing how governments work, Carson cannot to be taken seriously.”

Anger

Indeed, the quick succession of events, Obama’s statement, apparent celebration by the Jubilee camp, follow up message from Carson and then the reactions, make up a curious and exciting development.  

Was this a choreographed script with the Kenyan actors only playing into a trap? And do the sentiments of Carson contradict those of his boss or are his just an added explanation?

Human rights lawyer, Harun Ndubi, says Carson only reaffirmed the known view, that US classifies certain people with regard to their history and certain circumstances.

“It is conceivable that the US has laws guiding State officials and citizens as to how to engage with certain individuals. Legally speaking, under the American law, private citizens, private and State corporations are bound to oblige in the event one is blacklisted,” explains Ndubi.

High stakes

International relations expert, Leonard Maumo, observes that by directly addressing Kenyans, Obama showed the high stakes in the country.

“Obama is both the American President and a blood relative of scores of Kenyans and there are things, therefore, that he cannot say outrightly,” says Mr Maumo, who teaches at the University of Nairobi. 

And although Carson did not mention names in his warning, most pundits believe he was talking about Uhuru and Ruto, indicted by the International Criminal Court.

Ndubi attributes the turn of events to the belief, especially by Jubilee supporters, that Obama was sympathetic to the candidature of their main rival:

“Some expected him to make an announcement to that effect. Why they would have expected him to endorse their rival is beyond my understanding.”

Misunderstanding

Maumo opines that Obama’s statement was not an endorsement but a veiled warning which Carson decided to amplify after a  misunderstanding.  

But Mr Buku maintains Carson acted independently and mischievously. The Uhuru spokesman wonders why Carson “who served in Kenya as US envoy and understands well how hard we fought for democratic space” could have forgotten so fast about the Kenyans’ resolve.

“Obama’s statement was grounded on two facts – we are free to elect our own leaders and that the same should be a violence-free exercise. Anything to the contrary is dictatorship and our people will not cede our democratic rights to foreigners,” he charged.

Terming Jubilee’s reaction an expression of anger, Ndubi observes it was foolhardy to celebrate Obama’s diplomatically couched statements. He claims Kimemia’s reaction is meant to perpetuate a notion that Kenya is under siege from foreign powers.

External pressure

But Mr Murathe maintains this is the case: “They are trying to dictate to Kenyans who to elect. This is totally an unacceptable, patronising, paternalistic and arrogant attitude that must be rejected by all right thinking Kenyans and the rest of the civilised world. It would be better they declare total severance of diplomatic ties rather than use threats, blackmail and Big Brother antics to subjugate Kenyans to new forms of neo-colonialism”.

Ideally, this forms the biggest challenge to US, Britain, France and other foreign nations that have warned Kenyans that they will keep an arm’s length, and even possibly impose economic embargoes, if the ICC suspects are elected.

Interestingly, the more they push their agenda, they actually help the Uhuru-Ruto course.

This is an almost win-win situation for the duo owing to the fact that some Kenyans are repulsive to external pressure.