Zimpapers Logo

behalf.
These are Uhuru “Freedom” Kenyatta and Raila Odinga. Add to the mix of prominence, Roy Abong’o Malik Obama, half brother to United States president Barack Obama, who stood as an independent candidate for governorship of one of the counties. No one can dispute these people’s ancestry, including top leadership positions and its role on the Kenyan political landscape. Is Kenya creating political dynasties?

In the same vein, whoever said sticks and stones will break my bones but names will never, was right on target.
Kenya became a battleground for two major names and probably ethnic groups in its pre- and post-colonial history, for half a century ago, Mzee Jomo Kenyatta, Kenya’s first president, fought it out with former vice-president Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, Raila Odinga’s father.
The March edition of The Africa Report calls it a “rematch” while one of the contestants seems to be crying foul and saying there was “match fixing”.

Fighting the election on different party tickets — Jubilee Alliance for Uhuru and Coalition for Reform and Democracy (Cord) for Odinga — the interesting thing is that these two sons sired by Kenya’s founding fathers also worked together in the last government.
Raila Odinga as Prime Minister while Uhuru was one of his deputies. But the tables were upset as Uhuru, who together with his running mate William Ruto, have been indicted by the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity, romped to victory last Saturday.
I cannot help but connect Uhuru and Ruto’s victory with the past — the Mau Mau uprising.

On October 5 2012, a British High Court gave an historic and landmark ruling — three elderly Kenyans tortured during the ’50s uprisings were given permission “to claim damages for the grave abuses they suffered when imprisoned during the Mau Mau rebellion. The court rejected the government’s claim that too much time had elapsed for there to be a fair trial, just as it threw out an earlier claim that the Mau Mau veterans should be suing the Kenyan government, not the British”. (guardian.co.uk)
I draw important parallels between the Mau Mau survivors’ court case and last year’s ruling with president-elect Kenyatta and his deputy’s pending case at the ICC. A lot has been said about how the ICC became a broker that brought victory to Uhuru and Ruto.

The Obama name, whose political connection dates back to the Mau Mau days, was also a force to reckon with. Reports claim that the Odingas are distant relatives of the Obamas and they are both from the Luo ethnic group. Therefore being closely connected to the world’s most powerful leader was supposed to produce a positive result for both Odinga and Malik Obama. But it was not to be. The two lost.
While the Uhuru camp is celebrating and others are mourning, let us remember that this is typical of elections. No wonder former Filipino First Lady

Imelda Marcos is reported as having said, “Win or lose, we go shopping after the election”.
These were some lighter moments in the Kenyan poll. Zimbabwe’s Egypt Dzinemunhenzva, who has been contesting all manner of election since 1995, has his equivalents in Kenya.

In 2011, The Herald Features Editor Isdore Guvamombe tracked down the man who colours up Zimbabwe’s elections by contesting Presidential, Parliamentary and local government elections, and each time losing dismally. He does not give up. Guvamombe’s summation of Dzinemunhenzva was: “With 30 tonnes of luck and credibility Dzinemunhenzva could have been voted the President of the Republic of Zimbabwe. Unfortunately for him, he does not have even half a teaspoon of both”.
When he loses, he does not point fingers. He does not blame the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission, and neither does he make wild claims that the elections were not free and unfair. He waits for the next five or six years, and his name will surely be back on some ballot paper.
Odinga has also contested the presidential post three times, but each time he has lost, and each loss is blamed on others. Maybe he can learn a thing or two from Dzinemunhenzva’s perennial losses: that there is a life after elections.
For the third time, Odinga, who thinks that he is the man to lead Kenya, is alleging that the election was stolen from him, and he is taking up the case with the Supreme Court.

While it is his constitutional right to question the result, we really wonder what Odinga is after. He escaped indictment by the ICC, but it was common knowledge that when he rejected the December 2007  poll results, this was when all hell broke loose resulting in the deaths of over a 1 000 people and the displacement of close to 600 000 others.
If Odinga had won the March 4 election, would he be making the allegations about election irregularities as he is doing right now?
But, the lightest moment in the Kenyan poll came from none other than President Obama’s half brother Malik, who thought that his blood ties with the US leader was an open cheque for his quest to higher office — county governor.
While his brother convincingly won his second term in last November’s election, Malik’s performance was dismal. He polled just 2 792 votes against the winner’s 140 000. For “an international figure, with traditional flair”, he failed to convince voters.
However, his returning officer sounded like Dzinemunhenzva when he told the media, “He was not the winner but at least he competed.”

The following brief from Agence France Press says so much about President Obama’s brother: his appetite for power and what I think is downright taking people for granted:
“(Malik) Obama, who describes himself as an economist and a financial analyst, told AFP on the campaign trail that he would use his contacts with Washington to bring development to the rural backwater he hoped to govern.
“Why would my people settle for a local connection when they have a direct line to the White House?” he said. Campaigning under the slogan “Obama here, Obama there”, he said he dreamt of bringing chains like McDonald’s to the area and launching a bid for the presidency.

To Malik Obama, the United States and his brother are the prescriptions to Kenyans’ problems. The Obama name has certainly been etched in the annals of history, but if President Obama had used Malik’s campaign formula, he would not be president today.
Although his was a lower position, but if he had won, he was going to be governor of one million Kenyans. That is a lot, but the unfortunate part is that they would now be taking instructions from the White House.
Yet another good example of massively hand-held politicians, and also a case of someone who uses others in the family circle to add value to his family name.
Although African politics is normally described as politics of the stomach, are they tummies that need fast foods from food chains such as McDonald’s? Despite the growing trend for fast foods, I don’t see Kenyans substituting their “ugali” with some McDonald’s burgers in just the same way that Zimbabweans would not substitute their sadza with these fast foods.

However, like Dzinemunhenzva, Malik Obama says he will be back.
But to show that it was the Obama name he wanted to trade, the UK’s Daily Mail reports that Malik complains that people malign and misunderstand him because he is a Muslim and a black man. “Having a famous brother has made me a target of hatred, racism and bigotry against my religion. I recently asked Barack what advice he could give me about dealing with all the negativity.
“He just laughed and replied, ‘You’re a big boy. You’re my elder brother, you can take it. Anyway, it’s only four more years.”’
There were other imposing names in the Kenyan poll: the ICC and how its role might now reshape the African political landscape.
On February 26, it had to do some climb-down when it announced, “Notwithstanding the prosecution’s objections to the particular arguments by the defence, it does not object to a reasonable adjournment of the trial in light of the fact that events beyond the Court’s control, in particular the Court’s operational restraints, may make an April start date untenable.” For, Kenyatta and Ruto were supposed to appear before the court next month.

We also saw former Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs in the Bush administration Jendayi Frazer sparring off with current Secretary, Ambassador Johnnie Carson, when the latter told Kenyans that there would be “consequences” arising from who they elected as president.
Frazer lamented, “I am troubled by Johnnie Carson’s statement that is essentially meddling in Kenya’s election. It is very reckless and irresponsible . . . We should not be threatening Kenyans about their choice by pointing to an ICC case that is not proven . . . I think the ICC case against Uhuru Kenyatta is a weak one and is based on hearsay.”
Both candidates seemed to be on the bosom of the United States — official bosom, and the other a private citizen’s. But surprisingly, the private citizen is celebrating with the Kenyattas.

It took me back to 2008, when Professor Frazer was on Zimbabwe’s case and, just like Ambassador Carson, sought an election result acceptable to the Bush administration. She was hell-bent on having Zimbabwe placed under United Nations Security Council Chapter VII.
“Zimbabwe must be put on the United Nations Security agenda . . . Washington will do everything in its power to ensure that Zimbabwe is hauled before the UN Security Council,” she declared.
Thus we now wait our turn. Kenya will look like child’s play!