No Dilemma Kathurima Can fill Muthaura’s big shoes
Story in Daily Nation:State House faces dilemma filling Muthaura’s big shoes
We dont need to recycle ! we have young capable and qualified people!
Harry Kathurima
Harry Mutuma Kathurima is Ambassador of Kenya to the Federal Republic of Germany and concurrently accredited to Bulgaria and Romania.
Mr. Kathurima joined the Civil Service in 1976. His tenure in Central Government commenced in 1976 as a District Officer in Malindi District, Coast Province and thereafter as an Administrative officer in the Provincial Commissioner’s office Mombasa until 1982. He moved to the Office of the President in 1985 as a Senior Assistant Secretary and rose through the ranks until his transfer to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as Deputy Secretary. He was appointed Chief of Protocol in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, a post he held from 1991 to 1997.
In 1997, he was appointed Permanent Secretary and served in this capacity in various Ministries. These include, Ministry of Lands and Settlement, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Ministry of Co-operative Development until 2000. He served as Chairman of the Retirement Benefits Authority between 2000 and 2003. In 2004 he was appointed High Commissioner to India until April 2005. He was concurrently accredited to the Republic of Singapore, the People’s Republic of Bangladesh and the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.
Mr. Kathurima is married with two children. He was born in Meru, Kenya on 20th August 1952. He holds a Bachelor of Arts Hons. Degree from the University of Nairobi (1976) and holds a Master of Science postgraduate degree in Public Administration from the University of Birmingham in the United Kingdom (1982).
Karanja From Daily Kos Takes on The Iranian Election
Karanja’s Dairy(daily Kos) -I am a fire breathing liberal, and a huge Obama supporter, for which reason, I liked the idea of an Ahmadinejad loss in the recent Iranian elections, particularly given that the storyline that was developing was that his loss would be translated as a win for Obama’s softly softly approach toward Iran and as an endorsement by the Iranian people (whom conservatives like to proclaim they have no quarrel with – even as they support sanctions that would weaken the Iranian economy wreaking havoc to those very Iranian people’s lives) of his extension of an open hand of friendship and open dialogue. Alas, the election did not go as I had hoped, against the slim odds that Mir-Hossein Mousavi might have toppled Ahmadinejad. Slim odds, in my opinion, because as all news media admitted in the lead up to the election, the close polls that were coming out of Iran were questionable, at best, and even if they had been accurate, the best case scenario would have suggested that the election would turn on turnout, and would have gone to whomever would succeed in getting out their supporters. I would argue that in fact it is quite likely that the polls would have unduly skewed toward the opposition, given that the opposition’s support was centered in the urban areas, and among the young and educated elites within the country, who would have access to telephones and other telecommunications technology and hence may very well have been over-polled.
This would suggest to me that in fact the polls showing Mousavi running almost even with Ahmadinejad could not be relied on as an indication of national sentiment right across Iran. Ahmadinejad according to all media reports enjoyed greater support from the majority of the rural population, who have benefitted hugely from his policies. Those people live outside Tehran, do not Tweet, and possibly have little reason to take to the streets, particularly given that their man got back in office. Whatever you think of Iran, and its system of government, Ahmadinejad was elected democratically four years ago, and has ruled in accordance with a relatively free, fair and democratic Iranian system, which contrary to popular belief is actually one where dissent takes place in relative openness and without crackdowns as most would prefer to believe. That the supreme leader, the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is an unelected official and the true Iranian Head of State is certainly a situation that is suspect in mine, as well as in the eyes of many, but then again, I can’t believe the United Kingdom, the other country whose nationality I hold, has a Monarch as the official Head of Sate.
Furthermore, the Supreme Leader was installed as a result of the Theocracy that followed the Iranian Revolution that ousted the Shah of Iran, who btw, had been installed by the United States interfering with and ousting the democratically elected Iranian government of the time in 1953. With regard to the British Monarchy, I am personally super offended that my taxes go to support a whole family and their cousins and aunts and uncles, who also happen to be the world’s wealthiest welfare dependents, but that’s just me. So, with that out of the way, the idea that this election was not free and fair is not a foregone conclusion. The fact that the demonstrators are fighting a dictator is not necessarily one that is borne out by all the facts. That they are demonstrating against a leader they did not vote for and whom they do not like is certainly clear. That the elections were rigged is certainly not clear either. Therefore, to continue to encourage the Iranian people to demonstrate against the election is not necessarily responsible. Senator Saxby Chambliss of GA, went on Chris Mathews declaring that the election was stolen and calling on President Obama to call it as such. This is hugely irresponsible, and is not backed by any facts whatsoever. President Obama, as usual is ahead of most everyone else, and has struck exactly the right tone on the question of the Iranian elections. As he pointed out, not only is there no guarantee that Mousavi would be dramatically different, but there really is nothing to suggest that Mousavi won, other than that his supporters are certainly very passionate, and clearly do not accept that Ahmadinejad won. Surely if Ahmadinejad was the tyrannical dictator that it has been suggested he was, I can’t imagine that we would have seen the relative calm surrounding the demonstrations that we have seen, notwithstanding the eight deaths that were reportedly caused by Ahmadinejad’s supporters, and not by official government personnel.
Many news reports have admitted that it is not clear that Mousavi won, and in fact, the only extent to which many have gone was to argue that Ahmadinejad could not have won by the margins that it is claimed he won. I argue that in fact it is highly credible that he did win by larger than expected margins, given the heavy skew in favor of the opposition, that I believe the polls would have had, and given a possible higher turnout among the rural vote that supports Ahmadinejad than the urban (more visible, more tweetable) vote. We in the west had absolutely no opportunity whatsoever to gage the rural support for Ahmadinejad, and furthermore, given that they may not have even viewed President Obama’s extension of friendship, may not have necessarily cared for greater engagement with the west, and hence may well not have cared for a change of government. I come from Kenya, and during the recent turmoil that followed the disputed elections of December 2007, I saw similar kneejerk reactions in the west in support of the opposition, calling for President Kibaki who had won in a closely contested election, to back down and or negotiate to end the impasse.
What most in the west were not privy to, was that the opposition were in fact a murderous bunch of thugs who killed over a thousand government supporters and tried to ethnically cleanse the government supporting members of the Kikuyu tribe from opposition strongholds, leading to hundreds of thousands displaced form their homes and ending up as internally displaced people, who to this day remain displaced, over two years later! It was not convenient to report this particularly given that the opposition was seen as more pro-western, which in fact they were. It is not that the Kenyan government is anti-western, but in fact the reality is that the opposition was far more malleable towards western manipulation, with the opposition leader, Raila Odinga having close ties to the MI6, and having enjoyed the support of British business backers, who stood to gain from greater exploitation of Kenya in a Raila administration. In that election, just like in the Iranian, there was no clear evidence that the incumbent had not indeed won, but furthermore, there was evidence that the opposition had been less than honest and transparent in their strongholds, having started their murderous rampage on the eve of the election, killing security personnel who had been sent to man polling stations within the strongholds of the opposition in Western and Nyanza provinces.
The US and Britain were impatient with President Kibaki, I believe who had refused all western aid, having succeeded in turning Kenya into a self dependent economy that was growing at a 7% rate annually and running purely on tax revenues. One example of his refusal to play ball was when he refused George Bush’s “so called” aid for HIV AIDS programs, which came with the strings attached of having to spend the money on US patented drugs, which cost so much more than generics that Kenya could have obtained from India and Brazil. It is therefore with such examples that I tread the free Iran bandwagon with great care, knowing that I do not understand enough about internal Iranian politics to jump to the conclusion that a) Iran is not Democratic and that b) that Mousavi won the last election. As far as I can see, there are demonstrations against an election result that a good number of Iranians, quite possibly almost half of the population disagree with. Can you even begin to imagine if the nearly half of the American electorate that voted for Senator McCain had refused to accept the election results last year, and decided to take to the streets? That would be seriously huge numbers and would certainly produce the same results as what we are seeing in Iran.
Granted that is a distant possibility, but take for example, Gore vs. Bush in 2000. That election was even closer, and was disputed and remains disputed to this day. That is one situation where demonstrations could have taken place, and indeed did take place. But can you imagine what it would have looked like if masses of Democrats had felt strongly enough to come out for big demonstrations. I certainly think that people actually did feel strongly enough and would have come out en masse if Gore had encouraged it. He did not. Moussavi has been encouraging the demonstrations, and so has the western media in their one sided coverage. I am just not convinced that the western view will be borne out by the facts on this occasion. I support the right of the Iranian people to demonstrate in peace, without the fear of violence or retribution, but this seems to be the case right now. I support the right of the Iranian people to demand exactly what sort of government they want to see, and indeed to question their election results if they do not feel that they were fair and transparent enough. I will however, not jump on the bandwagon of jumping to the conclusion that this half, if that, of the Iranian population is the only true point of view. I also wholeheartedly agree with President Obama’s decision to sit this one out, and I believe that time will prove him right to have done so very soon, and I sincerely hope that he does not cave to the right’s demands to throw himself any further into the melee.
By Karanja- A liberal American Blogger on Daily Kos
Kenyan Census Real Fear:Kikuyu Population Explosion
Then a new king, who did not know about Joseph, came to power in Egypt. 9 “Look,” he said to his people, “the Israelites have become much too numerous for us. 10 Come, we must deal shrewdly with them or they will become even more numerous and, if war breaks out, will join our enemies, fight against us and leave the country.”11 So they put slave masters over them to oppress them with forced labor, and they built Pithom and Rameses as store cities for Pharaoh. 12 But the more they were oppressed, the more they multiplied and spread; so the Egyptians came to dread the Israelites 13 and worked them ruthlessly. 14 They made their lives bitter with hard labor in brick and mortar and with all kinds of work in the fields; in all their hard labor the Egyptians used them ruthlessly-
Exodus 1:8-14
A spirited attempt to block a census question that would make it possible for Kenyans to know the number of people in each of the country’s 42 tribes has been rejected even as it emerged that the government was planning to deploy monitors to help prevent rigging of the August national census.
Alston’s Report: Bigoted Wild Allegations
It is inconceivable that anyone would have investigated the activities of Mungiki and Sabaot Land Defence Force in a mere ten days. This is hardly enough time to investigate chicken theft.On his visit, Alston spent one hour with the Police, despite having been granted total access. It was apparent he did so merely to fulfil a mandatory requirement, rather than establish the truth. In fact, during the two 30-minute sessions at Police Headquarters, he complained he would be late for other appointments and had to leave. He did not try to visit any police stations and cannot now complain he was not assisted.
Alston provides little beyond wild allegations. It seems he was handed a written document by local activists to adopt as his own work. In his hurry to use plagiarised material, he failed to interrogate why civil society organisations used unqualified persons to conduct post mortem examinations in Mt Elgon.In his overzealousness to condemn those he was instructed to, he has published inexcusable falsehoods. His assertion there was no need to assemble evidence to apportion blame is an astonishing disregard for due process. According to him, the fact that any unproved allegation had been made is sufficient reason to condemn the Government without the need for further proof!
There is no precedent for such absurd reasoning. All reports by rapporteurs are made on the basis of information sufficient to require further investigation, not to sustain a conviction.
The report comes as ‘civil society’ organisations with links to Mungiki try to elicit public sympathy against efforts to restore law and order. Their diversionary tactic is to distract attention from the more than 5,000 Mungiki prosecuted, including the leader Maina Njenga, and the many defectors executed by this gang.Little or no effort was made to investigate each allegation or to obtain credible evidence. Given the resources available to organisations that have made these allegations, it is telling that none has sought to “bring the killers to book” by setting in motion any proceedings or, at the very least, lodging formal complaints.In summary, Alston suggests that he had three objectives: (a) to ascertain the types of unlawful killings; (b) to investigate whether those responsible are held to account; and (c) to propose measures to reduce incidence of killings and “impunity”.It is sad to note that:He chose to concentrate exclusively on accusations against the police. He did not find it necessary to ask about the systematic murder of citizens by Mungiki. Maybe he thought it was not important. He, however, appeals to the criminals to stop killing!b) Alston did not identify even one person responsible for specific killings sufficiently enough to sustain any prosecution;c) The ‘recommendations’ he makes were handed to him by activists keen to attract donor funding and, therefore, neither interested in truth nor accuracy.
There are a number of factors that militate against any attempt to take the report seriously. First, the sweeping findings and generalisations by the rapporteur are astonishing. Obsession with the police is evident in the three areas that he elected to study.
Alston provides not an iota of evidence on alleged killings by police. All he has are wild allegations by civil society groups. Torture allegations against police or military personnel are based on similar information. These, however, are outside Alston’s mandate and fall within the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Torture, an established office in the same UN office. He also concentrates on post-election violence, which was not a case of extra-judicial killings. Police action in reaction to widespread politically-instigated violence was, arguably, also outside his mandate.
The report is a cheap anti-police statement that strains to ensure the result is skewed. Alston claims he interviewed many Government officials, but he falsified the list of people he met and his visits were brief and hurried. His report is fabricated and postulated entirely on the allegations of phantom witnesses supplemented by bias and prejudice.
In current investigations, it is clear that Mungiki hace changed tack and infiltrated the public opinion machinery. The activities of the group have escalated following the report’s release.While cases of human rights abuse cannot and will not be tolerated, it is essential that there be credibility in independent investigations. This report, sadly, does not have such credibility. It would have been useful to have a truly independent report with plausible evidence of wrongdoing. But our security shall not be battered by populist compilations with no investigative merit.
By Eric Kiraithe
Ethnic Humility
God hates seven things. Tellingly, the first is pride. When someone overvalues himself by undervaluing others, he inevitably reveals it with his proud look. Puffed up in self-conceit, he may also devise evil and sow discord. No wonder God hates proud looks. Proud and powerful people may think they can disregard others’ displeasure, but they cannot disregard God’s opposition.
Peter reminds us not to trust in ourselves but in the One who will exalt us “in due time” (1 Peter 5:6). As we submit to Him, we avoid the risk that pride brings to our character and we become thankful, humble servants of God.
We should never look down on others ! devise evil and sow discord with the aim of building ourselves.We can grow and build without undervaluing others.Because we seek a better future for ourselves We should also seek a better future for others even though seperate from ourselves
Regional Governments & Self Rule
Mt Kenya Region
Rarely has a topic turned out to be so emotive, divisive and controversial like the majimbo debate.A debate that should otherwise be very intellectually stimulating has been reduced to a weapon for political one-upmanship and for settling ethnic scores.Far too many people feel that majimbo is a red-herring for ethnic dichotomisation. Their fears are greatly justified by the ethnic pogroms that have always, unfailingly, followed calls for majimboism.This ugly history notwithstanding, the real majimbo should stand up. Maybe all of us, pro-majimboists, and anti-majimboists need to pause for a moment.Let me confess here. I have been a rabid majimbo-phobic. Today, I am a real convertee to the gospel of majimboism. It is much easier to work on the real fears of the phobics, as well on the mischievous designs of the centrics, than to throw away the baby with bath water.
For beneath the acrimony, majimbo is good for us, a ‘‘nice-to-have’’ and not a ‘‘must-have’’ for the sake of our country.I have many reasons for my stand, but two will suffice. Take the case of our government structures at the grassroots. It is simply a tower of Babel.You have a district agricultural officer who reports to Kilimo House, trying to work through a district commissioner who reports to Harambee House. If they are to have a project that requires irrigation, the water officer has to seek the authority-to-incur-expenditure (AIE) from Maji House
I haven’t even talked about the Public Works, Environment and Youth officers involved – just in case the project has a Kazi-Kwa-Vijana component.The local MP has no inkling about the civil servants who serve in his constituency, let alone being responsible for their performance. In case of new districts, all these departments have to build their offices independently.So pathetic and scattered are the offices that in some districts, they are referred to as the “government slums”. I look forward to the day the jimbo governor moves in to restore order.
I look forward also to see the demystification of Nairobi. In South Africa, Parliament sits in Cape Town, the Executive in Pretoria, the Judiciary in Bloemfontein while the main business address is Johannesburg.By the same measure, I look forward to having tea at Parliament Buildings in Eldoret, and go for a case mention in the Judiciary headquarters in Kisumu. I can only imagine the glee with which sukuma wiki vendors will welcome the announcement that the office of the Prime Minister has been moved to Thika.
The second reason is sad, unfortunately. All over the country, illegal gangs are coming up by the day. They may be different in terms of modus operandi or region. However, a striking similarity among them is the way they rush in to duplicate (or is it substitute?) functions that are the preserve of the central government.From illegal taxes to providing ‘‘security’’, these gangs point out to the need for us to re-examine the centralised system of governance.The distance between the central government and the people has grown to the maximum limit. When Jomo Kenyatta became President, Kenya’s population was 9 million. Today we are 36 million, yet the same miserable central government structures still prevail. They are writhing in pain, over-burdened by this insurmountable yoke of responsibility.We have the option of continuing to hide our heads in the sand like the ostrich or to move with the times.
by Moses Kuria ( secretary-general, Centre for Strategic and International Studies)
Acceptance of killing of Innocent Kikuyus
With the pervasive demonisation of the Mungiki militia group providing an effective cover for the killing of members of the Kikuyu community – Mungiki and non-Mungiki alike – ordinary citizens are reluctant to speak out, both for fear of being accused of supporting the sect and of the reactions of Mungiki militia to criticism. Calling on the political and religious leadership of the Kikuyu community to face up to the challenge in its midst, Maathai urges the country to heal the growing rift between the community and other Kenyans.
Mungiki
In the course of history everywhere in the world, it is the leadership of the day that guides its people towards peace or war, poverty or wealth, development or collapse, slavery or freedom. And so it is with Kenya’s current leadership, a leadership which is failing to see the signs of anger and frustration of those they govern even though the writing is on the wall. Since the rupture over the infamous Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in 2003, the referendum on the constitution, the general elections and the subsequent fallout from them, Kenya has continued to slide dangerously backwards.
In 2008, thanks to a quick response from the African Union and the international community, Kenya was saved from the brink and a National Accord was arrived at to allow the Party of National Unity (PNU) and the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) to declare a ceasefire, share power and work towards national cohesion and reconciliation. Kenya was given a new lease of life but since then the leadership has wasted away that second chance as it continues to compete and play politics with only 2012 in mind. In the past, the failure to recognise danger signs were the reason why some people expressed shock and dismay that deadly post-election violence could happen in Kenya in 2007-08. Such people had believed that Kenya was a peaceful country. Unfortunately, that perception was because people ignored the danger signs and lived a lie. To such people the tribal clashes of 1991, 1992 and 1997 were quickly forgotten. Yet during those earlier clashes, as in 2007-08, distress calls to the police for help were ignored. Many people died, and more were maimed, raped and displaced, while much property was destroyed. Again, once politicians shared power and privileges, nobody was held responsible for those crimes. Everything was swept under the carpet and was quickly forgotten. As it turned out, the clashes of the 1990s proved to be rehearsals for the post-election violence of 2007-08 and in all cases the violence was largely directed at the Kikuyu community.
Currently, the danger signs are palpable. Instances of citizens being murdered in cold blood in cases where no robbery is involved, or citizens shouting down leaders at public rallies – such as happened during Jamhuri Day (12 December 2008) and Labour Day (1 May 2009) – or youth uprooting the railway, engaging police in gun battles in rural towns, or engaging in killing orgies of defenceless villagers, are all signs of a society that is falling apart and losing respect for the rule of law. The government knows that the violence and killings are largely perpetrated by members of militia groups, which are created and funded by politicians. Different communities have their militia, which bear different names. The government knows these militia groups and knows that politicians use them to punish and defeat their opponents, especially during elections. If they win elections, the same politicians end up in government and become part of the leadership.
Mungiki, which is currently making headlines, is the militia group from the Kikuyu community. Information about the group is kept secret, but unconfirmed reports indicate that this militia is split into several groups. The original Mungiki members were only interested in pursuing the Kikuyu form of worship, which prays facing Mt. Kenya. This group does not believe in Christianity and calls for the traditional Kikuyu way of life, including practicing female circumcision. Owing largely to its stand on those two issues, the strongly christianised Kikuyu community has been unsympathetic towards this group and has largely demonised the sect. The banning of the sect by the government has criminalised it, and therefore the community and Kenyans in general have tolerated the extrajudicial killing of its members.The police have taken advantage of this demonisation and criminalisation to kill Mungiki indiscriminately, because they know that they will not be called to account. Why the members of the sect are denied freedom of worship, in a country where everybody else can worship as they please, is not clear. Indeed it is only among the Kikuyu community that worshiping in a traditional way is demonised, criminalised and the killing of followers is tolerated.
The second group camouflages itself as Mungiki but is said to be comprised of militiamen being recruited from thousands of unemployed youth. With the failure of the cash crop economy, impoverishment and the introduction of drugs and illicit alcoholic drinks in the Central region, it has been easy to recruit youth and men into militia groups. Criminality gradually infiltrated some of these militia groups, especially as they sought ways to sustain themselves beyond the handouts from their sponsors. Therefore, they become available to politicians and others for hire. They are the type we encounter protecting grabbed public lands or properties built on stolen land. Sometimes they may receive police protection, an indication of their political patronage.
The third group is claimed to be closely connected to the law enforcement arm of the government and is used to collect information, intimidate and instil fear in citizens, terrorise matatus and silence elements like dissidents, activists and competing elements. It may also provide ‘protection’ or other services for a fee. These are the ones people accuse of hiring police guns to commit crimes.
In some cases the militiamen and the law enforcement arm of the government form a symbiotic relationship, which sometimes goes sour with either of them getting killed. When militiamen are killed they are labelled thieves and members of the Mungiki sect. That is usually an indication that the matter get closed and no further action is expected. Because of the internalised disdain of the Mungiki sect, especially in the Kikuyu community, the expected outcry against their killings has been absent and nobody in the community wants to be seen supporting Mungiki. At the same time Mungiki has instilled so much fear in the community that nobody is willing to speak about them or their actions for fear of immediate elimination.Therefore, when innocent persons are killed and are labelled Mungiki, death is stoically accepted as the will of God and the community internalises the pain. Killing members of Mungiki, irrespective of their innocence, has became so acceptable that all that police have to claim to literally get away with any murder is to say that the victim was a member of Mungiki. Unfortunately, that has degenerated into acceptance of killing of innocent Kikuyus. Currently this is further degenerating into members of Mungiki turning on the community itself in a cycle of vengeance and tit-for-tat.
The recent murder of the son of the former member of parliament for Gatundu North, Hon. Kariuki Muiruri, painfully exemplifies the tragedy and the dilemma that the Kikuyu community faces. The son was shot dead by a plainclothes policeman, who subsequently walked into a police station and wrote in the Occurrence Book (OB) that he had killed a thief who was also a member of the Mungiki sect! Yet the son was on holiday and the two met casually at a social place. Whatever the circumstances that led to the shooting of the son, this was a case of an innocent young man killed by a policeman who knew that nothing would happen to him if he were to record that the man was a member of the Mungiki sect. But for the fact that the victim was the son of a former member of parliament and a former assistant minister, Muiruri’s son would have joined the list of thousands of Kikuyu youth who have been killed under similar circumstances and labelled thieves and members of the Mungiki sect.
The Mungiki phenomenon, almost like the Mau Mau experience five decades ago, is providing cover for extrajudicial killings, intimidation, harassment, criminalisation and the bashing of the Kikuyu community under the pretence that police are protecting citizens from Mungiki. Sometimes police are fully aware of the activities carried out by this group. The killings in Mathira and Kirinyaga, for example, are said to have been committed with full knowledge of the law enforcement arm of the government. Indeed, citizens claim that distress calls to the police for help were never responded to until the killings had been completed. The extrajudicial killings of innocent Kenyans have been attracting international attention. This is because not only is the state perceived to be failing in protecting its citizens, but the police are being blamed for some of the deaths. Promises to carry out a thorough investigation come to nothing, and nobody has been held to account. After all, the police cannot be expected to investigate and incriminate themselves.
Perhaps militia groups like Mungiki have gotten out of hand. But is the right response to militia groups a license to kill them indiscriminately? We are not in a state of war, and nobody should be killed without following the due process of the law of the land, police excuses for self-defence notwithstanding. Police Commissioner Hussein Ali will find it hard to explain how in his era Kenya has experienced a level of carnage at the hands of the police greater than at any other time, even when compared with the colonial era. When the government sends the message that the Mungiki group should be crushed, it is an endorsement for extrajudicial killings. For their part, the militiamen will subsequently go on a killing spree to avenge members killed. This cycle of death has become a common feature, has instilled fear and has given rise to frustration in the people of Central Kenya.
The way I see it, the political and religious leadership of the Kikuyu community should rise to the challenge facing the entire community. This is a community that suffers from accumulated trauma and frustration extending back to the beginning of the colonial era. From the latest attack during the post-election violence, the community has yet to bury their dead, settle the internally displaced persons (IDPs) and send their children back to school. A culture of Kikuyu bashing, criminalisation and isolation is being perpetrated and is quickly entrenching itself, creating a deep rift between the community and other Kenyans. The fact that this is happening when the national leadership in State House is from the community is doubly tragic. How can they be so bashed, so criminalised, killed, displaced and humiliated when their beloved son is in State House? Will he wait until he or members of his family are touched by the tragedy afflicting the community? If they are now encouraged to turn on each other, there will be no shortage of helping hands, including being given guns to kill their own children! For a country awash with militia groups, these are dangerous signs not only for the Kikuyu community, but for Kenya as a whole. The question I would ask Prime Minister Raila Odinga is, have you not heard the cries or seen the tears of these Kenyans in your capacity as the coordinator of government business? Have you not seen the mourning mothers?
* Wangari Maathai .Nobel Peace Prize winner
Victims of British Brutality:”baboons”, “barbarians” and “terrorists”.
In a few weeks, a group of quiet, dignified elderly men and women will arrive in London to explain how the forces of the British state crushed their testicles or breasts with pliers. It was part of a deliberate policy of breaking a civilian population who we regarded as “baboons”, “barbarians” and “terrorists”.They will come bearing the story of how Britain invaded a country, stole its land, and imprisoned an entire civilian population in detention camps – and they ask only for justice, after all this time.
As a small symbol of how we as a country have not come to terms with our history, compare the bemused reaction to the arrival of these Kenyan survivors of Britain’s gulags to the recent campaign supporting the Gurkhas. We have all waxed lyrical over the Nepalese soldiers who were, for two centuries, hired by the British Empire to fight its battles. Sometimes they were used in great causes, like the defeat of Nazism. Sometimes they were used to crush democratic movements in India or Malaya or Pakistan. But they did the bidding of the Empire – so they are that rare bunch of foreigners whom the right will welcome. I too strongly supported their rights to reside in Britain, out of simple humanity – if they’re good enough to die for us, they’re good enough to live with us. But isn’t it revealing that even in 2009, we can cheer the servants of Empire but blank the people mutilated and murdered by it?
The British arrived in Kenya in the 1880s, at a time when our economic dominance was waning and new colonies were needed. The Colonial Office sent in waves of white settlers to seize the land from the local “apes” and mark it with the Union Jack. Francis Hall was the officer of the East India Company tasked with mounting armed raids against the Kikuyu – the most populous local tribe – to break their resistance. He said: “There is only one way of improving the [Kikuyu] and that is to wipe them out; I would only be too delighted to do so but we have to depend on them for food supplies.”
The British troops stole more than 360,000 acres from the Kikuyu, and renamed the area “the White Highlands.” But the white settlers were aristocratic dilettantes with little experience of farming, and they were soon outraged to discover that the “primitives” were growing food far more efficiently on the reserves into which they had been driven. So they forced the local black population to work “their” land, and passed a law banning local Africans from inde-pendently growing the most profitable cash crops – tea, coffee, and sisal.
The people of Kenya objected, and tried to repel the invaders. They called for ithaka na wiyathi – land and freedom. After peaceful protests were met with violence, they formed a group, dubbed the Mau Mau, to stop the suppression any way they could. They started killing the leaders appointed by the British, and some of the settlers too. As a result, the London press described them as “evil savages” and “terrorists” who were motivated by hatred of Christianity and civilisation. They had been “brainwashed” by “Mau Mau cult leaders”, the reports shrieked. The 1.5 million Kikuya overwhelmingly supported the Mau Mau and independence – so the British declared war on them all. A state of emergency was announced, and it began with forced removals of all Kikuyu. Anybody living outside the reserves – in any of the cities, for example – was rounded up at gunpoint, packed into lorries, and sent to “transit camps”. There, they were “screened” to see if they were Mau Mau supporters. One of the people locked up this way for months was Barack Obama’s grandfather.
Professor Caroline Elkins, who studied the detention camps for five years for her remarkable book Britain’s Gulag: The Brutal End of Empire in Kenya, explains the tactics adopted by the British to snuffle out Mau Mau. “Electric shock was widely used, as well as cigarettes and fire,” she writes. “Bottles (often broken), gun barrels, knives, snakes, vermin and hot eggs were thrust up men’s rectums and women’s vaginas. “The screening teams whipped, shot, burned, and mutilated Mau Mau suspects.”
The people judged to be guilty of Mau Mau sympathies were transferred to torture camps. There, each detainee was given a number which they had to wear on a band on their wrist. They were then stripped naked and sent through a cattle dip, before the torture would begin again. “Detainees were frog-marched around the compound and beaten until blood ran from their ears,” Elkins writes.
The Kikuyu survivor Pascasio Macharia describes some of the tortures he witnessed: “The askaris [guards] brought in fire buckets full of water, and the detainees were called one by one, [my friend] Peterson first. The askaris then put his head in the bucket of water and lifted his legs high in the air so he was upside down. That’s when [one of the camp commandants] started cramming sand in Peterson’s anus and stuffed it in with a stick. The other askari would put water in, and then more sand. They kept doing this back and forth … Eventually they finished with Peterson and carried him off, only to start on the next detainee in the compound.”
British Crimes against Kikuyus
When I reported from Kenya earlier this year, I met elderly people who still shake with fear as they talk about the gulags. William Baldwin, a British member of the Kenya Police Reserve, wrote a memoir in which he cheerfully admits to murdering Kikuya “baboons” in cold blood. He bragged about how he gutted them with knives while other suspects watched. Another British officer, Tony Cross, proudly called their tactics “Gestapo stuff”. For the civilians outside, life was only slightly better. Women and children were trapped in 800 “sealed villages” throughout the countryside. They were surrounded by barbed wire and armed guards, and forced at gunpoint to dig trenches that sealed them off from the world.
There was always another, honourable Britain that fought against these crimes. The Labour left – especially Barbara Castle and Nye Bevan – fought for the camps to be exposed and shut. They didn’t succeed until the British imperialists were finally forced to scuttle away from the country entirely. We will never know how many people they murdered, because the colonial administration built a bonfire of all the paperwork on their way out the door. Elkins calculates it is far more than the 11,000 claimed by the British Government, and could be as many as 300,000.
Yet in Britain today, there is a blood-encrusted blank spot about Empire. On the reality show The Apprentice, the contestants recently had to pick a name for their team, and they said they wanted “something that represented the best of British” – so they settled on “Empire”. Nobody objected. Imagine young Germans blithely naming a team “Reich”: it’s unthinkable, because they have had to study what their fathers and grandfathers did, and expunge these barbarous instincts from their national DNA.
This failure to absorb the lessons of Empire is not only unjust to the victims; it leads us to repeat horrifying mistakes. Today, we are – with the Americans – using unmanned drones to bomb the Pakistan-Afghan borderland, as we did a few years ago in Iraq. Nobody here seems to remember that the British invented aerial counter-insurgency in this very spot – with disastrous consequences.
In 1924, Arthur “Bomber” Harris bragged that all rebellion could be stopped with this tactic. We have shown them, “what real bombing means, in casualties and damage: they know that within 45 minutes, a full-sized village can be practically wiped out and a third of its inhabitants killed,” he said. Yet instead of “pacifying” them, it radically alienated the population and lead to an uprising. If we knew our history, we would not be running the same script and expecting a different ending.
Gordon Brown said last year (in India, of all places) that “the days of Britain having to apologise for its colonial history are over”. The survivors of England’s blanked-out torture camps are entitled to ask: when did they ever apologise?
Madaraka Day Special
My Enunciation
I like many of you, appreciate the comforts and security of the familiar,I enjoy the tranquility of repetition. But in the spirit of truth , I thought I should pen some facts many will sadly not accept. I consider myself Kikuyu first and Kenyan Second.There are of course those who would not want me to say so. Their replies may express shock and disbelief at what I have to say. But we must ask them why?
Because ideas will always retain their power and words offer the means to meaning I feel I have to express why I dont grieve our national spirit being in a coma. For those who will listen to my enunciation of truth.The truth is, there is something terribly wrong with Kenya and that is why I am Kikuyu first .The truth is hard to accept because most people are deceived about themselves. Rationalizations and the incessant search for scapegoats(politicians,the constitution,our tribes) are the psychological cataracts that blind us all.But the day has passed for my superficial patriotism.
He who lives in a lie , lives in spiritual slavery.But freedom is still the bonus we receive for knowing the truth.”Ye shall know the truth,” says Jesus, “and the truth shall set you free.” .And the truth of my enunciation is setting me free.The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in a period of moral crisis maintain their neutrality. There comes a time when silence becomes betrayal.The truth of these words is beyond doubt, but the mission to which it calls is a difficult one. Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, we do not easily assume the task of opposing unjust systems , especially in country like ours. Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one’s own bosom.
When the issues at hand seem as perplexing as the Kiambaa church aquittal , as they often are in the case of Kenya, we’re always mesmerized by indifference and collective denial.Where we once had the freedom to think and challenge we now have coercing to conformity and solicited submission for the sake of false peace. How did this happen? Who’s to blame for this false hopes?(maybe its Eric Wainaina’s song Kenya only) Well certainly there are those more responsible than others for the breakdown in my patriotism to Kenya(The Church Burners, Justice David Maraga,Raila Odinga,Mwai Kibaki),but again truth be told, if I was looking for the guilty, I need only ask you to look into a mirror.
After reading that a judge had set free the church burners and jackson Kibor,I waited to hear from you but all I heard was the echo of your silence. Then I sought to end my own silence and remind you what it is our ‘Nation’ has forgotten. More than forty six years ago great citizens wishing to embed our independence forever in our collective psyche, shed their blood for fairness, justice, and freedom (Not for a flag, a country name or even eight provinces)
So I write to you on this issue, because we(those who are now Kikuyu first) are determined to be taken seriously. We feel the day has come the ‘true patriots’ (Generation Kenya ,Revisioning Kenya & Kenya first gang) to explain to the growning many like me how the whole road to happiness can be granted in Kenya today ,So that men,women and children are not beaten and killed in churches.I look uneasily on the glaring contrast of visions and political direction and ask can I be loyal to this Kenya ? Show me how I can be Kenyan first and Kikuyu second when I see the injustice of Kiambaa and all the recent talk that accompanied the burial.
Joe Ndungu(Mugwithania2.0)
‘V’ version
Jimmy Kibaki -Reinventing The Wheel?? lol
The Apple doesn’t fall far from the tree they say .Kenyans are discouraged, ashamed, disillusioned and angry at your Father and his friends(Muthaiga club).His Jua Kali(informal) primitive style of Leadership has left even his useless Prime Minister wondering ? Jimmy your fathers former Rift Valley supporters are still in refugee camps.Alone hungry and forgotten .When people hoist themselves to seeking leadership positions they expose themselves to public scrutiny and judgment. Jimmy where have you been for the last one and a half years as the supporters you now want to inherit suffered in IDP camps .Where was your young leadership when youths joined illegal sects and gangs out of hopelessness.
Now that the old tree is slowly withering you want to show the youth the way forward! Jimmy your Fathers cardinal sin is that throughout his life, he has never fought for the freedom he has never hesitated to enjoy. Indeed, posterity will remember him most for equating fighting dictatorship with the madness of felling a fig tree with a razor blade. But fighting for freedom(be it freedom from poverty,hunger or foolishness) and advancement means sacrificing and the Kibaki’s have never sacrificed for any cause, person or community.
That is why poor Jimmy we will give you a wide berth. The Agikuyu say “Garurira mbeu ti ya kinya kimwe”(Change seeds taking them from different calabashes when planting )It is good to introduce new blood but the Kibaki calabash has run out of its charm and we now know it is defective .People of differing ideologies and creeds.I think on this one we can all agree,tumechoka !!
Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission (TJRC)
While Kenyans praise the setting up of a body by Parliament to investigate historical injustices with a view to reconciling communities torn apart by ethnic hatred and inequalities, doubts surround the success of such an initiative.Negotiators named by post-war leaders to the international mediation group were of the view that signing of the National Accord without putting in place mechanisms to heal the war wounds would be an exercise in futility.A raft of proposals towards possible reconciliation and peaceful co-existence were made, one being the setting up of the Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission (TJRC) to investigate historical injustices, including the eruption of post-election violence.Nobody in Kenya can claim the cloak of a saint before the TJRC.
In adult life, everybody in this country is an accomplice in meting out injustices. Since violence or political assassinations always have leaders’ blessings, how will this commission summon such personalities without provoking ethnic animosity?
Only the privileged class can get away with injustices as was evidenced by the 2007 general elections. Kenyans who bear the scars of senseless protests against bungled election results were not the contestants for the top seats.The big question is, what constitutes injustices in the eyes of the commission and the public? Caution, patience and sobriety should be the guides if the country is to forestall a recurrence of violence.Some of the heart-rending testimonies by victims and the stone faces of the perpetrators could be stressful. The commission could be presiding over the disintegration of the nation or perform a miracle to restore the short-lived unity at independence.
The latter is unlikely where negative ethnicity has deepened in all sectors including the Legislature.The leaders across the divide should convene a national healing conference as part of the preparation of the perpetrators and victims to look at the commission, not as a witch-hunter or a trial court, but as a peace-broker.
Going by recent inflammatory statements by leaders after the burial of Kiambaa church fire victims and the conspicuous absence of some coalition leaders, it is safe to conclude that we have forgotten that the country was engulfed in one of the worst violence in living memory.It is thus upon the two principals to rise to the occasion and save the coalition and the country from disintegration.Given the sensitivity of the terms of reference of the commission, the coalition government should move with speed to reinforce the confidence of Kenyans in the healing process.The unease in the coalition government that was crafted out of the ashes of a bloody war should not be a hindrance to the smooth functions of the commission. The TJRC process should not be turned into another public relations exercise to hoodwink the international community, which insisted on reconciliation rather than confrontation.An appearance by leaders across the divide would encourage the perpetrators and victims to fearlessly testify at the commission that seeks to reconcile communities and individuals who regard their neighbours as arch-enemies.
By Joseph Kamotho. EGH.
Mugumo
We must prune the old and unproductive branches but the tree should not be uprooted.
In the fiery dawn of time, when the earth trembled in the throes of creation, a dense cloud of mist stood over the land as Ngai (GOD), the divider of the Universe, descended to earth, to his seat of mystery.There upon the dazzling snow capped peaks of the black crystal mountain called Kirinyaga, he made a dwelling place. From that day the mountain became his symbolic abode and was revered as sacred ground.
One day, Ngai led Gikuyu, father of the Gikuyu nation, to the misty peaks of the sacred mountain. Pointing out the beauty of the land lying below he said:”You shall carve your inheritance from this land, it shall belong to you and your children’s children to be passed from generation to generation until the twilight of existence.”And so it became. The Agikuyu were given the land of rivers and ravines, of hills and valleys, of forests with all the creatures therein, and all the gifts of nature that Mugai, divider of the Universe had bestowed on his people.
As the morning sun broke through the misty skies, Gikuyu did as his creator had commanded. He descended to Mukurwe wa Gathanga where a grove of sacred fig trees grew in rich red earth.Resting in the shade of the sacred grove, he found the most beautiful of women. Taking her to be his wife, he named her Mumbi, the creator or moulder of the tribe.From the sacred Mukuyu grove, Gikuyu took his name. Together, Gikuyu and Mumbi built a home and gave birth to nine daughters.
Away from Myth
The (Mugumo/Mukuyu) fig tree is one of the more frequently mentioned trees in the Scriptures. It was from its leaves that Adam and Eve made their first covering (Gen. 3:7). The fig tree was valued first of all for its delicious, sweet fruit (Judges 9:11). It was also a symbol of prosperity and security: “and Judah and Israel dwelt safely, every man under his vine and under his fig tree” (1 Kings 4:25). It was an enjoyable thing to rest, meditate on God’s word, and pray in the shade of the fig tree. (John 1:48)
Figs are considered characteristic fruit for the land of Palestine. The best loved and most nutritious were the spring fruits, which ripened in May and referred to as figs in the fig tree of the first time (Hosea 9:10). The main harvesting of figs occurred in the later months of the summer and in the fall. Those figs were called late figs. They were inferior in their quality. The poorest ones were even fed to cattle.
The Fig Tree as a Symbol
Some places in the Bible indicate that the fig tree also has a symbolic meaning. One of the Lord’s miracles is most intriguing when his curse of the fig tree caused it to wither. This seems to have been the only miracle in which Jesus used his power to destroy, to annihilate something. It also is the only miracle which was of no benefit to anyone. All others were done for men. The Lord multiplied bread, healed diseases, raised the dead. This miracle was as if in conflict with our Master’s disposition, who to the suggestion of destroying the wicked, answered back to his disciples: “Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of”. (Luke 9:55). All these facts imply an exceptional character of that miracle and its symbolic meaning. But to understand this symbolism, the miracle must be considered in the light of our Lord’s parable of the barren fig tree.
“A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none. Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground? And he answering said unto him: let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it and dung it. And if it shall bear fruit, well and if not then after that thou shalt cut it down.” (Luke 13:6-9)
The parable was preceded by his words: “Except ye repent ye shall likewise perish”. The explanation of this parable was obvious to the listeners. The owner of the vineyard is the God of Israel (Isa 5:7). The dresser is the Messiah, who, three years into his mission, would, through his digging and fertilizing, make the nation bring fruit unto God. At the time of the utterance of this parable, the fate of this nation was still not decided. Our Lord still had half a year of his dressing work before him. It seems that the cursing of the fig tree is as if it is the finishing of the unfinished parable.
After his triumphant entry into Jerusalem, the end of our Lord’s mission was fast approaching. Returning from Bethany, the Master approached the fig tree and looked for fruit in it. Having found none, he passed this sentence on the tree: “Let no fruit grow on thee henceforth for ever” (Matt. 21:19). Some interpret this event literally, as a curse on a tree which had no fruit. But such an interpretation is in conflict with a note made by the author of the Gospel of Mark, who emphasizes that “the time for figs was not yet” (Mark 11:13). Both our Lord and his disciples realized that in that season, in the early spring, no figs could ever be found on a fig tree. The lesson was manifest: his seeking the fruit had a symbolic meaning, it was a living parable, so often used by the prophets. Jesus wanted to finish the story of the barren fig tree which he had told earlier. After three and a half years of the dressing work was complete, he wanted to show that the antitypical fig tree brought no fruit. The fate of the tree was decided. On the next day it withered.
The fig tree was used as a picture of Israel not without a cause. As early as in the Old Testament, figs were identified with the nation of Israel by the prophets. Hosea wrote: ‘I found Israel like grapes in the wilderness, I saw your fathers as the first ripe in the fig tree in her first time” (Hosea 9:10). Jeremiah received the vision of two baskets of figs, which represented Israel: “Like these good figs, so will I acknowledge them that are carried away captive of Judah” (Jer. 24:5).
How soon was Christ’s prophecy fulfilled about the withering of the symbolic fig tree to be fulfilled?. In the year 70 A.D. the temple was destroyed. No longer was there a place to offer sacrifices, the opportunity to serve the Lord according to the precepts of the Law thus ended. Jerusalem fell into ruin, and the whole nation was expelled from their own land and dispersed throughout the world. Speaking about the time of his Kingdom approaching, Christ again turns his disciples’ attention to the fig tree. “Now learn a parable of the fig tree: When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth his leaves, ye know that summer is nigh. So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the door”. (Matt. 24:32, 33)
It should be observed that this parable was uttered on the same day when the barren fig tree was cursed. Therefore it would be difficult to assume that when Christ told them to watch for signs taking place on that very kind of a tree, it was merely accidental. These two events constitute one whole. As a result of the rejection of the Messiah on the part of the Jews, during his first advent, God’s favor was turned away from them, as shown in the withered tree. Whereas, the softening of the branches and the bringing forth of leaves represents the return of favor to this nation during the time of the establishment of the Kingdom in Christ’s second advent. Let us, then, carefully observe this symbolic fig tree.
Wahu Mathenge:An African Queen
Wahu Mathenge (Rosemary Wahu Kagwi )
- Wahu Mathenge. Best female artist MTV Africa Music Awards.
While she was a student at Precious Blood Secondary School, in Riruta, she wrote her first song called ‘Showers of Blessings’ (with a friend) as a tribute to God for the national academic success that the school enjoyed. The song is still part of the schools hymnal collection.She worked in the entertainment industry and used the money to pursue her university education at the University of Nairobi, studying for a Bachelors degree in Mathematics.Her first song ‘Niangalie’ drew the attention of renowned CBN presenter Victor Oladokhun, who aired it on his ‘Turning Point’ program. Her second song ‘Esha’ was a fusion of English Swahili and Kikuyu based on a traditional Kikuyu folk song, and inspired by the late Brenda Fassie. She also came out with ‘Liar’, ‘Kibowow’ and ‘Sitishiki’. She launched an album, Liar, in 2004.In 2004, she married longtime boyfriend David Mathenge (popularly known as Nameless) who was also on the Ogopa DJ’s label. They have one child, a daughter who was born in 2006. Wahu also acted in a leading role in the popular television show, Tazama on KTN.
In 2007 She released some singles including Mambo bado, Running low, The little things you do, and Sweet love.
*Sweet Love has been Wahu’s biggest song. It has received two nominations — the British Music of Black Origin Awards and Kora Awards.
Wahu , African & Kikuyu Queen
Provocateur Exposed:2007 Kenyan Election
When Paul Collier, professor of economics at Oxford, publishes something, it invariably contains some very important ideas. I realised this when I first encountered his paper about civil war and insurgency, “Greed and Grievance”. Collier co-wrote it when head of research at the World Bank, where he developed a rare ability to merge his deep understanding of economics with sober analyses of a rapidly changing political landscape. Put simply, in “Greed and Grievance” he argued that armed rebellion had more to do with access to financial resources than with any deep commitment to ideology.
mong political scientists that particular paper was greeted by murmurs of approval and harrumphing in equal measure. Here was an economist treading on the keenly defended turf of political wonks, and many took umbrage. A few wonks, however, recognised the valuable contribution Collier’s research had to make to the struggle against poverty and political violence.I think some of the harrumphing that followed the publication of that paper might also be ascribed to Collier’s liberal use of baffling mathematical formulae to prove his point. I confess I had to skip a raft of calculus in his earlier work. But I am pleased to report that since he started writing bestselling books, he has dumped the equations in favour of clear prose.
This strategy paid real dividends just under two years ago when he published The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries are Failing and What Can be Done About It, a fresh and inventive look at chronic underdevelopment, its victims and its winners (the latter being few in number but abnormally powerful). The book was showered with praise as it offered many cogent explanations for the persistence of grinding poverty in a world which was until last September indecently rich. Wars, Guns & Votes carries on from where The Bottom Billion left off.
Apart from the fact that its author is not American, Collier’s work is distinguished from the books of Tom Friedman, Bob Kagan, Fareed Zakaria and several other gurus of globalisation in that it is based on extremely thorough empirical research. This puts him in the same camp as real heavyweights such as the Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz. When Collier asserts that the bottom billion are much more prone to insurgency and civil war than the rest of the world, you can be confident this is not observational anecdote. The chances are that he and his indefatigable team of student minions will have exhaustively examined the data from every civil war since the dawn of time to back his thesis.
This aspect of Collier’s books is powerful, making it hard to refute many of his conclusions, some of which are disturbing, iconoclastic or both. He is destined to upset a lot of people when he asserts at the outset that democracy is bad news for the countries of the bottom billion – it usually ends in tears, not to mention grand larceny, murder and even genocide. On closer examination, he argues that elections alone do not amount to a strong democracy. Without institutions that promote accountability, they are too easily exploited by cynical, greedy elites.
Unfortunately, the “kumbaya” politics of the 1990s held that voting was an end in itself. Western institutions became involved in an electoral circus which often absorbed huge sums. Self-selecting election “monitors” from America and Europe would travel to Armenia one week and the Ivory Coast the next to pass judgment on the validity of the process. By contrast, there was little or no investment in dealing with the consequences of the elections or building the institutions essential to ensuring that the resulting government did not abuse its power. In the former Yugoslavia, unscrupulous populists exploited the plebiscitary democracy in 1990 and 1991 to rip the place apart. And Collier saw this repeated in many countries in Africa, the continent where the great majority of the bottom billion states are found.
It is a brave scholar who asserts that democracy equals bloodshed, but Collier is not afraid of going against the grain. He gives very short shrift to the fashionable cause of self-determination or special status for minorities espoused by the Kosovo Albanians, the Luo in Kenya or the rebels in Darfur. He casts Raila Odinga, the Kenyan prime minister, and not President Kibaki as the provocateur in the country’s last elections (in contrast to most foreign media covering the story).But he mounts a very heartening defence of peace-keeping operations which, using hard facts, he is able to prove unambiguously are extremely good value for money. He then comes close to creating what on the surface looks like a surefire formula for stabilising the countries of the bottom billion, enabling them to begin economic development in earnest.
And this is where the problems arise with his thesis. He proposes a reduction of sales in weapons to governments and rebels in these areas – so far so good, although he skips over the issue of how to police such a regime a little too lightly. It is in his central assertion, however – that fragile democracies in Africa must be allowed to flower under the military guarantee of the United States, France and Britain – that the optimism of his economic modelling clouds the reality of global geopolitics. The “command centre” that the Americans are trying to establish in West Africa is motivated by a need to secure oil supplies, not by an altruistic project to nurture democracy. And his faith in the military strategies of the French in West Africa overlooks much of Paris’s cynical manoeuvring in the region (including the promotion of arms sales and mineral exploitation).
One might argue that British, French and American motives may change; however, after Iraq, Rwanda and Afghanistan (to name but three), the political and moral space for intervention is extremely limited. But it is to Collier’s great credit that he has really opened up a debate that we need to conduct with some urgency. Even as we dither about military strategies and aid for West Africa, for example, the entire region is being captured by Colombian and Venezuelan cartels who are turning Guinea-Bissau, Sierra Leone, Liberia and even Senegal and Ghana into the new Mexico. In economic terms, even after the crash, the world still has more than enough money to raise the bottom billion out of the swamp they are forced to inhabit. As in so many challenges we face, it is political vision and political will that is lacking.
By Misha Glenny
Appeasement Of Anti-Kikuyus Will Never Work
“You may gain temporary appeasement by a policy of concession to violence,but you do not gain lasting peace that way”.Anthony Eden
DN .The entire top ODM leadership on Thursday skipped the burial of victims of the arson attack on a church in the Rift Valley district of Eldoret during the post-election violence which had been billed as a reconciliation gesture between different communitiesPrime Minister Raila Odinga, deputy Prime Minister Musalia Mudavadi, Agriculture minister William Ruto, ODM national chairman Henry Kosgey and local MP Peris Simam, all failed to show up at the ceremony presided over by President Kibaki. The arson of the Eldoret church was one of the most brutal attacks of the post-election violence which followed the declaration of the 2007 presidential election.
Standard -Burned Kenya Assembly of God Church burials the Orange Democratic Movement boycotted on Thursday, have scoured old wounds in the Grand Coalition.The internment boycotted by Kalenjin leaders has renewed the cat and mouse games between President Kibaki’s Party of National Unity and Prime Minister Raila Odinga’s Orange Democratic Movement. The groundswell stands out in the Rift Valley – ODM’s stronghold and the hotspot of post-election chaos – where local MPs stayed out of the State burial organised for 36 victims of the bloodletting.Fourteen of those buried in the church compound died in the fire that destroyed the shrine. The other 22 bodies were collected around the area and were not identified or claimed.President Kibaki’s presence at the Kiambaa burial, the first for victims of post-election violence, PNU’s proposal to split Rift Valley Province, plans for a monument at the church, which Kalenjin leaders insist was not destroyed by their youth, and the decision to bring in bodies collected elsewhere, triggered the ODM boycott.Those who did not attend, leaving the burial to members of one community, Government officials and PNU leaders, say they did not want to be accused of displaying double-standards because they were not at the burial of the party youths killed in the violence that was at its worst in January and February, last year.
Others claimed there was favouritism for a section of the Internally Displaced Persons and by attending the burial it would seem they would be endorsing this, courting a political backlash among their communities.At least one MP, speaking in confidence because of the sensitivity of the matter, claimed they would not be part of Kiambaa burials because of the feeling it was hyped to cast their party as the aggressor and PNU the victim.”Why did they bury them in the church? We have public cemeteries. Why bring in bodies that had nothing to do with the church fire? Why build a monument if we are pursuing healing? Should we also erect monuments everywhere our children were killed as a perpetual reminder of what happened?” asked an ODM MP.
*Eldoret Church Suspects Set Free
kiambaa- RIP
Do not gloat over me, my enemy! Though I have fallen, I will rise. Though I sit in darkness, the LORD will be my light.
Devolution
As Kenyans continue to debate the 4th item of the national peacemaking agenda – how to resolve historical injustices of the past – we continue to ponder if the devolution of political and economic power to the lowest administrative levels could offer a lasting solution to the exclusion of marginalised communities. The national peacemaking agenda was drawn up to prevent the recurrence of the post-electoral violence that rocked Kenya earlier this year. In countries where there is constant contestation for state power between the government and the people, genuine devolution of power has in many instances provided a panacea for resolving the conflict. In addition, devolution, as a foundation of good governance has become a reality of global norms and practices.
In any part of the world where democratisation is not in tandem with devolved governance, democracy can only be synonymous with legitimising the elites’ accession to power.Many examples can be cited where perfect harmony between democratisation and devolution has been registered. In the United States, Germany, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Switzerland among others, devolution has been the driving force of social harmony and an engine for development. In Africa, despite the numerous ethnic communities with competing political and economic interests, South Africa, Rwanda and Uganda, among others, have appreciably implemented modern devolved systems of governance with ease. In all of these instances, positive aspects of ethnicity and pragmatic approaches to decentralisation have been recognised to contribute to stability and enhance human development.
In Kenya, the fundamental flaws in the devolution debate from those opposing devolved government is essentially two-fold: firstly, anti-devolution groups have deliberately concentrated on the labels of majimbo (Swahili for federalism) rather than the content, because of too much focus on the narrow ethnic interests rather than the interests of the broad masses of Kenyan society. Secondly, the anti-devolution crusaders have not taken cognisance of the fact that the current system of provincial administration was not subjected to the popular mandate but rather, was imposed on Kenyans undemocratically. By maintaining the adopted current centralised form of governance, the people of Kenya abdicated important responsibility to the government. The consequence was a glaring gap in governance, whose remedial measure is long overdue. When the current system of provincial administration was crafted, the overriding interests were those of the ruling elites, with the interests of the people sacrificed in lieu of elites’ control of state power through a tightly controlled administrative structure.
Pragmatic criteria of socio-economic development and vulnerability of the poor and marginalised were never issues for consideration. For instance, it defies logic when one looks at the rationale used to create the Eastern province which stretches all the way from Ethiopia to near the Tanzanian border with its provincial headquarters in Embu, far off from other key areas such as Dasnatch and El Molo -about 800 km away. Likewise the Rift Valley province was made to stretch all the way from Sudan to the Tanzanian border, with the headquarters in Nakuru, about 1000 km away from Toposa and Dongiro in Elemi Triangle. Poor road infrastructure makes it impossible to connect the public in these vast areas.
The fallacy of the current system of provincial administration is that the administrative officials lack even the basic knowledge of the communities they purport to serve. An example from the pastoral and arid areas of Kenya gives a clear example of why this current system bears high risks to human security. First, most of the administrators are transferred to this harsh environment for disciplinary reasons. This is aggravated further by the standing order and code of ethics of the provincial administration, which bars the local community from participating in the institution charged with local security such as the District Security Committee (DSC) and the Provincial Security Committee (PSC). The locals are prevented from participating in the security meetings ostensibly as a measure to protect the ‘government’s secret’. Further, given the lack of accountability and transparency, these local administrators have often been accused of bias, and at best, incompetence in appreciating local conditions.
Mt Kenya region
The very nature and structure of governance through the provincial administration is a semblance of colonial institutions. In a number of cases, local elders have drawn parallels between the districts and provincial administrators and the British colonial administrators. It is therefore very clear that the entire governance system in Kenya as currently constituted, has limited the opportunities and impacted on lives, livelihood and human security of the people. In these arid and peripheral zones, devolved governance is inter-alia anticipated to offer a final solution to the myriad of problems that have witnessed intractable conflicts and perennial instability and displacement. And as such, the call for the devolution of power creates hope and aspiration for the disenfranchised groups, which will eventually redress the neglect and unlock human potential.
Kenya missed an important juncture to mitigate the shortcoming in governance during the advent of the multi-party political system. Both the proponent of political reforms and the regime did not embrace democracy comprehensively, thereby equating electioneering to democracy. Far away from Nairobi, many communities in Kenya often equate the period of general election as the ‘season of democracy’. This is because democracy in this part of the world is equated to a single event in five years whose principles and practice ends with the general election. And what is more disturbing is the perception about the provincial administration as an institution of government that implements democracy through tight administrative controls.
Kenyans have shown great enthusiasm towards greater participation in the government as reflected by the great debate at the Bomas. The spirit at the Bomas clearly indicated that the people of Kenya can articulate their problems and offer practical solutions. What crystallised out of the constitutional review process was the need to design a system that allows for a fine balance of ‘self rule’ at local level as well as ‘shared rule’ at national level. Through this approach, government powers are not only shared horizontally between executive, legislative, and judiciary; but also vertically between various levels of government. This will ultimately guide the spirit of Kenya as a common homeland, and attain the objective of combining unity and diversity.
In this age of globalisation, therefore, where states have been busy pursuing international and regional interests, proactive decentralisation is actively becoming a norm. The move towards devolved governance is another juncture in Kenya’s political development whose sober approach will contribute to the great historical success. Whereas four decades of unresponsive governance is a lost opportunity in terms of development, the time is ripe for Kenyans to grapple with the unfinished business of allowing the people to choose a popular mode of governance regardless of the label.
* by Mohamed A Guyo, ISS Research Associate and Dr Annie Barbara Chikwanha, AHSI, ISS Nairobi
Eldoret church massacre suspects freed
Kenya’s high court on Thursday threw out the case against four men over tribal violence in which at least 33 people were burnt alive in a church during last year’s post-election chaos.The ruling brought to a close the only case in which citizens have been charged with murder in connection with the violence that left around 1,500 people dead and hundreds of thousands displaced.At least 33 civilians, including women and children, died when marauding militias set fire to the Kenya Assemblies of God church in the northern city of Eldoret, where they were sheltering from the clashes.The deaths took place on 1 January, 2008, and four suspects were charged two months later but Justice David Maraga said he had to drop the case, citing lack of evidence and shoddy police investigations.
“I find that the prosecution (has) failed to prove the burden of the case against the accused persons and thereby acquit them of all the charges and order that they be set free,” he said.”This was obviously a well planned and orchestrated attack and as such I was amazed to find no whiff of common intention on the part of the accused or the planning that went into the attack,” he said.”The events preceding the commission of this offence cannot have eluded the police as clouds for the gathering storm were there for all to see,” he said, reading a 45-page ruling.”I am not a politician but I am only a judge and a Kenyan who is just as outraged at the casual manner in which we are handling serious issues like insecurity in this country and by the attitude of our police force in the face of serious crime,” Maraga added.
Eldoret is in the Rift Valley of Kenya, which saw the worst tribal violence following the dispute that erupted when irregularities in the December 2007 presidential poll prompted accusations that then opposition leader Raila Odinga was robbed of victory by incumbent President Mwai Kibaki.Three days after the election, on December 30, hundreds of civilians were driven from their homes by militias, according to evidence presented in court.Some who had found refuge in the church were attacked by more than 1,000 men, who had painted their faces with chalk and were armed with bows and arrows, machetes, clubs and other weapons.The mob lit up mattresses inside the church and then blocked the door to prevent the displaced from escaping the fire. The State dropped incitement charges against Kibor
Fidel Odinga:My life in Crime
So you are probably waking up to news that Prime Minister Raila Odinga’s name has been sucked into the controversy over a Sh3.6 billion maize scam and a parliamentary committee has recommended that his son, associates and personal assistant be investigated over the deal.
More than 50 percent of all crimes are committed by re-offenders, and 40 percent to 60 percent of parolees return to prison. In Texas for instance 70% of the offenders become repeat offenders. According to a 1994 study by the U.S. Department of Justice, more than two-thirds of released prisoners were arrested within three years, with more than half of those returning to prison.
So did Fidel have a hand in the maize scandal?Thats the question we all want to know.Someone somewhere once said innocent until proven guilty.But then again statistics don’t Lie. Fidel is a convicted criminal here in the United states.The man even had a probation officer.
* In Maryland, laws exist to ensure that state government is open and that the public has access to appropriate records and information in its possession. At the same time, both state and federal laws provide exceptions that serve various needs, including the privacy of individuals. While much information is made available to the public through this site, some information may be restricted or require registration to obtain. All of the information collected at this site becomes a public record that may be subject to inspection and copying by members of the public, unless an exemption in law exists.‘Save Darfur’ Movement:The pornography of western racism & deceit
The international community is presently engaged in a high-stakes game of poker with the government of Sudan. At stake is the legitimacy of the International Criminal Court, the permanent sitting tribunal whose purpose is to punish those that commit the worst crimes against humanity. Also hanging in the balance are the lives of 2.5 million Darfurian refugees who have been driven from their homes by a scorched earth counter-insurgency campaign launched by the Sudanese government in response to rebel attacks in the region in 2003.Both sides in this international stand-off have already demonstrated a willingness to sacrifice those lives for the sake of the principles they support. The Sudanese government has thrown out 13 international aid groups who provide the food and medicine necessary to sustain those refugees, under the pretext that they gathered evidence for the ICC against Sudan’s president, Omar al Bashir. The ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo went ahead with the indictment in full knowledge that this was the likely consequence. He claims to be acting in the interest of justice alone, without reference to the political or humanitarian situation – and no one disputes that by arming and abetting mounted Arab proxies (later dubbed “devils on horseback” in the press) to put down a rebellion with indiscriminate violence against civilians, al Bashir violated the spirit and letter of international law (as have many rulers before him). We have a struggle for primacy between the two principles – national sovereignty and international law – that seems likely to define global politics for the rest of this century.
Providing an accurate account of these principles, and the intricate politics in which they are embedded, involves wading through self-serving and overwrought claims from both sides while weighing two genuine and incommensurable claims to legitimacy. In his new book, Saviors and Survivors: Darfur, Politics and the War on Terror, the distinguished Africa scholar Mahmood Mamdani does his readers the considerable service of laying waste to many of the dangerous and self-serving illusions of one side of this argument. But he erects a mirror edifice of illusions in its place; getting the story straight requires disentangling the true from the misleading in Mamdani’s account.On one side, there are the claims of universal justice that the ICC purports to represent. The ICC is the institutional face of a growing movement seeking to make real the promise of “Never Again” inscribed into the Convention on Genocide of 1948. The ICC indictment of al Bashir was the first against a sitting head of state, and it was hailed in editorial pages across America as a great progressive advance for global justice. Even those who worried about the consequences of the indictment still placed hope in its deterrent value. The goal was to worry the minds of subsequent heads of state tempted to use mass rape and murder as a counter-insurgency tactic.
Taken on its own terms, in narrow isolation, this is a worthy and unassailable mission. But nothing exists in narrow isolation, least of all moral purity and universal justice. Such claims exist in a real world of actual politics amid complicated histories, which many Darfur activists have made it their business to elide – portraying the conflict in Darfur as what Mamdani dubs “a morality tale unfolding in a world populated by villains and victims who never trade places and so can always and easily be told apart”.On the other side are the rights of sovereign governments to govern themselves without outside interference, which the Sudanese government and the Arab nations that have rallied to its side purport to defend. Sovereignty has been, since the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, the currency of the international system, and, as Mamdani reminds us, a privilege hard-won by postcolonial states only recently.
In the wake of the American misadventure in Iraq, the weird confluence of moralistic rhetoric and bellicose policy that characterised Bush’s foreign policy, the complicity of so many ostensibly liberal hawks caught up in the Iraq War fervour, and a history of one-sided enforcement of humanitarian rules, it should surprise no one that the leaders and intellectuals of formerly colonised states are wary of the claims to universal justice emanating from what Mamdani dubs the “new humanitarian order”. At this week’s Arab Summit in Doha, Arab leaders, many of them signatories to the ICC, (which the United States has refused to sign) lined up in unanimous support of al Bashir.
The human rights lobby views this emphasis on sovereignty as the first and last resort of butchers who employ anti-colonialist rhetoric to defend their crimes. Weary of the grubby compromises of diplomats and corporations willing to do business with tyrants and criminals, one faction of the human rights community calls for armed western intervention to defend helpless victims of state violence everywhere. The Save Darfur movement, an aggressive and media-savvy coalition “whose scale recalls the anti-war movement of the late 1960s and 1970s”, rose up with the intention to turn Darfur into a test case for western action to halt what it called a genocide in progress.
Mamdani devotes the first section of his book to assailing the credibility of Save Darfur. He accuses them of inflating the scale of the killing, obfuscating the reality of a “civil war” and “cycle of insurgency and counter-insurgency” that it called genocide, bombarding viewers and readers with “a pornography of violence” that removed the conflict from its political context, sustaining an impression of ongoing genocide long after the claim was plausible, portraying the conflict in racialised terms as a genocide conducted by Arabs against Africans and ceaselessly advocating for hard-line policies more likely to harm than to the help the victims they intended to save. On each of these counts, Mamdani assembles a more or less devastating case. Save Darfur publicised a figure for the number of deaths – 400,000 – that was twice as high as reliable estimates (Mamdani cites a study commissioned by the US Government Accountablity Office to this effect) and escalated its rhetoric at precisely the moment – January 2005 – when the scale of killing fell dramatically. Save Darfur have continued to clamour for aggressive action despite a humanitarian crisis that was largely stabilised due to the cooperation of the Sudanese government with aid agencies that had reduced the mortality rate to between 100 and 200 month in Darfur – “below emergency levels”, according to World Health Organisation.
Most important for Mamdani’s purpose, though, is the Save Darfur Coalition’s emphasis on the race of the perpetrators and victims: “The central claim is that perpetrators and victims in Darfur belong to two different racial groups, Arab and African and that the Arab perpetrator is evil.” Mamdani is not content to say, as he does, that Save Darfur are committed to policies that will do harm. He intends to demonstrate that they are part of a more insidious agenda written into the War on Terror. To strip Darfur of its politics serves a political project of its own, and Mamdani makes it his mission to reveal its workings – what he sees as the foundation of a post-Cold War order in which American clients and proxies act with impunity while rogue states are subject to violent discipline at the hands of the international community, with America at its head. It is a politics notable for denying that it is a politics at all and, as Mamdani narrates it, one that portends a bleak future for the inhabitants of the developing world.
In the long historical section that makes up the centre of the book, Mamdani traces the centuries-long intermingling of Arab and African identities in Darfur, and their reciprocal permeability. He also shows how these identities were politicised under the “indirect” rule practised by British colonial administrators that pursued a policy of “re-tribalisation” of the various groups that shared Darfur by assigning homelands to certain groups and denying them to others.
This backdrop allows Mamdani, in his third and final section, to return to the question with which the book opens. Since Americans are inclined to regard Africa, to the extent that they regard it at all, as a site of “meaningless anarchy – in which men, sometimes women, and increasingly, children, fight without aim or memory,” why has there been “a global publicity boom around the carnage in Darfur”?
The worst conflict since the Second World War, with a death toll of 3.9 million between 1998 and 2004, raged in the Democratic Republic of the Congo; the figure of “excess deaths” caused by the Iraq war likely outstrip the same numbers in Darfur. Yet only Darfur, a conflict in a remote and impoverished region without oil or other significant exportable resources has generated a lavishly funded advocacy organisation. For Mamdani, the answer is embedded in the definition of genocide itself. “Only when extreme violence targets for annihilation a civilian population that is marked off as different ‘on grounds of race, ethnicity, or religion’ is that violence termed genocide,” Mamdani observes:
“Given that colonialism shaped the very nature of modern ‘indirect rule’ and administrative power along ‘tribal’ (or ethnic) lines it is not surprising that both the exercise of power and responses to it tend to take ‘tribal’ forms in these newly independent states. From this point of view, there is little to distinguish mass violence unleashed against civilians in Congo, Northern Uganda, Mozambique, Angola, Darfur, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Ivory Coast, and so on. Which one is named ‘genocide’ and which one is not? Most important, who decides?”
The new humanitarian order is, as Mamdani describes it, “a bifurcated system whereby state sovereignty obtains in large parts of the world but is suspended in more and more countries in Africa and the Middle East,” in which subjects exchange their political rights as citizens of sovereign states for the “human” rights possessed by “wards in an open-ended international rescue operation” in a humanitarian “system of trusteeship” administered by an international community that lacks either accountability or responsibility. The world he describes he looks a lot like the world as the Palestinians under the jurisdiction of UNRWA see it, and the vision Mamdani projects of an Africa delivered piecemeal to the good intentions of the international community is a stark one.
A problem with this claim, however, is that the record of American policy in Sudan challenges it. Indeed, proponents of humanitarian intervention in Darfur make a diametrically opposite charge against the American government – that it has subordinated its interest in the cause of human rights to its desire to maintain relations with Sudanese intelligence to aid the War on Terror. Mamdani’s argument also passes over the American response to Sudan’s much longer, more brutal and more complex civil war, a two-decade conflict pitting Christians and animists from the south of the country against the Arab Islamist cabal to the north that controlled the state and the military.It was here that al Bashir pioneered the technique of using proxy war conducted by mounted Arab warriors. And it was this conflict that first aroused activist concern among the evangelical Christian movement at the base of George W Bush’s electoral coalition.
Islamists in Sudan were waging a brutal war against the Christian coreligionists of the single most belligerent electoral constituency in American politics. If the goal of American policy was, as Mamdani alleges, to “slice Africa by demonising one group of Africans, African Arabs”, then surely the Sudanese Civil War was the perfect opportunity to carry out this agenda. But the Bush administration instead expended considerable diplomatic resources cajoling the North and the South to make peace in a negotiated settlement that Mamdani himself acknowledges as Bush’s only foreign policy accomplishment.While there were plenty of hardline advocates for the fantasy of regime change in Sudan, the United States remained effectively committed to the stability of the Bashir regime, as the only guarantor of the peace deal it had signed, through the end of the Bush Administration.And so, when Mamdani describes the “the responsibility to protect” as “a slogan that masks a big power agenda to recolonise Africa”, he is mistaking the fantasies of American activists for the policies of their government. He is also asserting the existence of a hidden nefarious agenda where none exists, and providing a false clarity that is the merely the obverse of the good-and-evil dichotomy of the War on Terror and the humanitarian order that he assails.
This overreaching damages the credibility of Mamdani’s powerful and incisive criticism of the international justice movement. So much of what Mamdani argues is true, and so much of it cuts against the grain of the usual coverage of Darfur in ways that are essential for the broader public to understand. And neither he, nor the rest of us, can afford to squander the opportunity to set the record straight
Maina Kiai,Muite autophobia Xtreme
* A response to Maina Kiai and Paul Muite Opinion – “Ethnic ‘entitlement’ does not bode well for Kenya and its communities ” Published by the Daily Nation
Maina Kiai A Hater
Did you ever notice that there are no Kalenjin going around the world saying, or writing about, how awful Kalenjins have been? Given that the Kalenjin have unleashed three tribal wars and perfected patented industrialized genocide against the Kikuyu, why has there been no Kalenjin Maina Kiai ?
Are there any Luos writing books about the absence of Luo soul-searching or expressions of sorrow over their torture and murder of Kikuyus in Kibera ? Has anyone ever encountered any Luo or Kalenjin remorse or self-hate?
The answer, of course, is no. In fact, among all the world’s peoples, only Kikuyus produce individuals who have greater sympathy for those who hate their people than for those who love it. Some in this small urban kikuyu community loathe everything Kikuyu (they love their own agenda and their own vision of what Kenya could be over their own people ) and have contempt for the average Kikuyu. That is why most of them have such admiration for William Ruto and ODM
There are no comparable self-haters in any other country, This newly minted young Kikuyu Intellectuals (sic) are often the leaders in anti-Kikuyu kamukunji(s) ,demonstrations and movements. The Kiai’s and Binyavanga’s devote much of their lives to trying to harm our community and expressing deep hatred of Gikuyu traditions.This self-loathing on their part is all the more remarkable when you consider that those who support and fund them strongly affirm their own cultural and ethnic identities. For example, while Kiai and Muite ceaselessly attack their own community ,ODM ceaselessly defends its own communities even in the face of serious catastrophic environmental negligence as shown by the issue of the Mau.
How, then, to explain this anomaly of new Kikuyu self-loathing? I offer one explanation.Many of the haters are political rejects,political wanna be’s driven by anger and selfish ambition .Anger that is similar to adolescent anger at a parent who claims very high ideals and turns out to be slightly flawed. Many of the haters are angry at Kikuyu’s for being ‘imperfect’ in accepting their values (ODM Values)and therefore disappointing them.There may be other explanations. But what is certain is that Kikuyu self-hatred is a unique phenomena that plays a particularly destructive role as designed by those who fund it .It gives fodder to those who are for the destruction of our community.What better way to promote anti Kikuyu propaganda than to have one of them spew it in the guise of speaking the truth .
Yes, we may agree with parts of your opinion that the older generation of Kikuyu leadership has failed.Failed to deal with poverty that is destroying us.Even worse is that they failed to protect the defenseless in the Rift Valley and in IDP camps , but the solution Mr Kiai is not to side with those our leaders have failed to protect us from by promoting their propaganda and agenda.
We can move on as younger Kikuyus without having to bow down to these forces or their stale ideas.
Joe Ndungu
Mungiki marked for death
Gitau Njuguna, Paul Muite
At least 24 people have been stoned or hacked to death in central Kenya during overnight fighting between vigilante groups and an outlawed criminal sect.The clashes in Karatina began when the vigilante groups armed with machetes, axes and clubs set upon members of the feared Mungiki gang, which extorts money from homeowners, taxi operators and businesspeople in many Kenyan towns. Gang members later regrouped and fought back but most of the dead were alleged Mungiki members.
“So far, investigators have confirmed that 24 people have been killed and three people have been injured,” police said.Thirty-seven people were arrestesd during the violence, which follows more than a week of vigilante action in the area, about 100 miles north of the capital, Nairobi. More than a dozen Mungiki members were reported to have been lynched by the public before last night’s fighting.The clashes are indicative of a growing sense of lawlessness in Kenya, with police seemingly unable to protect the public and deal effectively with criminal threats.
“Live by the sword, die by the sword”
Henry Muoria-Self & Community.(1914-1997)
Henry Muoria (1914-1997).
Muoria was an active journalist, a friend and press secretary of Kenya’s future president Jomo Kenyatta and, from 1945 to 1952, the editor of a nationalist newspaper Mumenyereri, written in Gikuyu, one of Kenya’s major languages. In October 1952, when the British declared the Emergency in Kenya in order to quell the Mau Mau rebellion, Muoria was visiting London. He stayed there for the rest of his life, but continued pursuing his writing career. He finished more than ten full-length autobiographical, philosophical and political manuscripts, but not one was published. East African Educational Publishers in Nairobi brought out his I, the Gikuyu and the White Fury in 1994. This book and his unpublished autobiography from 1982, The British and My Kikuyu Tribe, are used in discussing Muoria’s debt to his ethnic community, the Gikuyu, his successful attempts to contribute to the creation of a nationalist public sphere in colonial Kenya, and his authorship in exile. The declaration of the Emergency put a stop to Muoria’s hopes for the recognition of his work, based as it was on a desired continuum between self, community and nation.
For several years during Britain’s late colonialism, from 1946 onwards, administrators in Kenya were in a panic over how to control the African press of the colony. African and Asian businessmen, politicians, editors and journalists had managed to create a public realm in which members of the various colonised communities debated pressing problems of everyday life, as well as the larger political questions of colonialism, racism, self-determination and independence. Colonial information officers asked advice from their colleagues in other British territories in East and West Africa on what measures might be taken to regulate and suppress the local press, and urged on the Colonial Office in London the need for sharper instruments than those already available. Samples of ‘near-seditious’ newspaper pieces, translated into English from the various Kenyan languages, were sent to London. 
This activity was an acceleration of ongoing endeavours within Kenya. The non-European press had been under surveillance for as long as it had existed. Officials had kept a worried eye on Muigwithania, the organ of the Kikuyu Central Association (KCA) from its inception in 1926. It was edited for a period by Kenya’s future president, Jomo Kenyatta. In a letter, the Governor, Sir Edward Grigg, warned the Secretary of State for the Colonies in London that the political tone of the newspaper gave grounds for worry. In particular laments over the injustices the Kenyan people had suffered under colonialism, couched in Old Testament idiom, might have serious consequences: “There is a danger that this emotional and semi-religious propaganda may spread very rapidly among excitable and ignorant natives, and it is clearly desirable that means should be devised to protect the natives themselves … from such an insidious menace” (Grigg 1926).
The authorities closed down Muigwithania in 1940, along with the KCA. Four years later the self-taught journalist and intellectual Henry Muoria launched its successor, Mumenyereri (The Guardian). He addressed it to the same community that had constituted Muigwithania’s readership–a community that was being created by access to reading matter in their own language, among other influences (Lonsdale 1996). The first issue of the paper was in Gikuyu and English, but those following were restricted to Gikuyu in order to use all the available space for the enlightenment of the Gikuyu community who did not have a great deal of writing available in their own language (Muoria 1982:17).
Henry Muoria was born in 1914 in Kiambu in Kenya’s Central Province (Berman & Lonsdale 1992:414-416, Pugliese 2003, Frederiksen 2006). His parents were land-owning peasants and did not know how to read and write. The young Henry managed to get himself into an infant and primary school run by the Church Mission Society. His formal schooling lasted for seven years altogether. He taught himself enough English to be able to enter the Railway Training School of East African Railways, and became employed as a railway guard and later an assistant stationmaster. As a trainee he experienced the discrimination and brakes put on the development of business and enterprise for the African population that was characteristic of the policies of the colonial regime. Being African, he was paid less than his European and Asian colleagues both as a trainee and later as an employee. This experience contributed to his disgust with colonialism and racism and prompted him to join the existing African political organisations. As a young man he was a member of Kikuyu Central Association–an oppositional nationalist organisation based on the community that was most affected by British colonialism, the Gikuyu. The organisation was banned in 1940.
In his life and works Henry Muoria brought together many worlds–sometimes in ways that were paradoxical. He was born into a Kikuyu traditionalist family and made use of Christianity. He grew up in the countryside, but chose the city as his place of work. He invested in both urban and rural property and cultivated a large plot of land in his home area with the assistance of his wives. He was a wealthy man who came to know poverty in London. He loved his country, detested racism and was cosmopolitan in his outlook and knowledge of the world but was sometimes accused of being a Gikuyu chauvinist. He fought for independence, but independence did not need him after it had been consolidated.
The declaration of the Emergency in 1952 by the British constituted the caesura in Muoria’s personal life and in the social and political fortunes of Gikuyus and Africans in Kenya. The event disrupted the continuity between self, community and nation that Muoria devoted his working life to uphold. After October 1952, the colonial government sought to isolate the Gikuyu from the rest of African nationalist opposition by undermining the credibility of their leaders and spokesmen, and cancelling their access to public debate. Large numbers found themselves in protected villages and detention camps. All his life Muoria fought for a democratic space to be kept open to all communities in Kenya. He insisted by his example that Africans in Kenya should be partners in debate on self-determination and the end of colonialism. For a while he was successful.
In exile he kept writing. When he tried to keep up his claim and his efforts to educate a new public by the combined moves of turning inwards and documenting his own life, and turning outwards and documenting the shifting political debates and events in Kenya, he was not heard. He had great hopes following the publication in 1994 of his autobiography and a selection of his political essays from the 1940s and 1950s in I, the Gikuyu and the White Fury. The volume attracted some attention in Kenya where Muoria was by now recognised as an important figure in the nation’s history, but little internationally. His writings deserve to be better known.
by Bodil Folke Frederiksen published in Current Wrting, October 2006, Vol. 18 no 2.
Happy Easter
Video-British War Crimes Against The Kikuyu.-Transitional Justice
Dealing with widespread colonial human rights violations raises large practical difficulties. A country’s political balance may be delicate, and governments may be unwilling to pursue wide-ranging initiatives-or may be unable to do so without putting its own stability at risk.The many problems that flow from past abuses are often too complex to be solved by any one action. Judicial measures, including trials, are unlikely to suffice: If there are thousands or hundreds of thousands of victims and perpetrators, how can they all be dealt with fairly through the courts-especially in cases where those courts are weak ,corrupt and controlled by former colonial masters ?Even if courts were adequate to the task of prosecuting everyone who might deserve it, in order to reconstruct a damaged social fabric, other initiatives would be required.After two decades of practice, experience suggests that to be effective transitional justice should include several measures that complement one another. For no single measure is as effective on its own as when combined with the others
Stella Mwangi & Lauryn Hill:
Born in September 1986, Stella Mwangi aka STL realized her potential in music at the age of Six. Her interest in music resulted from racial discrimination she was subjected to following her family’s move from Kenya to Norway in 1991. Music made her feel good about herself and at the age of eight she could relate to Public Enemy, Queen Latifah, NWA and Salt & Pepper . In 1998, she worked with an African Youth group known as “The Rise” where they produced an album called “Maroon” which was released in Norway 2002 and had among its tracks the single ‘All about the Benjamin’. See details on www.theriseproject.com In 2005 STL and “The Rise” performed for Nelson Mandela while he was in Norway for an AIDS eradication campaign.
Since 2002, STL has been working with two production team; Rumblin Music and JayArr Music. Her Break into the African Hip Hop scene came in 2005 when she worked with a Senegalese Hip Hop group called Wagable in their Debut album, Senegal, produced by Rumblin Music. She was featured in two of their songs ‘Babylon’ and ‘Do it’ which topped the charts in Senegal and Gambia for several weeks. The album scooped the Best album of the year in Senegal for 2005. In Kenya STL has worked with top Hip Hop artists such as Mishelle, Abbas Kubaff ,Kantai and reggae artist Ousman. In 2006 she got five nominations in the Chaguo La teeniz Awards in Kenya. Then she had been in the Kenyan music scene for only three months. Though she did not win, it propelled her to win in the KISIMA Awards three months later for the Best new and Promising artist.
In December 2006, STL had a performance with MTV Alert in Nairobi, Kenya. She has curtain raised for International artists like Angelique Kidjo, Common, Talib Kweli, Slick Rick, Dead Prez and Public Enemy during their shows in Norway. Her songs, “Crazy”, “Feeling Love” and “Swing”, which she featured on produced by JayArr, was picked by the Position Music and Choice Tracks (based in L.A) as a soundtrack for the films Save the last dance 2, American pie 5, Redline and the series; CSI (New York) , LasVegas, Ghost whisperer and Army Wives. The summer of 2007, STL has had shows on festivals in Norway while working on her Debut album and is now out with the single ‘Take it back’ and it’s music video in Norway and in east Africa. STL is a hard working artist and is determined in realizing her dream as an international Hip Hop Artist.
Her debut album called ‘The Dreamer’ was released in 2008.
Read more on her website .http://www.stellamwangi.com/
