Will violence in Kenya end?

On December 27th, 2007, Kenya held presidential elections between current incumbent Mwai Kabaki and opposition leader Raila Odinga, who leads the Orange Democratic Movement Party. Although Kabaki barely won re-election as president, international observers have criticized abnormalities in the vote-count process. As a result, the Wall Street Journal of January 4, 2070 notes that both sides have accused the other of voter fraud and rigging the elections in their favor. Even worse, the Associated Press of December 30, 2007 reports that hundreds have died as violent protests destroyed homes and killed many innocent bystanders. In an attempt to quell the riots, diplomats from Africa, Europe and the United States have pushed for peace and negotiations between the two parties. Unfortunately, not even this will end the violence. Why?


First, it is important to examine how the riots in Kenya have affected its economy. The violence in Kenya has had a ripple effect that hit the Kenyan economy. The Business Week of January 4, 2008 notes that due to the riots in Kenya, the stock market in the country has plummeted and the country’s economy is in shambles. The New York Times of the same day further elaborates on this point by noting that “Before last week’s election, a head of cabbage in Mathare, an enormous slum, cost 15 shillings, or about 20 cents. After the much-debated results were announced on Sunday and the country exploded into chaos, cabbage prices doubled. By Thursday, as the police tear-gassed protesters in the streets and gangs from opposing tribes hacked one another to death… cabbage prices shot up to 100 shillings.” This deterioration of what was once heralded as a great model for other African economies caused more and more people to protest the poor conditions of the country, turning what used to be a purely political matter into a political and economic issue. As a result, many of the riots currently occurring in Kenya are also over the poor economic condition of the country, thereby creating a vicious cycle of violence that is self-perpetuating. Thus, the deterioration of Kenya’s economy is one reason why the violence in Kenya will not be ending anytime soon.

Second, the riots in Kenya have reopened racial wounds in the country. The Washington Post of January 4, 2008 notes that this election has stirred up “strong undercurrents of ethnic-based hatred that will not recede any time soon.” Since Kibaki is a Kikuyu, a tribe known as Kenya’s privileged tribe, and opposition leader Odinga is a Luo, a tribal ethnicity that has long felt marginalized, many Kenyans have felt subtle undercurrents of racial tension over this election. In fact, exit polls found that most voters voted based on ethnic associations. As a result of the current conflict over elections, a sub-group of violent acts in Kenya stem from racial tensions. As the Wall Street Journal of the same day reports, in one city, mobs swept through towns across the country, looting Kikuyu stores, attacking Kikuyus and in one case burning to death up to 50 Kikuyu women and children who were taking refuge in a church. Furthermore, tribal gangs have gained power in some regions in Kenya, making the issue of race an important factor for why the violence in Kenya is so strong. As a result, the violence in Kenya won’t end anytime soon because this political conflict has opened a racial conflict between the Kikuyus and Luos. Thus, even if the two parties agree to compromise, racial tensions between the two will still exist.

Finally, it is important to consider the how both parties have refused to compromise on this issue. The BBC of January 4, 2008 notes that while the two parties have finally met, they have not agreed to anything as of yet. The Financial Time of January 4, 2008 primarily attributes this inability to resolve the conflict to the current incumbent president’s refusal to compromise: “President Mwai Kibaki, the declared winner of a flawed election last Sunday, has adopted a hardline stance and blocked international intervention in the bloody stand-off.” However, this stance is not entirely true. The opposition Orange Democratic Movement Party is also to blame. As the BBC of January 4, 2008 notes, the European Union offered to conduct an independent investigation, a step that could lead to a recount of the ballots. However, the opposition party refused to take this offer responding that a recount would be pointless because the ballots would already be lost or forged. Then, the incumbent government stated it would allow a rerun if the court system demanded one. However, the opposition party stated that the courts were at the whims of the government and would not only take too long to make a decision, but would also be under the control of Kibaki. Therefore, it is apparent that neither side of the conflict is willing to compromise; since no compromise can be made, the violence will not be resolved.

Given the current situation in Kenya, it seems that this country, which was previously proclaimed the “most stable democracy in Africa,” will not be so stable anymore.