Shifting political alliances on the road to The Hague

Six individuals have been named by the International Criminal Court prosecutor over Kenya’s descent into post-election violence, but two names stand out clearly when it comes to the political reverberations.

Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta and suspended Education minister William Ruto are seemingly tied at the hip in a political relationship that has swung from one end of the spectrum to the other.

They are political allies as they confront the prospect of sharing the dock at The Hague, yet, ironically, they are being pursued because ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo views them as the prime “commanders” on opposite sides during the savage blood-letting that followed the disputed 2007 elections.

Mr Kenyatta and Mr Ruto may have been on opposite sides during the post-election violence, actually a conflict that traces its origins to the Rift Valley ethnic clashes of the early 1990s designed by the regime of President Daniel arap Moi as an anti-dote to the growing clamour for a multi-party system then.

However by the time Mr Ocampo stepped into the picture, Mr Kenyatta and Mr Ruto had mended fences and were now on the same side. The two were motivated by more than just the common desire to get the ICC off their backs. They came together purposely to drive a joint political initiative aimed at ensuring principal roles for themselves, via leadership of their respective communities, in the post-Kibaki era.

Their so-called KKK (Kikuyu, Kalenjin, Kamba) alliance that also includes Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka is also aimed at checking the presidential prospects of a common foe, Prime Minister Raila Odinga who has always publicly supported trial for post-election violence perpetrators.

This is a position that has always irked his former ODM ally Ruto. He has argued that Mr Odinga used the Kalenjin vote and numbers in the Rift Valley to prosecute the deadly protests that ultimately propelled him to the premiership as President Kibaki’s co-principal in the coalition government before leaving the community in the lurch.

This is one of the issues that led to the fallout in ODM and Mr Ruto and his Kalenjin MPs are out to seek a new political accommodation with Mr Kenyatta’s central Kenya bloc.

Both Mr Ruto and Mr Kenyatta are declared presidential candidates. The former is out to cement his position as the undisputed Kalenjin political supremo after consigning former President Daniel arap Moi to history; the latter keen to firm up his position as President Kibaki’s heir in central Kenya leadership.

The other figure in the KKK trio, Mr Musyoka, is also a declared presidential candidate. The VPs campaign has been based in part on the assumption that his two colleagues will have little option but to support him as the best compromise since they both might not be viable candidates.

Mr Ruto may be supreme in Kalenjin politics but cannot sell anywhere else, comes too soon after the Moi presidency, and of course is embroiled in The Hague alongside other court matters.

Mr Kenyatta may command a solid central Kenya constituency, but also might not sell anywhere else because his candidacy to succeed President Kibaki would be seen as an attempt to extend Kikuyu hegemony. With his two compatriots named, is Mr Musyoka the last man standing in the KKK alliance?

All three have a common foe in Mr Odinga who might have reason to be celebrate that two of his principal rivals might have be derailed by The Hague courts ahead of the 2012 elections.

However there could also be a severe backlash that works directly against Mr Odinga. For one, both Mr Ruto and Mr Kenyatta command sizeable constituencies that any presidential candidate would be foolish not to assiduously court.

Chances are that the threat of indictment will serve to rally the Kalenjin and Kikuyu communities even more solidly behind Mr Ruto and Mr Kenyatta, respectively.

The mooted alliance, against the backdrop of deep mutual distrust going back to the cyclic ethnic clashes in the Rift Valley going back to 1991, might now have been given the spur it needs to close ranks against the perceived common threat — Mr Odinga. The Prime Minister seems to be aware of this and has publicly moved to distance himself from the “send them to The Hague” bandwagon.

Just a fortnight again during the review conference on the Kenya dialogue and reconciliation process, Mr Odinga made a startling statement that might well have come straight out of Mr Ruto’s script. In Mr Ocampo’s presence, Mr Odinga said that punishment for post-election violence masterminds should not take precedence over punishment for those he claimed triggered off the violence in the first place — those who mismanaged the 2007 presidential elections.

That is an argument that has been advanced by Mr Ruto ever since the prospect of trials before a local or international tribunal came up. Mr Ocampo dismissed the argument on the basis that he was looking to charge specific individuals for specific crimes against humanity rather than looking towards assigning political responsibility.

Meanwhile, it is certain that there will be political reverberations. The announcement yesterday came against a backdrop of serious fears that the Rift Valley might again break out in violence. The concerns were serious enough for Police Commissioner Mathew Iteere to issue a statement assuring the nation that everything was under control.

Even if peace prevails in the Rift Valley, however, Mr Ruto’s political stock in his community might rise top stratospheric levels spelling the death knell for those not in his camp.

In the most unenviable position is his ICC co-accused Henry Kosgey. The Industrialisation minister and ODM chairman has emerged as one of Mr Odinga’s pointmen among the Kalenjin since the fallout with Mr Ruto. There might be no tears shed for him at home even as the prospect looms of sharing the dock with Mr Ruto.

Then there are Cabinet ministers Franklin Bett and Sally Kosgey at the head of a pack of Kalenjin politicians who might have difficulties in their own constituencies if seen as traitors.

Even Mr Gideon Moi, who has been trying to clip Mr Ruto’s wings and craft his own path to the Kalenjin leadership, will have to tread carefully. The announcement on Wednesday and the prospects of a political fallout calls for a re-wind to 2002.

Mr Ruto, together with President Moi’s son Gideon, was instrumental in the effort to craft a new-look Kanu. The strategy culminated in President Moi ditching his long serving party lieutenants such as Vice President George Saitoti, powerful minister Nicholas Biwott and veteran secretary-general Joseph Kamotho to bring new faces to the fore. Up stepped newcomer Mr Kenyatta as a co-vice chairman alongside Mr Musyoka, while Mr Odinga disbanded his National Development Party to take a place as Kanu secretary-general.

Then came phase two of the “new Kanu” plan and everything unravelled after Mr Moi named the greenhorn Kenyatta as his chosen successor. It was Mr Odinga who led the revolt in the new line up that saw key faces in the revolt against Mr Kenyatta presidential candidacy. Key figures in the Kanu hierarchy including Mr Musyoka and Prof Saitoti’s short-lived successor as VP joined Odinga in a massive walkout to bolster Mr Kibaki’s ultimately successful presidential bid.

Also ditching Kanu at the same time were some of the figures supplanted when Mr Odinga joined the party, including Prof Saitoti and Mr Kamotho. Fast-forward to 2005, and Mr Odinga was again at the helm of a rebellion against the Kibaki coalition. This time he was leading out the ex-Kanu figures, notably himself, Mr Musyoka and Mr Mudavadi, to re-unite with what remained of the Kenyatta-Ruto-Gideon Kanu under the banner of the Orange Democratic Movement that defeated the proposed new constitution.

That was the birth of the ODM and the alliance that nearly propelled Mr Odinga to the presidency. The ground shifted significantly with the Odinga-Ruto fallout, and the Ocampo list of six serves to underline the growing rift. In the run-up to the ICC action and the immediate aftermath, it was notable that the most vociferous voices against Mr Ocampo came from Kalenjin and Kikuyu MPs loyal to Mr Ruto and Mr Kenyatta respectively.

Former Internal Security PS Zakayo Cheruiyot let it all out at the angry press conference with likely deliberate “slip of the tongue”, referring to Raila Odinga, rather than to Ocampo, manoeuvres.