This sneer at donor funding is myopic and reeks of hypocrisy

The choice “insult” against pro-democracy activists during the dark days of the Moi regime was that they were foreign funded.

The implication was that they — and all Kenyans who wanted change — were too stupid to think for themselves and needed foreigners to think for them.

The corollary of that was that Kenyans were happy to allow corruption, massacres, tribalism and dictatorship to thrive. This thinking implied that the idea of accountability, democracy, freedom from torture, freedom of expression, association and assembly, and the right not to be summarily executed were unviable foreign concepts.

These insults were entirely driven by selfish interests to maintain power, privilege and corruption for a few who had literally no regard for any values but their own pockets and status.

This was at a time when it seemed the national priority of the powers-that-were was how fast they could strip Kenya bare, destroy the environment, grab as much public land and goods, and silence anyone who dissented.

Ironically, the propagators of this insult were at the same time pleading for donor support for various developmental challenges, not to mention they were banking much of our stolen tax money in the same foreign countries they considered evil.

And their kids were all being educated in the schools and universities of these evil countries that they denigrated for supporting the pro-democracy movement in Kenya.

HUMAN RIGHTS

Thankfully by the mid-1990s, the insult essentially fizzled out from the public domain. But it then made a comeback in 2012 as we were gearing for elections, this time powered by the British firm that was handling Mr Uhuru Kenyatta’s public relations issues around the ICC and his campaign.

How ironic that a company from a country that touted values of human rights and democracy was the engine for decrying human rights, accountability and democracy in Kenya!

And all of a sudden, those who dared call for accountability — for corruption or crimes against humanity; those who decried impunity and those who called for the implementation of Chapter Six of the Constitution were said to be “donor driven.”

Of course, those purveying the charge made no mention of their close personal and professional ties with these same donors. Somehow, it seemed, if the donors interacted with the powerful it was okay, but if they interacted with those seeking accountability, they were evil!

The normalisation of relations between Kenya and the West reduced the rhetorical battles against donors. But a very public Twitter fight between two prominent Kenyans recently shows that Moism continues to haunt us, as the purported insult of being donor funded was thrown out repeatedly in that fight.

The gist was that because someone is funded by foreign donors, his thinking must be foreign and that his interest in justice, accountability or anti-corruption is only because of the donor funding! Again, you see the derogatory assumption that without donors, Kenyans should have no interest in these issues.

PRIESTESS OF CORUPTION

How myopic! It is like saying that because a lawyer represents (and is paid by) drug dealers, high priestesses of corruption, and Al-Shabaab members, then he is also a drug dealer, a high priestess of corruption or a card carrying member of Al-Shabaab!

Does it mean that because our military in Somalia and here is donor funded it is run by the donors with no independent policies of its own? And does it mean that because a significant portion of US government debt is owned by China that China dictates the USA’s policies and practices?

In fact, aren’t we always pleading for foreign funding (termed investment) for our companies and economy?

This thinking is highly duplicitous. We welcome foreign funding when it is about building boreholes in arid and semi-arid regions, and medical services, (including paying for all anti-retroviral drugs).

We invite donor funding for education, from the “foreign” Christian and Islamic schools and madrassas to the scholarships that have enabled many to study or train abroad.

We also welcome foreign funding for state institutions such as the Judiciary, the Public Prosecutor, Elections body, and police, uttering not a word against “donor” funding.

So why is donor funding bad when it is supporting justice, accountability, human rights and democracy by non-state actors?

[email protected]