Brace for imminent split in Nasa, Jubilee

Many of the headlines in Kenya over the last couple of days have focussed on the fall out from the swearing-in of Raila Odinga as the “People’s President” on January 30; the detention of Ruaraka Member of Parliament Tom Joseph Kajwang for administering the oath; the unnecessary and unacceptable shutdown of three TV stations; and the alleged grenade attack on the home of Kalonzo Musyoka.

In this column I want to go behind the headlines to think about what recent developments on both sides of the political spectrum have to tell us about the country’s future. A key point that it is easy to lose sight of amidst the noise and controversy of the last few days is that both the ruling and opposition alliances are starting to fragment.

The fact that these processes are happening at the same time is important because one thing we know about Kenyan politics is that the fragmentation of one party or coalition tends to encourage the fragmentation of the other.

In other words, the more fractious the ruling party becomes, the harder Nasa will find it to stay together.

It is hard to know whether Raila Odinga’s swearing in was a great propaganda success or a political setback — in reality it was probably both.

PROPAGANDA

The sight of Baba defying the government to present himself to thousands of adoring supporters in Uhuru Park generated great excitement in his strongholds. It is moments like this that underpin his status as the defining opposition leader of his generation.

However, the failure of other Nasa principals to turn up for the swearing in ceremony has led to widespread speculation about what motivated their absence. Did Kalonzo Musyoka, Moses Wetang’ula and Musalia Mudavadi really stay away simply because they were worried about the lack of security protection and the threat of being arrested?

There is certainly some evidence for this interpretation. As the Nation reported on January 31, in an audio recording widely circulated on WhatsApp, Musyoka explains that: “I was left alone. I stayed (at home) until about 11 am., and that is the time journalists came to my home. I left. We had spoken on phone with Hon Raila, Wetang’ula and Mudavadi to plan our journey to Uhuru Park. We did not get there. We found ourselves, Wetang’ula, Mudavadi and I, because we did not have bodyguards, unable to leave the room. That is what happened.” 

PRESSURE

A joint statement that was subsequently released by the three leaders repeated this mantra, insisting they remained committed to Nasa, and that the opposition was united. And as pressure on Musyoka and Mudavadi to prove their loyalty increased, their statements of faithfulness to the opposition cause have become stronger.

However, it seems unlikely this was the only factor behind their absence. There have been strong rumours for months that Musyoka and Mudavadi are uncomfortable with the more hardline approach being pushed by some of Odinga’s closest advisors. This is not only because they fear being arrested — it is also because they are thinking ahead to the next election.

Most obviously, swearing-in Odinga as the people’s president was not in the interests of Mudavadi and Musyoka because it reinforced the notion that he is the driving force behind Nasa, relegating them to the back seat. The proceedings at Uhuru Park may not have put Odinga in State House, but they were hugely symbolic nonetheless. And the symbolism of Odinga as an incumbent political authority is problematic for those who hope to succeed him, because it implies that he remains in prime position to be the candidate of the opposition next time around.

SUPPORT ODINGA

Quite how much this thinking influenced the decisions made by the absent Nasa principals is hard to judge, but we know the issue of leadership and succession has been a major bone of contention for some time. Having been promised that he would be the candidate in 2017 in return for his support for Odinga in 2013, Musyoka already feels he has been taken advantage of. Mudavadi is equally keen to step out of the shadows and rekindle his own presidential ambitions. Given that neither leader wishes to line up behind another candidate again in 2022, it would only be natural if they had mixed feelings about investing in further strengthening Odinga’s position.

Attending the swearing-in ceremony was also problematic for Musyoka and Mudavadi because it would have tied them to a potentially adversarial political episode — which many believed had the potential to trigger widespread clashes with the security forces — hardening the criticism of them among leaders and communities that back the government. In turn, that would have made it more difficult to form fresh alliances with factions of the ruling party in the run-up to the next set of polls.

This is something that Musyoka and Mudavadi are determined to avoid, because they both know that their best chance of winning the presidency is to present themselves as compromise candidates acceptable to leaders and communities across the ethnic divide.

DEMONISED ODINGA

As we saw in the last election, the way that successive governments have demonised Odinga as a force for division and instability has frequently been unfair, but it has also been politically effective. Having observed how the negative campaigns against Raila have hurt his prospects of winning power, Musyoka and Mudavadi are understandably worried about suffering the same fate.

By staying away, they have disappointed many Nasa voters, and allowed their critics to call into question their credibility and courage. But they have also kept alive a broader range of alliances, and hence their ability to occupy the political centre-ground come 2022.

Of course, the ruling party will face just as many if not more challenges over the next few years. The potential storms to come were clear during the 2017 election campaign, when Deputy President William Ruto ruffled feathers by seeking to get more of his allies selected as candidates under the Jubilee Party banner, only to see a rival – Gideon Moi – parachuted into President Kenyatta’s campaign team.

It was only to be expected that the same tensions would resurface over the question of Cabinet appointments. On the one hand, Ruto knows his chances of succeeding President Kenyatta as the Jubilee candidate — and hence of winning the presidency — depend on establishing greater control over the ruling party by pushing his allies into key posts. On the other hand, President Kenyatta faces considerable pressure to use his final term in office to reward his own supporters and allies.

VICTORY

In the end, neither faction secured a decisive victory. Ruto was ultimately able to veto a number of the proposals he did not like, including some allied to Moi, but unable to force all of his own nominations through. However, in a sense what was more significant than the final distribution of cabinet portfolios was the fact that the episode clearly revealed the challenges that Ruto will face in exerting his authority over Jubilee in the coming years.

The Deputy President is not naïve enough to have imagined he would receive universal support from within the party for his ambitions, but he still seemed disappointed and frustrated not to get it.

Indeed, it is now clear — if it was not already — that it is not a question of if the government will fragment but when and to what degree. Even if Ruto succeeds in using his patronage networks to retain control over the bulk of the party, there will be a number of leaders and factions that will break away, triggering a fresh round of political realignment.

As I have argued before in these pages, the degree of unity in a party or coalition is shaped by what happens to its rivals within the political system. This is particularly true when there are two main political blocks, because the opportunities to form successful new alliances depend on being able to instigate a fresh coalition with leaders from the other side.

Fragmentation encourages change, while unity facilitates stability.

DIVISIONS

Consider, for example, the difference between the elections of 2013 and 2017. In 2013, the new alliance between Kenyatta and Ruto left Musyoka surplus to requirements and led to a political merry-go-round. Once the then Vice President had formed a new coalition with Odinga, there was still time for Uhuruto to briefly consider bringing Mudavadi on board to boost their campaign, before ultimately discarding him.

By contrast, in 2017 the unity of the ruling party meant that opposition leaders had nowhere to go. As a result, they focussed on establishing a more united front, with Mudavadi coming back into the opposition fold, standing alongside Musyoka and Odinga.

The early signs are that 2022 is going to look a lot more like 2013 than 2017. As the evidence grows of divisions on both sides of the political spectrum, former rivals will start to make contact, anticipating the coming realignment.

And as they try and manoeuvre to keep their options open, leaders with presidential ambitions will increasingly disappoint their current allies, making it even harder to sustain existing coalitions.

Given this, the next election is unlikely to look too much like the last one.

 Nic Cheeseman (@fromagehomme) is Professor of Democracy at the University of Birmingham