It is being suggested by some Kenyans that Barack Obama's party's losses in the mid-term elections will have a negative impact on his prospects come the 2012 presidential elections. Indeed, some have gone so far as to suggest that he may even fail to secure the Democratic Party nomination. However, many mis-read the signs and perhaps fail to appreciate that American politics, while just as tribal as the Kenyan one, is played by different rules and for different stakes.
When Barack Hussein Obama was sworn in one January 20, 2009 as the 44th President of the United States of America, it was a watershed moment. However, he inherited an economy in recession and his first order of business was to implement a stimulus package that had been passed by George W. Bush's White House and a Republican-dominated Congress. The new president swept into office with promises of 'change', bringing with him a newly resurgent Democratic Congress. Those gains that had been made on the backs of 'Hope and Change' have been reversed, though not so much in the Senate, where Obama's party still maintains a lead, though not a filibuster-proof one. Pundits the world over are predicting that the Republicans will ensure that as many of the Obama priorities are not addressed and that he will govern according to their needs. This idea should be taken with a pinch of salt. Even the apparent heir-apparent to the Speaker's seat in the House of Representatives, John Boehner of Ohio, has gone out of his way to pour cold water on the notion that the Republicans will set the agenda.
Why should the mid-terms in America matter, especially to Kenya? Regardless of our new love-in with the Chinese and sundry other pariah states, the United States remains our single most important trading partner, not just in absolute terms of money transfers, but also in terms of market access. The Republicans have traditionally been the party that appreciated the role of foreign policy and the place of economic policy in foreign policy. Under George W. Bush, direct aid transfers to Africa more than quadrupled compared to the amounts earmarked under Bill Clinton. It was also under the 43rd President that the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act was signed and extended. President Obama, for all the talk of his links to Africa, has merely maintained the levels of US-assistance to developing countries. But, in the midst of slow economic recovery, he has instead become more protectionist (witness the tariffs imposed on Chinese tyres in 2009). Therefore, if Kenya wishes to take advantage of whatever relationship it has with the Americans, it can benefit more under a Republican administration than under a Democratic one; in the alternative, it can still benefit by targeting the Republicans on the Hill regarding trade policies and legislation aimed at improving Kenyan market access and favourable trade ties. Their pleas will not be heard by the Democrats.
The changes that are taking place in Kenya indicate the path that we should follow in the reform programme. Kenya is not a developed economy and our manufacturing capacity is still puny compared to other countries, especially in the upcoming East. Therefore, many of the publicly-funded programmes that we think will arise because of the new Constitution will be delayed until we can pay for them. It is in the realm of political activity that we may be able to move quickly to establish institutions of governance that we can be proud of. So far, the Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission has acquitted itself well; but it is early days and the strength of its convictions will be tested when it attempts to bring to book the masterminds behind the Goldenberg, Anglo-Leasing, Free Primary Education, and, the so-called, Maize scams. The new frontier of political conflict seems to be the new Counties where the perception has been created that it will be a battle between professionals and professional politicians. Until the law on counties is enacted, much of what has been planned regarding county governance is speculative at best and divisive at worst. It is the development of the parliamentary Committee system that offers Kenyans the best hope of emulating the American style of government.
The Departmental Committees have been in the limelight in recent months for their investigations into the operations o various ministries. Most recently, the Defence and Foreign Relations Committee reported on the sale of embassy houses, publishing a report that has ultimately resulted in the minister 'stepping aside' to allow investigations to take place. Now the Minister for Water and Irrigation is facing enquiries as to the criteria and manner of allocations made for water projects throughout the country and why it seems that she is favouring one particular region over others. The American House and senate Committees are powerful organs that can make or break a political career, but only because they are thoroughly professional, even when doing a hatchet job. Before Kenya can claim to be a professional democracy, its institutions will have to display a level of professional competence that the current politicians are incapable of. Professionalism will have to be carried forward into the political parties, the CDF Committees, schools and colleges, places o work, churches and other faith-based organisations. The aim will be to make the average citizen appreciate these institutions and use them to enhance the quality of his life. If one feels that it is a burden to deal with these institutions, they will have failed in their attempt at professionalism. Until that day comes, we must keep reminding ourselves that decisions are made by those who show up.
No comments:
Post a Comment