No! It is not a question of national security, but one of public safety. Despite the legalistic definition of national security, the meaning that people derive from that loaded phrase is the security of the government, and not the safety of the people. The security of the government is the continued existence of a political power in charge of that government. In Kenya this has frequently come to mean the continued reign of the incumbent president. It very rarely means the safety of the people or their property or the institutions that are important to them.
Therefore, when commentators point out that the structural infirmities that permit the prolific killing of elephants and rhinos in our national parks exposes gaps in Kenya's national security, they miss the point by a mile; they seem to be of a piece as those who would call for the extra-legal killing of dissenting Islamist voices amongst us. They are united in considering that the ease with which poachers seem to kill trophy wildlife, transport their spoils through our towns and cities, have them loaded onto ships or planes, and delivered to final customers overseas exposes the weakness in the policing of our national parks and game reserves, policing in our towns and cities, policing at our border crossings and a woeful inadequacy in our intelligence-gathering and analysis systems. But they would be loath to admit that all these areas in which weakness or inadequacy is exposed are not institutions for the safety of the public but for the perpetuation of political power at its most basest.
Our forces of law and order and our intelligence services are designed to corral us into docility; we are not to question what our political superiors know or do. We are to remain silent and allow our taxes and our national treasure to e expended as the powers-that-be determine to be best. If we are to raise our voices in protest, we are to do it in the manner and form that the powers-that-be permit, that is, in such a way as we do not threaten their continued grip on the levers of power or the taps of fabulous wealth.
It is for this reason that a community, such as the diverse and cosmopolitan one at Kenya's coast, will continue to defy the neat pigeon-hole to which the State is determined to consign it. When the county commander of police declares that the people cannot fight the government and win, he is subtly reminding them that in his understanding of national security, he will burn down the town to preserve the authority of the government. he will set his police on them to keep them from hurting themselves with foolish thoughts of challenging the authority of their government. It will never occur to him that because of a complex set of reasons, some recent and some historical, a majority of the peoples at the coast consider the government of the day, whether at national level or county level, to be illegitimate.
The question of legitimacy also stalks the wildlife conservation meme promoted by those who like to see "Kenya's heritage" preserved for future generations. They do not care to consider that land injustices have defined this nation since the day the white settlers set foot in Kenya. Unless the Land Question is resolved to the satisfaction of those who have always been marginalised, poaching will never receive widespread attention from the people. Before the question of our national heritage is settled, the people must be satisfied that the Land Question is no longer a cause for violence, suspicion and corruption. Wildlife conservation, therefore, remains the legitimate concern of those who have the land, the money and the power of the government behind them. To the rest of the people, game reserves and national parks are illegitimate interlopers on land that the people fought a colonial power for.
No comments:
Post a Comment