Kenya: The Medium Term, Part One

The other big story from yesterday is that Kenya's rival parties have, finally, officially approved the constitutional changes to put in place the National Accord.

Reading the news reports of this from The Nation and The Standard, there is an overwhelming sense of optimism and excitement in how the two warring sides have now come together.

Both the President and the future Prime Minister made very clear signals about their willingness to cooperate as equals in the enormous task that awaits them. That is great, amazing news.

The President's hard-line followers had, in recent weeks, made comments that seem to undermine the entire basis of the power-sharing agreement. It is very reassuring to see the President, at least symbolically, suggest he supports deeper power sharing than his supporters.

It's difficult to project out into the Medium Term, as I am hoping to do in this post. Kenyan politics has been, for the past 20 years, enormously volatile. During this time, Kenyan politicians have demonstrated a remarkable ability to abandon principle and dignity in the name of political expediency.

What is being suggested in all of the news reports that are coming out now is that the political class has a sense that its time to move above the nasty, hate-tinged disagreements of the past toward a better future.

Given Kenya's previous attempts to do this, we should not be so naive as to think that this will all go off without a hitch. The biggest question, the one that is the hardest answer is the following:

How will the new drive for transparency, accountability, and meaningful change confront the leaders of Kenya's ugly past?

What we need to be honest about is that Kenya has an ugly past. There are many powerful, influential individuals who have gotten very rich off of state-sanctioned corruption.

A couple of those individuals are Kenya's first and second president, who have been accused of some involvement in not only corruption, but also torture and political murder. (I'm not saying they're guilty, just that everyone knows that a serious investigation means their roles need to be investigated.)

It seems extremely unlikely to me that former President Moi, or President Kenyatta's offspring are at all willing to open this can of worms. Any reasonable effort to do this would be extremely painful for them, their families, and, on a psychological level, the nation.

Kenya may need a Truth, Justice, and Reconciliation Commission, as is about to be formed. I'm just not sure that the wounds of the past few months are deep enough to convince Moi he should hand back hundreds of millions of shillings, or for the Kenyattas to agree that they should hand over their land to the state so it can be divvied up among squatters and the local community.

I'm not sure it's enough to make each of these men's inner circles admit to their corrupt actions. Or even their involvement in political murder.

While the Moi and Kenyatta families and their respective cronies may realize that they can't stop the Commission from being formed, it seems extremely likely that they will do everything in their power (and they do still have a lot of power in Kenya) to prevent this from hurting their interests.

Finally, I'm not really sure that this is where Kenya wants to go now. Going through this--expurgating a sad, vicious, hate-mongering past--is not necessarily a way to create peace among Kenya's various ethnic groups. It needs to be handled very, very carefully.

Leaders from all levels need to prevent people from interpreting whatever Truth or Justice comes out of the Commission as supporting one ethnic group's claims over another. The Commission needs to have individuals from all over the country come forward with meaningful and sincere admissions of guilt and complicity.

With Kenyan politics where it is now, it's hardly clear that that is the most likely outcome.

Kenya: The Short Term

Kenya's political leaders have reached a peace agreement of sorts. I'll address the short, medium, and long-term effects of all of this in different posts. 

In the short term (think the next three months), these are the reasons for optimism:

1. Both parties have reached a political agreement that can be seen as fair to everybody. The creation of the prime minister position allows everybody to claim some kind of victory.

Kibaki keeps his claim on the presidency. Raila can claim enough power to keep his followers relieved that he will matter.

2. The economy has been leveled by the recent violence and the enduring political stagnation.

Both Raila and Kibaki are wealthy businessmen, as are virtually all their friends. When the economy suffers, so do they. They, in fact, are among the first to be hit. Certainly gives them an incentive to reach some kind of settlement.

3. The international pressure up to this point has been immense, and there are reasons to think that the international community will remain focused on stability in Kenya for the near future.

4. A lot of the work that now confronts Parliament and the President (and now the Prime Minister) is just trying to clean up the mess that the past couple months has created.

(Locally, it's known as machafuko, which translates to "crisis" or "disorder", though the root of the word is -chafua, which means "to dirty".)

In other words, the very immediate work isn't really controversial. There are other proposals that have already been agreed to, though they may still prove rather difficult to implement without some fisticuffs.

Here, I'm particularly thinking of a  as a Truth and Reconciliation Committee. There's a lot of people who do not want truth to come out and will do whatever they can to make sure that they and their actions do not come under any scrutiny. Probably plenty of people on both political sides.  There's a real danger of a whitewash here, which would please the politicians, but not really meet the societal cleansing goal that seems to underlay any such effort.

More on the medium and long term later...

A "National Accord"

Great news out of Kenya today. Kibaki and Raila sat down and signed a peace agreement.

This is a absolutely huge deal in the short-term. Both sides have accepted major compromises to get here.

Am I surprised? Not really. There have been good signs of progress over the course of the past month.  The fact that the discussions have covered as much ground as they have is a strong indication that both sides realized that they needed to compromise.

There were signs in the past few days that the talks were about to collapse. The U.S. sent out a very strong statement a couple days ago about taking serious action against whoever was seen to be dragging their feet on the talks. (Widely seen as the government.)

For all the hatred against the Bush Administration's policies and politics, they've done a pretty good job on Kenya. They've been effectively pushing both sides to compromise.

They've successfully portrayed themselves as in league with the Kenyan people and relatively independent toward both the government and the opposition.

But they shouldn't think the hard work is over. In fact, it's just begun.

Former Anti-Corruption Czar on the 2007 Election

FT.com print article: "Whatever the outcome, little will change without comprehensive constitutional reform and a credible anti-corruption programme. Better management of presidential powers will be crucial to a stable future for Kenya. There is a significant minority willing to tolerate a mild economic reversal in the event of an Odinga victory, if that is the price that has to be paid for a correction to what is perceived as an unjust status quo. Whether Mr Odinga would be able to carry out the necessary reforms is another matter. Kenya's future prosperity and stability are at stake."

Election Season

It's election time. America's presidential nomination battle is nearing the finish line, with the Iowa caucus in early January. There's the big three on the side of Democrats, with both Obama and Clinton seeming very electable. On the Republican side, you've got Rudy, Mitt, McCain, Thompson, and Huckabee, none of whom seem very electable... (I'm an Obama fan myself.)

I watch those races with the same nerdy political excitement that I've always had for American politics. Being in Kenya has in a number of ways heightened my appreciation for the American political system. You know what I really love about the American system? Just how absurdly (and I mean that in a positive way) democratic it is.

How many positions do we vote for? In Wisconsin, to the best of my knowledge, we vote for the president, two senators, a member of the house, a governor, an attorney general, two state representatives, county executive, county representative, mayor, alderman, sheriff, coroner, and others. Off the top of my head, that's already 14. And that doesn't include the primaries for a number of those positions. Or the referenda that come up every so often.

In Kenya, under the current system, you have just three elected positions: President, Member of Parliament, and Councilor. Those positions come up for elections every five years. In the eyes of most Kenyans, it's a long five years.

The nomination system this year was actually similar to what America had a hundred years ago: back room negotiations produced a candidate and all other presidential aspirants were supposed to give up their presidential bids and unite around the negotiated candidate.

The process led to a split in the opposition and has created a a three-way race for the presidency. We're now just eight days away from the general election. Kibaki, the sitting president, has been polling at 43%, Raila Odinga at 45%, and Kalonzo Musyoka at a distant third with 10%.

I'm not a big fan of any of the three, though I admit that, given the options, I support Raila. He promises constitutional change and I believe that he has the potential to deliver it. Why? He wants a constitution that takes power away from the president. Naturally, Kibaki enjoys his powers as president and isn't keen to give them away quite yet.

If Kibaki loses, you can be sure his supporters will do everything they can to reduce the powers of an Odinga presidency. Suddenly having a powerful president doesn't seem so desirable....

Will Raila stick to his promises? I'm betting yes. He's tied himself so closely to devolution and to his “pentagon” of five former presidential candidates who support him that it'd be difficult (but not impossible) for him to ignore them once in office.

Just eight days away. I'm betting it'll be free and fair and mostly peaceful. I hope if Raila loses, he and his supporters will calmly accept the loss. Unfortunately, I'm not sure that'll happen.

I'll be viewing it from Halako's home town, Hola. It'll be my first time meeting her sisters, step mothers, 20 half-siblings, and the rest of the family. Wish me luck...

The VP Offers Insight Bure

Nationmedia.com | Daily Nation | NEWS | Sh80m survey to gather data on the disabled launched: "The Vice-President, Mr Moody Awori, who officially launched the exercise at Bontana Hotel in Nakuru, said many of the disabled cases had not been able to fully take advantage of the free education because they lack hearing devices." (emphasis mine)

Now, in case you ever become vice president and find yourself talking about "disability," I thought I would give you all some pointers so you don't a) seem unaware of the issues and b) annoy people who are.

1. Not all disabled people are deaf or hard-of-hearing. I'm not even sure it's fair to say that most are. The fact that no one really knows roughly how many disabled people there are, let alone deaf vs. non-deaf, makes this an important study.

[Update: I'm not exactly sure if Awori means to imply that most of the "disabled cases" are deaf students or if most of the "disabled cases" that have failed to take advantage of the free education are deaf students. I'm skeptical on both claims.]

2. Not all deaf/hard-of-hearing people benefit from "hearing devices." People become deaf for different reasons. Some deaf can benefit from receiving amplified sound, others benefit from receiving electrical impulses to auditory nerves inside the cochlea. Others are just plain deaf.

3. Even those who benefit from devices like cochlear implants or hearing aids (see links above) will likely still need to learn a signed language (in Kenya's case, KSL). Sticking a deaf kid with a hearing aid in a hearing classroom will definitely boost attendance of deaf children in schools, but brings with it a whole host of problems.

4. Deaf kids aren't benefiting as much as their hearing counterparts from the government's free primary education because.... the deaf schools (residential programs) are not free! The government program does not cover boarding schools.

And, on this point, I'd like us all pause for a brief Swahili lesson: bure.

This word conveys two different concepts.

Concept #1: Serikali hii imesaidia wananchi kwa kuanzisha elimu bure kwa shule za msingi.

English Translation: This government has helped the citizens by starting free primary education.

Meaning of Bure: Free


Concept #2: Ubaya wake, lakini, ni kwamba hii elimu ni bure!

English Translation: The bad thing about it, though, is that this education is useless!

Meaning of Bure: Useless


I like that bure means both of those things. It takes you down the same path as "There's no such thing as a free lunch." If it is free, it's probably useless.

Seeing free primary education in a hearing school with 1,500 students and 20 teachers, I saw elimu bure.

For many deaf children, the government's promise of elimu bure has been just that, elimu bure.

[Update 2: It occurs to me that I say "useless education" when what I really mean is useless "free education."]

[Update 3: A nod to Kyle for the advice on making the distinction between "sign language" and "signed languages." There is no one "sign language", there are different "signed languages" that share features as a result of being signed and not spoken. To wit, saying "speech language" implies it is one, "spoken languages" acknowledges there are many.]

Expert: Raila Has Sensible Vision, Little Chance

Or... "Expert: Kalonzo Musyoka has no business running for president"

This article sizes up the two heavyweights in the opposition party's primaries, with an eye toward the general election.

The author is Ahmednasir Abdullahi, a former chairman of the influential Law Society of Kenya. He makes the argument that the former front-runner, Kalonzo Musyoka has no credibility and is economically out-of-touch with reality. That might be true.

Polls suggest that Musyoka's popularity is dropping. The media seem to favor a Raila vs. Kibaki match up, and now the people do as well.

To Raila's credit, out of all the presidential hopefuls in ODM-Kenya, he alone projects strength. He can draw crowds at the drop of the hat. He has a long history of fighting for democratization and the opening of political space. He's even pledged to create a strong post for a Prime Minister, which would seem to actually take away the majority of his potential presidential powers.

The author doesn't recognize that Raila, too, is compromised by his former cooperation with the old, corrupt ruling KANU party. And that he, too, ditched it when he saw that he wasn't going to be chosen for president. That Raila is prone to outrageous comments, always alleging that there are massive conspiracies, including plots to kill him, but providing little evidence.

(There is, to be fair to Raila, a history of prominent Luo politicians being murdered: Tom Mboya, Robert Ouko, and, apparently, Peter Okondo and Prof. Mbai.)

On top of that, Raila has reportedly admitted some involvement in a 1982 coup attempt against President Moi. Kenyans have seen what happens to countries where rulers are chosen by coups instead of elections; it ain't pretty and they don't want it.

Until now, Raila has banked on support from the Luo. In fact, he has a massive influence in Luo politics and it would be political suicide for a Luo to criticize Raila.

Despite that, he still seems to be the most viable opponent to President Kibaki. Though, since he's such a polarizing figure, it's hardly clear he can pull it off.

CDF: All Wrong

In 2003, the Kenyan goverment established the Constituency Development Fund (CDF), which takes 2.5% of total annual revenue and redirects it to each of Kenya's 210 constituencies. Apparently this has added up to KES 100m per constituency.

(Technicalities seem to have held up the use of this money in Halako's home constituency of Galole, which the Nation notes "is one of the few constituencies that have not had electricity or a tarmac road since independence.")

There are a number of reasons why this whole system is chaotic. Chief among them is that it means the Kenyan Government is handing over all of this money to one person to use this money as s/he feels fit.

There are three fundamental flaws to this set-up:

1) The only real check as to whether MPs are appropriately allocating funds is an election; this means the MP has major incentives to favor certain populations and ignore others.

2) The allocations are done without a larger sense of planning. Build a road here, pay these students' school fees, plant some trees there. But how will these funds be most effectively used over the next five years to truly bring development to the constituency? No answer. The focus is, of course, on short-term political gains.

3) MPs are supposed to be MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT. They shouldn't be carrying millions of shillings back to their district and trying to figure out how best to allocate those monies for all of the constituencies many needs. That should be done by other institutions! How about democractizing government on the local levels (mayors, council members) and let them figure out how best to use this money.

Kenya in the "War on Terrorism," 2

The Nation does a special on America's war on terrorism, with its own exclusive report of Kenya's transfer of terror suspects to Ethiopia and Somalia. Unfortunately, the article is so jam-packed with details that the narrative glue comes apart, and it's hard to fully process the article once you've read it.

In an editorial, the Nation says,

Yes, terrorism is a clear and present danger. Indeed, during the last decade
Kenyans have twice been attacked by terrorists. It is important to catch the
culprits and bring them to book, but we have laws and due process must be seen
to have been followed.

Shrugging off the rule of law and repeatedly being seen as unfair and unjust in its treatment of Muslims could turn out to be a liability for this government. I think this government should be asking itself, how do we convince the moderate Muslims that we're doing the right thing?

I don't think anyone is asking that question, which might turn out to be a major strategic error.

Kenya in the News

A quick tour of Kenya via the newspapers.

Party Politics

Good news for Kenya's leading opposition party, Orange Democratic Movement-Kenya. The Liberal Democratic Party, which is a corporate member of ODM-Kenya, has decided to scale down its party activities in support of ODM-Kenya activities. Though, the article suggests that Presidential candidate Raila Oginga Odinga is throwing his lot with ODM-Kenya, while his fellow presidential contender Kalonzo Musyoka wants LDP to maintain robust activities.

Is this a sign that Musyoka wants the option of using LDP as a vehicle for his presidential campaign if he loses the ODM-Kenya nomination? Would LDP withdraw from ODM-Kenya and leave Raila for Musyoka? Seems hard to believe....

In other news, ODM-Kenya has embraced the ruling party's macro-economic program. ODM-Kenya certainly made a stink about various privatization measures that the government was enacting, but argued the problem was that the privatized companies were being bought up by governmental cronies.

At any rate, they seemed to come out anti-business and pro-"equality." Now they claim that they are more pro-business than Narc-Kenya. Both parties are actually pretty new and it's hard for anyone to be certain about their true political and economic philosophies.

Business

The article also notes the Economist Intelligence Unit forecasts a slight drop in economic growth over the next two years due to "constrained capacity." I don't have the $200 that the Economist Intelligence Unit charges to find out just exactly what they mean by that, though I'm guessing it refers to poor physical infrastructure and the strength of financial institutions.

Capacity is also hampering oil flow in the country, leading to fuel shortages in some areas.

The roads have reached such a point that Kenyans are clammoring to pay tolls to improve them!

NYTimes Columnist Thomas Friedman has taken his World is Flat argument to Kenya. (Articles one, two, and three via Free Democracy.)

Certainly he'll be cheered by the news that the government is trying to connect schools to the internet, establishing ICT hubs in every constituency across the country, and the state-owned Telekom talks of setting up WiFi networks.

And globalization marches on as coffee houses begin to swamp Nairobi, as Sasini, the tea manufacturer now looks to become a major competitor. (Most Kenyans prefer tea to coffee; Sasini thinks it has an advantage here. But I don't know anyone who buys Sasini tea. I also don't like their commercials.)

Tribalism

Okech Kendo argues that presidential elections by runoff (50% + 1 is needed to stay in office) is the cure for tribalism. Kenya has a history (1992 and 1997) of an unpopular president who is able to stay in power through manipulation by spliting the opposition. This isn't a bad idea at all.

The pro-government forces are now advocating for the same to be true for members of Parliament, which will be more difficult for the opposition to swallow.

But I think they should consider the value of another condition that already exists. Currently, to win the presidency, you have to win at least 25% of the vote in five out of eight provinces. This too is a deterrent to tribalism. It wouldn't be hard to imagine a presidential contender that appeals heavily to the Kikuyu population and another large tribe, they could muster up the 50% and ignore other parts of Kenya.

Balancing regional interests, are, after all, what led to the creation of the Electoral College in America.

Other News

Kenya's Anti-Corruption Agency seems to be doing its work, though the Attorney General's office hasn't exactly impressed anybody with its willingness to take action.

Tanzanians are worried about Kenya, afraid that closer economic integration proposed in the East African Community will result in money, labor and capital flowing out of Tanzania and into Kenya.

My old stomping grounds of Malindi make the paper for the district hospital being disconnected from the water supply and the inevitable end of tourist season that prompts the closing of an estimated 1,200 villas and hotels, and laying off 4,000 workers.

Sadly, a deaf man gets mauled to death by lions on the eve of his wedding.

Kenya in the "War on Terrorism"

In my previous post on monuments in Nairobi, I did not mention the August 7th Memorial for the 1998 American Embassy bombing. It's a small park in downtown Nairobi where the old American embassy once stood. There's an information center about the events of that day, with horrific pictures and pointed text.

(Unfortunately, while the information center does create a pretty moving depiction of that day, its displays have a number of embarrasing misspellings, awkward phrasings, as well as highly pixelated photographs.)

Since the bombing, Kenya has been a major ally in America's global war on Al Qaeda and its followers and sympathizers.

Recently, the Kenyan government has turned over a terror suspect to the American government, which sent him to Guantanamo Bay. He is believed to be involved in a 2002 terrorist bombing of a Mombasa Hotel as well as the attempted downing of an Israeli airliner.

Prompts some interesting questions:

1) Why wasn't he tried by the Kenyan government for the crimes he committed on Kenyan soil?

2) Why was he transferred to the American government? The Israeli government would seem to have greater jurisdiction, considering a number of its civilians were killed and its airliner was targeted. Or do Americans now have jurisdiction over all Al Qaeda terrorist suspects everywhere?

There's also allegations that the U.S. is operating a secret prison in Ethiopia and that Kenya has sent suspects there to be interrogated by U.S. agents. Ethiopia has admitted holding 41 terror suspects there, and U.S. agents admit that they've done interrogations there, but denies it's a secret U.S.-run prison. (here and here)

Egypt's now recalling its teachers from Kenya, afraid that they'll be accused of being terror suspects.

Kamangu and His Yellow-Checked Suit

Bishop Wanjiru was supposed to get married to her South African fiancee on February 10th. The courts stepped in and blocked the wedding, saying that James Kamangu's case had to be heard first.

Kamangu, as I've already noted, is a simple man: a cobbler and potter, who wanted nothing more than to have Wanjiru admit that she used to be his wife, and to stop dragging his name through the mud.

That was the old Kamangu.

The new Kamangu wears a yellow-checked suit, slick tie, walks into the courtroom with an army of lawyers, and now declares that he wants the courts to recognize his marriage to Wanjiru and give him his "marital rights" (i.e. bedroom rights).

How did old Kamangu become new Kamangu? Politics!

A group calling itself Maendeleo ya Wanaume (The Development of Men), rushed to his side and started talking about legal action. Some commentators argued that Kamangu had a legal case and he should take action, despite him publicly saying that he wasn't interested.

And, one can't help but wonder, did Wanjiru's political opponent, Maina Kamanda, who obviously has a stake in seeing this drama stretched out for as long as possible, have anything to do with it? While I haven't seen any reports explicitly linking Kamanda with support for Kamangu's case, there can be no doubt that he privately supports the mess, trying to keep Wanjiru's name dirty before the election.

The residents of Starehe constituency find themselves choosing between the troubled minister of sports and the over-scrutinized bishop. Voters seem stuck between a rock and a hard place. And that, my friends, is politics!

A Painting's Absence

Every morning on the way to work, I jump out of a crowded matatu, sling my black bag over my shoulder and walk along a dirt path that leads to our office.

This is an uneventful walk. Trees, grass, mud, litter, a women selling bananas and peanuts out of a small green basin, and the guys painting the large clay pots that are sold alongside the road. Along the dirt road in front of our office, is something of a nursery with a couple dozen people watering plants, or haggling with prospective buyers.

Last week Monday, I had something of a surprise, when I walked by the Paresian Center—home to a dentist firm, a World Vision office, and a couple other organizations/businesses—and found a large white rectangle of paint on the surrounding wall.

I looked at it for a second, trying to understand what happened. There used to be a nice large painting there of a man in a hospital bed with a quote next to it. It was one of the best public paintings I'd seen in Nairobi—in Kenya.

When I first looked at the painting, back in August, I was ignorant. The painting seemed loud, like it was making a statement, and struck me as too specific in its detail to be just another sick person in a hospital bed. But I couldn't make the connection. Could it really be just another painting about HIV/AIDs?

On October 20th, I discovered who it was. The 20th is a national holiday in Kenya, called Kenyatta Day, after Kenya's first President Jomo Kenyatta. The holiday was originally meant to invoke the (intellectual) heroes of Kenya's liberation from British colonialism: a group that included Kenyatta and his eventual successor Daniel arap Moi.

What the holiday (under Moi and Kenyatta) did not emphasize were the people who violently fought the British during the Mau-Mau rebellion. These people, generally from an “ethnic group” called the Gikuyu, hid in the forests, swore secret oaths, launched attacks on white settlers, and created enormous panic for the colonial rulers. Among their numerous frustrations, perhaps the chief one was that the colonial settlers stole their land.

The rebellion led to the declaration of an eight-year state of emergency, imprisonments of hundreds of thousands Gikuyu, and tens of thousands of deaths. Locally, it's seen as what triggered the British to give up its colonial rule of Kenya. (Though, since this was replicated all across Africa with all of the colonial powers suddenly granting independence roughly around the same time, it's unclear that the Mau-Mau rebellion caused or even speeded up Kenya's independence.)

When Kenyatta came to power, he was quick to distance himself from the Mau-Mau fighters, calling them a bunch of thugs and criminals. This might seem ironic since the British imprisoned Kenyatta as one of the leaders of the rebellion. In fact, it was strategic: he wanted to portray himself as a national leader, a national hero; not someone who would be held ransom to the demands of Mau-Mau fighters, or even one ethnic group. (Kenya says it has 42.)

As Kenyatta's increasingly dictatorial regime gave way to Moi's overwhelmingly corrupt one, Kenyans, especially Gikuyu decendents, began to mythologize Mau-Mau fighters as brave and creative warriors who fought for Kenya's independence—a struggle that was now continuing against their own rulers to bring democracy and justice to a country that failed to live up to pre-colonial rhetoric.

No fighter is more remembered or more mythologized than Dedan Kimathi. Once captured in 1952, he escaped with the help of local police. A year later he became a field commander, coordinating the Mau-Mau forest fighters for three years. The British labeled him a terrorist and finally shot and captured him. An ailing Kimathi lay in a hospital bed, awaiting his death sentence.

That, of course, was the painted-over image on the wall that I saw. That painting may be lost, but Kimathi's legacy lives on. The Kenyan government has now commissioned for a statue of him to be built; he's already the central character in Ngũgĩ wa Thiong'o 's play “The Trial of Dedan Kimathi”; and he has a street named after him in Nairobi. Since Kenyatta Day is meant to remember national heroes, the media includes Kimathi among the ranks, showing this famous image.

I don't know if Kimathi is actually the national hero that he's now portrayed to be. His added prestige these days may involve more than a little white-washing: click here for a colonial police officer's less favorable remembrance of Mau-Mau, with its own share of vicious, brutal internecine warfare.

I'll miss Kimathi on that wall, not because I think he ought to be praised, as I'm sure the artist intended, but because that image reminded me of something else. The British labeled him a terrorist, Mau-Mau fighters called him their martyr, and the Kenyan elites dismissed him as a leader of criminals. In death, Kimathi is all of these things and none of them. That's the Kimathi I saw looking out at me, someone who lost control of his own destiny.

The Bishop Gets Burned

In America, highly publicized scandals related to the church often deal with sexual relationships between men of the cloth and young boys. Kenya, with its own very robust Christian ministry, is not without its share of scandals.

Today, Taifa Leo reports that Pastor Gideon Mulwa Mutisya from the Salvation Joy Gospel Centre “tricked” a 14 year old girl into believing that he was sending her somewhere to get a job. Then, after convincing her to stay at his house, he raped her:

“[M]tumishi wa Mungu alimshika kwa nguvu na kumvua nguo zote. Lakini msichana huyo alikataa kufanya naye mapenzi na wakang'anga'ania kwa muda mrefu hadi mshtakiwa alipomshinda nguvu baada ya kuchoka na kumnajisi.”

(The servant of God forcefully grabbed her and took off all her clothes. But the girl refused to have sex with him and they struggled for a long time until she became tired and the accused overpowered her and raped her.)

This, you might think, would be a scandal. Deserving of headlines. It isn't.

No, the bigger, more blockbuster news centers on a Kenyan Bishop (of Jesus is Alive Ministries) named Margaret Wanjiru. A couple weeks ago Wanjiru, who's running for a Parliamentary seat this year, brought her South African fiancé to church.

A couple days later, James Kamangu said he married Wanjiru in 1978 following Kikuyu customary laws. After five years and two children, he said, they separated. Apparently what stirred him out of his silence was Wanjiru's claim that her “boyfriend” was a “drunkard.” He just wanted Wanjiru to clear his name.

Kamangu is clearly a poor man, making ends meet as a cobbler and potter. Wanjiru, on the other hand, is doing very well for herself. Responding to Kamangu's claim that he paid a 3,000/- dowry in 1978, to roars of laughter, she asked her congregation, “Do I look like a 3,000/- woman?”

It's a smart political technique: twisting numbers to create false impressions. Who could believe that this woman, now a very successful and well-to-do woman could have been bought off for a measly 3,000/- ($43)? Even a modest dowry runs 50-100,000/- ($714-$1428).

But a shilling today and a shilling 30 years ago are drastically different things. In 1978, according to my admittedly imperfect calculations, 3,000/- was roughly $1,000. (See the 1978 exchange rate and convert to 2005 dollars.)

She went on to publicly ridicule Kamangu, denying that she ever had a relationship with him. The congregation cheered her on, as she continued: “The man who is making those claims has hands which appear as though they have been eaten by jiggers. He looks miserable. He can go look for a rope and hang himself somewhere. We shall do a funeral.” (emphasis added)

Now that's scandal: a Bishop standing in front of her congregation, publicly telling a man to go and hang himself. If the comment wasn't outrageous enough, the evidence suggests that she's lying. Hospital records and circumstantial evidence suggests that Kamangu really is her ex-husband and the father of at least two of her sons. (Maybe three?)

Wanjiru's wedding to the South African Pastor has now turned into a media circus. Instead of it being the success story of a poor, single mother putting her life together and rising to the top, some Kenyans, with that same robust Christianity, are citing passages in the bible that suggest she cannot remarry until her first husband dies. (The bible doesn't exactly recognize divorce.)

Clearly Wanjiru, who has said that she believes one day God will help her become President of Kenya, has handled this whole thing disastrously. As a bishop and political candidate, she needs to learn how to control her emotions, language, and, above all, her relationship with the truth.

Being a politician doesn't mean being honest about everything--though one wishes that was the requirement for both religious and political leaders--but it does mean knowing how to tip-toe around topics that will damage your reputation.

Wanjiru cannot seem to bring herself to admit that she had a relationship with Kamangu, but she doesn't mind confessing to having been a witch, graduating from black to white to red withcraft. Claiming to have bewitched people doesn't seem to strike her or her supporters as damaging her reputation. (Update: My co-worker suggests that the more dramatic the conversion, the larger the congregation.) As she tells the story, she met a Nigerian Evangelist, gave her life to Jesus and underwent a “total transformation, a Holy Ghost baptism of fire.”

These past few weeks have been Wanjiru's political baptism of fire. Can she recover from it?

Update 2: A link for Wanjiru's Jesus is Alive Ministries. It's worth glancing at if you're vaguely interested in African Christianity. Includes this eye-opening line: "Following a prophecy by a visiting US preacher, Prophetess Brenda Todd, Bishop Wanjiru announced the decision to plunge into the political arena [...]." Here's more about Brenda Todd.