Tribalism in Kenya is LIVE

A menace that will not go away........are we waiting for a repeat prescription? or never again should we elect the instigators who started it all in the first place?

Tribalism in Kenya is responsible for underdevelopment, corruption, the rigging of elections and violence. What can its background tell us about the future risks of Kenyan tribalism, and how to put an end to it?

KENYA'S ETHNIC GROUPS

Population 34.5m, comprising more than 40 ethnic groups

Kikuyu are the largest tribe, mostly concentrated around Nairobi

Most of Eastern/ North-eastern regions sparsely populated with ethnic Somalis

Main ethnic groups are:

Kikuyu: 22%

Luhya: 14%

Luo: 13%

Kalenjin: 12%

Kamba: 11%

Kisii: 6%

Meru: 6%

Other African: 15%

Kikuyus want Uhuru to be the president, 

Luos want Raila,

 Luhyas want Mudavadi, 

Kambas want the Water Melon,

Swahilis are still chanting 'Pwani si Kenya' ...........(but mombasa is in Kenya)

Kalenjin want Ruto, 

the Maasal Ole Kiyiapi, 

why don't we just divide this country along the old provincial boundaries as they were, so that when we have an election hakunapost election violence.

The way things are going, I don't see us avoiding PEV in March. IDPs are still camps, the suspects want to be president, Mzalendo is dead a sleep (I only hear his voice when he is snoring loudly), thugs kill a politician in Kisumu and peoples' businesses are looted and burnt as stray bullets kill some of the rioters and boda boda passengers, mungiki has slowly but firmly made a comeback.

Meanwhile politicians who are not in regionally correct parties are quietly defecting to home parties.

Is it really really about shambas, jobs, development projects, ministerial flags?

Sam Ongeri has been the Education Minister yet Kissii schools were ranked the worst in last years exam, Musalia M has been the local Gvt minister yet the official language in Ongwaro is Luhya, Raila is PM, yet students from Maranda have to get an A to be admitted in UON for medicine, despite Ruto's money and power, Kemboi has to train day and night to win the marathon, Githae is the Finance minister yet my friend has to hawk shoes to put food on the table for his kids and wife lest they sleep hungry.

 Focus on tribalism in Kenya

Tribalism in Kenya is not a historical inevitability.  It cannot be traced to ancient hatreds or warfare from cultures clashing over the ages. In fact, the major opposing groups, the westerners ( Luo, Luhya, Kalenjin, Kisii)  of western Kenya and the GEMA (Kikuyu, Embu and Meru people) from the Mount Kenya area, had little contact with one another before the coming of the colonialists. Accordingly, Kenya’s tribalism is a relatively new phenomenon. It is a product of modern times arising from colonialism, urbanization and the political culture that sprung up in independent Kenya.

Before the coming of the colonialists Kenyan tribes lived in their own distinct areas with their own cultures, i.e. language, customs, myths of origin etc. The communities lived free from each other, save for some conflict over water and pasture for livestock.

When the British came, they brought with them the principle of divide and rule. They magnified differences amongst the various communities/ tribes, instigating clashes whereby each community distrusted and fought the other.   This served as the breeding ground for negative tribal stereotypes which then became embedded in popular belief. The Kikuyu for example were given the impression that the fish-eating Luo’s were lazy, uncircumcised and unreliable while the Luhya’s were made to view the GEMA communities as schemers, liars, untrustworthy, arrogant and so forth.

This situation of suspicion persisted till the time when independence was realized in 1963, at which point tribal suspicions shot up as the two major parties KADU (Kenya African Democratic Union) and KANU (Kenya African National Union) began squabbling over power. KANU was a party largely dominated by two tribes, the Kikuyu and the Luo.  KADU on the other hand was a coalition of all the other small Kenyan tribes that feared being dominated by the Kikiyu/Luo alliance under KANU. 

KADU insisted on “majimbo”- a federal system of governance tbat they argued twas the only way to protect the smaller tribes from domination by the majority tribes (Kikuyu and Luo).  However, KANU carried the day and federalism was discarded, in its place, Kenya adopted the unitary system of governance.

The unity between the Luo’s and the Kikuyu’s was short lived, since immediately Mzee Jomo Kenyatta (a Kikuyu) became president his administration started favouring the Kikuyu people. This favouritism manifested itself in greater government expenditures for social infrastructure in Kikuyu areas, corruption benefits to fellow tribesmen, privileged access to government and parastatal jobs. The Luo on the other hand, despite holding the vice presidency, were largely discriminated against, their complaints only eliciting intimidation and even assassinations in return.

Under the Mzee Jomo Kenyatta government, it was common to have many underqualified staff from the Kikuyu community placed in positions of higher authority than the qualified ones from other tribes. This led to the final falling out with government as the vice president Oginga (a Luo), was eventually pushed out of government and detained.  The tribal rift was widened and solidified when a Luo minister who had remained in government was assassinated; Mr.Tom Mboya’s assassination was blamed on highly placed Kikuyu personalities.  This was seen as an assault on the Luo by the Kikuyu, and since then Kenyan politics has essentially pitted Kikuyu against Luos, with each side attempting to attract other tribal groups to its side. 

Kenya's ethnic divisions by province

The consequences of tribalism

Tribalism in Kenya is indeed a major stumbling block to democracy as well as socio-economic development. It persists since it provides an avenue via which state goodies and favours trickle down from those in power to their tribesmen. Therefore, loyalty to tribe is given ever greater relevance than loyalty to the country.

Tribalism is responsible for a lot of ills such as underdevelopment, corruption, rigging of elections and violence/civil war. There is also no meritocracy as people are given jobs based on tribe regardless of having low qualifications. Hence the inefficient use of available skills. The exploitation of natural resources also takes a tribal angle, with resources in some areas being ignored or being under utilized. Bad governance and lack of accountability is also linked to tribalism as people will never question a government run by their tribesmen: even if it makes mistakes they remain supportive of it firmly and blindly.The reverse is also true. This means that even if a government does well it will receive daily unnecessary criticism from the tribes not in the ruling party.   

Tribalism is thus used to withhold or provide preferential services and resources.

Thanks to tribalism, citizens are now questioning the call for Peace, Love and Unity. They ask for whom is this unity, peace for whom? For whose benefit?   Rival tribes?  Tribal clashes/ethic violence is a common occurrence in Kenya as in most African countries such as Rwanda, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Zimbabwe etc.  There is animosity, distrust and hatred amongst various tribes so that even intermarriages among some tribes are strongly discouraged by the older conservative generation as well as the rural folk.       

The Luhya for example have a proverb which says “elisimba lifwitsanga mulikobi lya lyasie’’ meaning that a mongoose dies on behalf of another mongoose. For example if a snake bites you, you kill any or all other snakes that you come across – you don’t sit back and look for the exact one that bit you. In a tribal context,  if  I am harmed by a Kikuyu, then whichever Kikuyu I meet has to pay the price. This has the capacity to heighten tribal conflicts.

Tribalism has infiltrated politics and with the advent of multiparty politics, there arose lots of tribal parties. For example FORD K is associated with the Luhya, DP - Kikuyu, FORD PEOPLE - Kisii, SPK – coastal Kenya (mijikenda), NDP/LDP - Luo, KANU/UDM - Kalenjin, SDP – Kamba and so on. Voting in Kenya whether parliamentary, civic or presidential is nowadays done purely along tribal lines as each tribe believes that it is its time to “eat” (time to enjoy political power and resources). 

In the political sphere, ‘leaders’ appeal to people of their own tribes when they want support, they also use their tribes as leverage when they bargain for positions and favours in government.

Heightened tribalism in the country has compromised the church and rendered the religious fraternity unable to offer guidance on matters of national relevance. The church is no longer trusted to be a neutral arbiter.  Various churches are allied with specific parties, for example the Presbyterian Church (PCEA) openly endorsed President Kibaki’s candidature in 2007 and urged all its followers to vote for him.

Tribalism has been to blame for government sponsored assassinations as well as other political assassinations such as that of Tom Mboya, Robert Ouko,  Othiambo Mbai and recently Hon. Melitus  Mugabe Were from the Banyala community who was assassinated three weeks after winning the Embakasi parliamentary seat (in a Kikuyu dominated area).

The previous government was fond of fuelling tribal division. It was in the habit of creating and naming rural districts with tribal names, so that the residents got to feel that the area was strictly theirs and outsiders ought to be evicted. For example Meru District for Merus, Kisii for the Kisiis, Teso District for the Tesos,  Kuria for the Kurias,  Suba for the Suba people and even Taita District for the Taita tribesmen.  This divide and rule tactic was used during election times so that 'outsiders' would be evicted if they chose to vote in a different manner.  For example the natives of Kisii district would feel justified to evict non Kisii people residing in 'their' district. 

The 2007 post election violence in Kenya is largely attributed to tribalism, due to the fact that in Kenya elections are simply a matter of life and death. The fate of entire communities is on the line. Raila Odinga (a luo) took advantage of this situation and ganged up the other 41 tribes against the Kikuyu led government of Mwai Kibaki.  He mobilized political heavy weights from most of the other tribes and formed the ODM (Orange Democratic Movement).   

The Kikuyu dominated PNU (Party of National Unity) was therefore faced with a tough challenge, even though the Kikuyu tribe is the most populous in the country. ODM was too strong.

Thus the election was never based on issues, ideologies or principles. Rather it was an avenue of voting out the Kikuyus, a showdown between the Kikuyu- led PNU versus a coalition of Kenyan tribes under the ODM umbrella.

Violence inevitably broke out when it became clear that the election had been stolen/rigged. People from president Kibaki’s tribe were hunted down, attacked and evicted all over the country, as other citizens could just not imagine being out in the cold, jobless and with zero infrastructural development in their areas for another five years. 

The way forward

There is no point in addressing the ills bedevilling Kenya while ignoring the actual causes, since the major cause of tribalism in Kenya (and in Africa as a whole) today is the competition and confrontation over power and resources. There must be a clear formula of sharing of power and resources via constitutional arrangements. This will ensure that there is no more skewed distribution of state resources. At that point each tribe/community might be fairly represented.

It would also be best if power was completely devolved to regional governments – a federal type of government is the only sure way to protect small tribes from those who would wish to exploit and subjugate them. The other option would be to moot an arrangement that caters for the rotations of key posts between tribes. So far, federalism seems the better option since historically Kenyan communities have lived apart.

It is also necessary to enforce strict laws that regulate discriminatory practices in the provision of public service.

Tolerance is obviously a major requirement if Kenyans are to be united in diversity, so that citizens learn to accept and accommodate customs and practices that are different from theirs.  For example I am Luhya.  I therefore love Luhya, I was nurtured as one and it is the thing I best understand how to be. However I don’t disrespect or disregard any other group even though I see some things differently from them and would prefer some different things from theirs. God created me a Luhya and intends to keep me so. But I make a point of respecting other people’s cultures, even those who circumcise girls and even those who practice wife inheritance. 

Tribalism is a retrogressive practice, as some citizens do like demeaning others and belittling others by disrespecting and making fun of other people’s cultures and customs.

Dehumanizing other people or simply considering them inferior is unacceptable and can degenerate into fistfights. Some of my native (Luhya) foodstuffs/vegatables such as Lisutsa, Lisaka, Murere,Likhubi are considered to be mere weeds in other parts of Kenya. Unity in diversity can only be achieved if tolerance is practiced. 

We must help citizens to learn, understand and even just get a glimpse into the cultures of other Kenyans, since this alone will wipe out myths, generalizations as well as misconceptions, skewed and limited information about other tribes/cultures.

Building bridges across different cultures is necessary since, when standing inside our own conceptual schemes, we are blind to the possibilities of other ways of thinking, seeing, understanding, and interpreting the world.

It would also help if international donor agencies such as the World Bank would peg all development aid to conditions such as success in instituting constitutional changes and other appropriate anti-tribal violence measures. This is vital since it is only with the eradication of tribalism that real and sustainable development can be achieved.

If tribalism is to be successfully combated then meritocracy has to be fully embraced in both the civil service as well as the private/corporate sector. It is only the most qualified people who should be considered for job placements,. The hiring process ought to be transparent, interviews done and only the best candidates considered.

When the issue of tribalism is adequately addressed, the main cause of the conflicts will have been defused and in time governance should improve, corruption should decrease, skilled citizens will return home, investment will be encouraged, developments will occur and living standards will most likely improve. Most importantly tribal violence will be eradicated in the country.

Kenya stokes tribalism debate

By Mark Doyle  BBC world affairs correspondent World headlines on Kenya appear to say it all."Tribal violence spirals in Kenya," screams the front page banner in the International Herald Tribune. "Kenya plunges into interethnic violence," says Le Monde. But headlines can be misleading. It is certainly true that the post-electoral violence in Kenya has taken on a tribal character. Members of the incumbent (and controversially re-installed) President Mwai Kibaki's Kikuyu tribe have been pitted against other smaller tribes. Thousands of people have fled their homes But that is only part of the story. A more complete headline might be: "Tribal differences in Kenya, normally accepted peacefully, are exploited by politicians hungry for power who can manipulate poverty-stricken population." But headlines are not really headlines when they are written like that - and few would criticise the international newspapers for their pithy style. The ethnic and political violence in Kenya has renewed debate about whether multi-party democracy can be successful in an African context where ethnic loyalties are strong. If you ask almost any African this question the answer will be qualified: "Yes, democracy can work... if only our leaders allowed it." Horror as church burned Rwanda fears propel West Q&A: Poll violence It would be naive in the extreme to discount ethnicity in any African election. The reality of life on the world's poorest continent is that most people live a marginal economic existence and rely enormously, for survival, on those nearest to them. Rural villagers rely on each other, for example, to bring in the crop, or to share food in difficult times. Urban dwellers often organise themselves to provide common services like schools because their governments are either too poor or too incompetent to deliver. In these circumstances the people nearest to you - whom you can trust - are first, family, and second, tribe. African politicians know this formula very well and many of them exploit it ruthlessly. "Vote for me," they say, "because I'm from your tribe and you can trust me." Unemployed young men The most dramatic recent illustration of this kind of manipulation was the Rwandan genocide of 1994. Much of Kenya's tribalism is fuelled by land disputes Hutus were persuaded by an extremist Hutu power bloc that all Tutsis were their enemies. There are many other less catastrophic examples. Politics in Nigeria, for example, is a complex chessboard of ethnicity and religion. The presidential elections in the Democratic Republic of Congo in 2006 divided the country along ethnic and linguistic lines. And even in a peaceful, democratic country like Ghana, it is clear that ethnic Ashantis, for example, tend to vote one way while ethnic Ewes tend to vote another. But at the same time there is usually a further explanation - beyond ethnic group - for the way people vote or the way they react to situations like the current crisis in Kenya. That explanation is almost always rooted in money - or a lack of it - and the cynical search for power by politicians. It is no coincidence that the people who usually perpetrate "tribal violence" are unemployed young men. In Ivory Coast in the late 1990s, for example, the campaign against northerners that was orchestrated by southern politicians - and which eventually led to a full-scale civil war - was spearheaded by youths in the main city, Abidjan, who were paid a daily rate for the job. 'Land grabs' Equally, in the Kenyan case, it is no coincidence that some of the worst violence has been in the Rift Valley area. The region has a history of land disputes. Most African nations now have an elected government Some of those disputes were originally caused by what was coyly called European "settlement" - which created refugees hungry for land. More recently, Kenyan politicians have practised more honestly named "land grabs" in parts of the country. African intellectuals who concede there is a problem of tribalism on the continent - or, rather, a problem of the deliberate manipulation of tribal sentiment by selfish politicians - stress that there is also a rational solution. Part of the solution, they say, is economic development. If there is growth in the economy there will be more education and less ignorance about fellow citizens of other tribes - and, of course, fewer unemployed thugs for politicians to "buy" for a few cents a day. Another part of the solution, they say, is genuine democracy with genuinely independent law courts. People would have no need to rely on their tribe - apart from culturally, should they so wish - if they could rely on all their ballot papers being counted, and could expect honest judgements from courts. Here, Africa can point to progress in recent decades. Fifty years ago, almost the entire continent was ruled by foreign colonial powers. Even just 20 years ago, most African countries were run by dictators or military juntas. Now, thanks to pro-democracy activists, most African nations have an elected government. Good start Many of those governments are far from perfect. But the advent of at least some democracy - assisted by relatively cheap technology such as FM radio stations and mobile phones which can spread information easily - has encouraged what seems to be an irreversible cultural sea-change in African attitudes to those in power. Put bluntly, that change means that people can no longer be comprehensively fooled or dictated to. It is still possible for politicians to cheat at elections - for example through the vehicle of ethnicity. But the new freedoms, coupled with the new technology, make it almost impossible for politicians to do this without people knowing what is going on. That is a good start, African intellectuals say, and it may one day mean the end of negative tribalism. Meanwhile, of course, those headlines will remain at least half true.