Pete Muller for The New York Times
Supporters of presidential candidate Uhuru Kenyatta cheered as he arrived at a rally on Saturday. More Photos »
By JEFFREY GETTLEMAN
Published: March 7, 2013
NAIROBI, Kenya — He has been charged with heinous crimes, accused of
using a vast fortune to bankroll death squads that slaughtered women and
children. His running mate also faces charges of crimes against
humanity, and as Kenya’s election drew closer, the Obama
administration’s top official for Africa issued a thinly veiled warning
during a conference call about the vote, saying that Kenyans are, of
course, free to pick their own leaders but that “choices have
consequences.”
Follow @nytimesworld for international breaking news and headlines.
Presidential candidate Uhuru Kenyatta has been
charged with heinous crimes and accused of using a vast fortune to
bankroll death squads that slaughtered women and children.
More Photos »
The New York Times
The presidential election is Kenya’s first in six years. More Photos »
Pete Muller for The New York Times
A news anchor awaited election results on Thursday in Nairobi. More Photos »
But when the ballot counting began this week, Uhuru Kenyatta, the son of
Kenya’s first president, surged ahead in the race for president and
stayed out front as the margin narrowed early on Friday. Soon, the Obama
administration and its allies could face a tough choice, made even more
complicated by the appearance of taking sides against a candidate who
may very well win.
Does the United States put a premium on its commitment to justice and
ending impunity — as it has emphasized across the continent — and
distance itself from Mr. Kenyatta should he clinch this election?
Or would that put at risk all the other strategic American interests
vested in Kenya, a vital ally in a volatile region and a crucial hub for
everything from billion-dollar health programs and American
corporations to spying on agents of Al Qaeda?
Even the little things could be tricky. Are the American diplomats who
interact with the Kenyan government on a daily basis not supposed to
shake Mr. Kenyatta’s hand? What about sharing a dais with him? The
British have already publicly stated that they will avoid any contact
unless it is essential.
“This is going to pose a very awkward situation,” said Jendayi Frazer, a
former assistant secretary of state for African affairs. “Kenyatta
knows he needs the United States, and the United States knows it needs
Kenya.”
American officials have declined to discuss publicly what a Kenyatta
victory would mean, and several reiterated the rather anodyne video
message from President Obama in February, in which he said, “The choice of who will lead Kenya is up to the Kenyan people.”
But Johnnie Carson, the top administration official for Africa, was not
quite so diplomatic when he repeatedly warned soon after that “choices
have consequences,” which critics say backfired by energizing supporters
of Mr. Kenyatta and his running mate, William Ruto, driving many to the
polls to rally behind them. “When you inject yourself into an
election,” Ms. Frazer said, “you never know how it will play.”
Mr. Carson responded, “One comment does not swing a contest.”
If he wins the presidency, Mr. Kenyatta, who was leading with 50 percent
of the vote on Friday, would become the second African head of state
after Sudan’s Omar Hassan al-Bashir to face grave charges at the International Criminal Court
at The Hague. But that does not mean he will meet the same diplomatic
isolation as Mr. Bashir, who is wanted on an arrest warrant and cannot
travel to much of the world.
For starters, Mr. Bashir has refused to appear at the court, while Mr.
Kenyatta has traveled there to defend himself, so no warrant has been
issued. Beyond that, the United States and Sudan were hardly allies when
Mr. Bashir was accused of fomenting genocide in Darfur.
The relationship was already sour, with Sudan squeezed by sanctions for
playing host to Osama bin Laden, among other things.
By contrast, the American-Kenyan partnership has been a particularly
symbiotic one, especially recently. American intelligence agents work
closely with their Kenyan counterparts, hunting down Qaeda cells in
Kenya and Somalia. Kenya receives nearly $1 billion in American aid each
year and has agreed to accept captured Somali pirates and hundreds of thousands of refugees, at the request of donors like the United States.
Nairobi, Kenya’s capital, is home to the largest American Embassy in sub-Saharan Africa and a sprawling United Nations
campus that runs programs across the world, making it especially
difficult for the United States to take its resources somewhere else.
“There is really very little leverage that the U.S. and other countries
can exercise,” said J. Peter Pham, director of the Michael S. Ansari
Africa Center in Washington.
One former American official with extensive experience in Africa was
more blunt. “We need Kenya more than Kenya needs us,” he said.
The United States has to be careful how it handles the Kenyatta issue,
analysts say, because Mr. Kenyatta could easily turn to China, which has
made important inroads here, building highways and even covertly
financing some Kenyan military operations.
Already, the Western concerns about Mr. Kenyatta’s candidacy seem to be provoking a backlash.
On Wednesday, the Kenyatta campaign accused the British high
commissioner here of “shadowy, suspicious and rather animated
involvement” in Kenya’s election, a claim the British dismissed as
“entirely false.”
Some diplomats have also spoken of what they call a “Mugabe factor,”
warning that Kenya’s leaders, if put under too much pressure, could
become isolated and testy like President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe.
Court documents paint a disturbing picture of Mr. Kenyatta. According to
prosecutors, as hundreds of his fellow Kikuyus were being slaughtered
by rival ethnic groups in the explosion of violence after the last major
election in 2007, Mr. Kenyatta organized meetings with a nefarious
Nairobi street gang to take revenge.
Mr. Kenyatta, the documents say, “contributed money towards the
retaliatory attack” and was “aware of the widespread and systematic
nature of the attack.” The outlawed gang, the Mungiki, killed scores of
people, including small children burned to death while huddling in their
homes.
Mr. Kenyatta has denied the charges and says he will clear his name.
Many analysts say the case is rather weak. The trial was supposed to
start next month but has been postponed until July.
The case against Mr. Ruto, a charismatic politician with an intensely
loyal following, is believed to be stronger. Prosecutors say Mr. Ruto
and his inner circle “created a network of perpetrators” and paid them
to kill.
There are few figures in the Kenyan political landscape as polarizing as
Mr. Kenyatta, 51, a deputy prime minister. Many members of other ethnic
groups accuse him and his family of stealing their ancestral land,
which became the basis for the Kenyatta family fortune.
But among many Kikuyus, Mr. Kenyatta is seen as a savior. He is a
confident speaker, educated at Amherst College and respected in
Nairobi’s business circles. During the last election crisis, several
supporters said, he paid for buses to ferry Kikuyus out of danger zones
and bought sacks of food for families who had been burned out of their
homes.
“When we needed it, Uhuru was there,” said David Wanjohi Chege, a trader.
Many Western governments would clearly prefer the second-place candidate, Prime Minister Raila Odinga,
who was trailing with 45 percent of the vote Friday amid complaints
from his camp that some results had been “doctored.” The race may be
headed for a runoff.
Diplomats in Nairobi said they did not know what their governments would
do if Mr. Kenyatta ultimately won — though most expected little or no
change in policy unless he was convicted or stopped cooperating with the
court. If that happens, some diplomats spoke of targeted sanctions
without wanting to be more specific.
“To be honest, there are so many different scenarios, nobody really
knows what we’re going to do,” one American official said.
The United States has opted not to participate in the International
Criminal Court, though the administration has expressed support for “the
I.C.C.’s prosecution of those cases that advance U.S. interests and
values.” Many Kenyans see this as hypocritical.
Mr. Kenyatta’s lawyers could probably drag out the trial for years. The only conviction the court has secured, against a Congolese warlord, came six years after he arrived at the court.
Some Kenyans have worried that Mr. Kenyatta, if he wins, may try to pull
Kenya out of the court to evade trial. But according to legal scholars,
that would not change Kenya’s obligations.
“The I.C.C. was definitely a factor in this election, but not
necessarily the factor you would expect,” said Maina Kiai, a prominent
Kenyan human rights defender. “It got people out. People were saying,
‘They’re our boys, they’re our sons, we need to protect them.’ ”
No comments:
Post a Comment