Connect with us
close

Op-Eds

To Herd is Human

4 min read.

Those promoting veganism as a means of fighting climate change forget that in many parts of the world herding is the only realistic means of human survival and millions rely on it.

Published

on

To Herd is Human

The war against animal agriculture, now spearheaded by fundamentalist vegans, is an attack on human diversity. Were it to succeed, it would wipe out streams of detailed knowledge and expertise about how to thrive – self-sufficiently – in almost all the landscapes and climates on earth. This knowledge has been accumulated gradually over many thousands of years and is irreplaceable. It’s where we truly connect to our non-human relatives. Eradicating it would reduce everyone to dependence on processed, factory-produced “food” and additives, and on the corporations that make them.

This is because healthy human nutrition from plants alone is only approachable in particular climates and landscapes, and even then important food supplements are needed. If everyone were to be restricted to this diet, the elites in charge of the manufacturers and supply chains would control human life.

Whether the elites would themselves live off the stuff they make is open to question. They could ensure some healthy food is still grown normally, including from animals, but it would likely be priced well beyond the reach of ordinary folk. Bill Gates, for example, now invests heavily in fake meat and dairy, promoting it vigorously whilst tucking into the real meat he loves.

Predicting the end of animal agriculture is nothing new. It was initially a fundamentalist Christian ideology preached over 100 years ago with the objective of cutting sexual desire! Were it ever realised, it’s no exaggeration to suggest it could signal the end of human life. After all, our adaptability and inherited knowledge are the only reasons our species survived and spread over the world in the first place, including into many climates still viewed by urban dwellers as hostile. Animal domestication has been central to human societies for tens of thousands of years.

Healthy human nutrition from plants alone is only approachable in particular climates and landscapes.

Whilst expertise in mechanics, science and industrial processes can be acquired from books, the flora and fauna we depend on is so subtly and delicately interrelated that it’s best seen at least as much through generations of direct experience as through classroom skills. Those who depend throughout their lifetimes on their own herding or hunting often rely on something which leans as much towards the instinctual as to the learned.

The risks in losing this vast body of expertise should be obvious. In spite of endless predictions, no one knows what the world will look like in a century or two, and wiping out knowledge of animal agriculture, as well as the myriad breeds it has produced, is bound to severely limit the options open to our descendants. There are many parts of the world where herding is the only realistic means of human survival and millions rely on it. The dependence on camels in the Sahara, reindeer in north Eurasia, horses in Central Asia, llamas and alpacas in the Andes, and goats and sheep in many environments, is well known. Areas that are unsuitable for crop growing, where agriculture is impractical or impossible – particularly in upland and arid regions – can support herding. Human life in vastly different climates can also depend on hunting, from tropical forests to the Kalahari to the Arctic, and of course more millions throughout the world rely on fish. Those who think that crops can replace these ways of life seem unaware of the reality in such places. As the climate changes, there may be many more zones in the future where humans can only survive if they live at least as much off animals as from plants.

In spite of all this, ending animal agriculture is now vigorously promoted by the mainstream media. Paradoxically, this is especially noticeable in apparently progressive forums, and where the propaganda is heavily funded by corporations and foundations, including by Bill Gates. The UN and the World Economic Forum support Gates’ dystopian dream and, as with most “good causes” nowadays, it’s inevitably presented as key in fighting climate change. Studies, and especially headlines, are routinely trotted out to support this highly dubious claim, often funded by corporate interests or their foundations, repeating one-sided or massaged data that can seem convincing at first sight.

Lots of people, particularly the young, swallow all this as an article of faith, and embrace the notion that ending all animal agriculture is about compassion for animals, as well as fighting for the climate. They rightly cite the undeniable horrors of massive industrialised agriculture but seem unaware or unconcerned that in much of the world animal agriculture is a very different thing indeed, practised on a much smaller scale and in the hands of local people who have derived sustainable livelihoods from it for millennia, and all this with little or no reliance on a polluting industry.

As the climate changes, there may be many more zones in the future where humans can only survive if they live at least as much off animals as from plants.

Those local people are, luckily for all of us, the real key to why the end of animal agriculture is unlikely ever to be realised. However much the elites seek to manipulate people and agendas, human beings remain individuals with their own beliefs and dreams just as much as they are conditioned social creatures who can, sometimes all too easily, succumb to short-term fashion and peer pressure.

Even the most vigorous and violent attempts at imposing total control over any population inevitably foster a resistance where, eventually, a plurality of belief and action is rekindled. Such human spirit, or whatever one calls it, proves time and again the overwhelming and resilient strength in human diversity.

The key lesson of history is that there is no single right way to live and be, and there is nothing in history to suggest any single way of life is ever likely to become totally dominant. That simple fact will save humankind from the dream of those who want to end all animal agriculture. It’s really a nightmare which points not towards an innocent and childish Garden of Eden of healthy plant-based diets and compassion for all creatures, but to the end of most human life. Indeed, that may well be what some campaigners seek. Fundamentalist environmentalists of the 1980s Earth First! movement believed that “Billions are living that should be dead,” and concluded,  “Fuck the human race.” Perhaps the original stimulus, a fear of and disgust with human sexual desire and reproduction, is not so alien to the campaign being waged today by fundamentalist vegans.

Support The Elephant.

The Elephant is helping to build a truly public platform, while producing consistent, quality investigations, opinions and analysis. The Elephant cannot survive and grow without your participation. Now, more than ever, it is vital for The Elephant to reach as many people as possible.

Your support helps protect The Elephant's independence and it means we can continue keeping the democratic space free, open and robust. Every contribution, however big or small, is so valuable for our collective future.

By

Stephen Corry was CEO of Survival International for 37 years. He continues to campaign, largely through articles and social media.

Op-Eds

Snake Farming: Roots Party Is on to Something

Thousands of Kenyans are dying from snakebite each year while others are left maimed for life. Snake farming could bridge the antivenom deficit in the country and alleviate the suffering of populations in snake-prone areas.

Published

on

Snake Farming: Roots Party Is on to Something

President William Ruto’s government should not dismiss snake farming outright; it could be an important contributor to the economy. And a life-saver.

The reaction of Kenyans to the Roots Party’s proposal to adopt snake farming in order to contribute to the economy was not surprising. Most people are squeamish about snakes, perhaps because of religious beliefs, or because of trauma from having been bitten by one, or because of knowing someone who did not survive a snakebite. Others simply suffer from ophidiophobia,  an extreme fear of snakes. Then there are those on the extreme end of the spectrum; those who eat snakes, like communities in Central and West Africa, Southeast Asia and China. There are the more adventurous ones who sustain a thriving, international trade in exotic snakes that are kept as pets. But regardless of our feelings towards snakes, they are important to the ecosystem as they manage rodent populations and are a food source for raptors, species of small mammals like mongoose and honey badgers, and other reptiles.

I do not hold fort for the Roots Party of Kenya, but embracing snake farming is not a farfetched idea, and I will tell you why. First, snakebite envenoming is a global health crisis, and secondly snake venom is important in pharmaceutical research; proteins found in snake venom are used in immunosuppressants and other medicines such Captopril, Aggrastat, and Eptifibatide which are used to treat diseases like arthritis, hypertension, heart failure and the effects of diabetes on the kidneys.

Snakebite envenoming results from the injection of highly toxic secretions from the bite of a venomous snake or from the spray of venom into the eyes or broken skin. Snakebite envenoming was declared a neglected tropical disease by the World Health Organization (WHO) in June 2017. Globally, the statistics indicate that over 5 million people are bitten by snakes, 138,000 of whom die from envenoming annually, while at least 400,000 are permanently disabled, or suffer lifelong effects. Of those who die, 30,000 are from Africa. It is a disease of poverty as it mainly affects the rural poor, who work in farms or whose dwellings do not provide adequate protection from crawling critters, who cannot afford proper footwear, and who will resort to traditional healers when bitten by a snake because the cost of healthcare is  not within their reach; in many cases, healthcare is literally far away.

Snakebite envenoming was declared a neglected tropical disease by the World Health Organization in June 2017.

In Kenya, data on snakebite envenoming is not accurate and is often difficult to obtain. In the preface to a report by  the Ministry of Health titled Guidelines for Prevention Diagnosis and Management of Snakebite Envenoming in Kenya, the Director of Medical Services, Dr Jackson Kioko, puts incidences of snakebite in Kenya at 15,000 annually. It is important to note that throughout the document, this is the only reference to any data on snakebite incidences. The estimate from media reports and from organizations such as Wildlife Direct is that at least 1,000 people die from snakebite envenoming every year, and thousands of others are left with permanent injuries, both physical and mental.

Mutha Ward in Kitui South is about 67 kilometers from the county capital, Kitui, and 280 kilometers from Nairobi. It has a population of about 34,000 people, most of whom are small-scale farmers and traders. Like much of Kitui, the landscape of Mutha is arid and semi- arid scrubland. The main economic activity is small-scale agriculture and bee keeping. There is also an abundance of snakes in the region (particularly puff adders, black mambas and cobras) and as a result, incidences of snakebite and snakebite envenoming are frequent. According to one resident, there are at least two snakebite victims every week, mostly from puff adders. That is at least 104 victims a year.

The nearest referral hospital is in Kitui town, which is almost 70 kilometres away. Mutha Health Centre and Ndakani, Kiati, Kalambani and Kaatene dispensaries are the health facilities in the area; they do not stock snakebite antivenom. Further, as Justina Wamae told us, the cost of antivenom is exorbitant, retailing at between KSh10,000 to KSh14,000 (approximately US$100 to US$140) per vial. On average, at least five vials are required for a single treatment. Mutha is representative of the situation in Kitui. The same is true in Baringo, Samburu, Kajiado, the Coast, Northern and Western Kenya.

Access to snakebite antivenom is confined to referral hospitals which are at a considerable distance from the health centres where it would be closer to the victims and where it is much needed. Even then, the supply is not enough to meet the demand. Kenya does not manufacture antivenom and relies on imports from South Africa and India. We do not import enough antivenom from South Africa, which is the most effective as venomous snakes found in that country are the same ones to be found in Kenya, and nor do are referral hospitals adequately stocked. Indian antivenom is ineffective because the venomous snakes found in India are not the same as those in Kenya; for example, antivenom for a Russel’s viper, one of India’s most deadly snakes, is ineffective against puff adder venom, even though they are both vipers. The Kenya Snakebite Research and Interventions Centre is working to produce East Africa’s first antivenom, and trials are ongoing. This is progress, although it will take a while before Kenya can adequately stock its hospitals and health facilities with a homegrown solution.

Kenya does not manufacture antivenom and relies on imports from South Africa and India.

The County Government of Kitui has built the Mutomo Reptile Park and Snake Venom Research Centre in Mutomo, about 30 kilometres northwest of Mutha and, in April 2021, invited bids from private investors to run the facility. As far as I have been able to establish, there were no bidders. The most logical partner, in my view, would have been KEMRI, but given how much our national budget is averse to medical research, it comes as no surprise that KEMRI was not a contender. The potential contribution of the newly-opened research centre to the economy of Kitui, the impact it would have had on medical research this side of the world, can only be imagined. There are snake venom research centres in Guinea, Nigeria, Benin, the Democratic Republic of Congo and South Africa. However, in the entire African continent, only South Africa commercially produces snakebite antivenom, and given the snakebite statistics, supply does not adequately meet demand.

The Kenyan government should, therefore, consider snake venom research for the manufacture of antivenom and other important medical interventions as a critical agenda. It will save lives.

Continue Reading

Op-Eds

Dear Mr President, Tax the Land Not the People

Introduction of a land tax would lead to the sale of the large tracts of land that lie fallow and unused by those unwilling to pay the tax. This in turn would have the effect of depressing the price of land, making it available for development.

Published

on

Dear Mr President, Tax the Land Not the People

We are just over a month into the new administration under President William Ruto. At this early stage we can see that some things have changed, others, not so much.

One definite change is that our new president’s speeches have been a lot more policy-heavy than perhaps we had become accustomed to. His inauguration speech mentioned the scaling up of the allocation to the judiciary, committed to the appointing of the six judges of the Court of Appeal (which he immediately did), made the Inspector-General of the police the accounting officer (again, done), as well as mentioning fuel subsidies, fertilizer costs, youth unemployment, financial inclusion and a number of other important policy aspects.

But it is the president’s speech during the inauguration of the 13th Parliament that I wish to draw attention to. It was just as policy-heavy, spending little time on the election just concluded, and more time on what the president’s legislative agenda would be. This is very important. Past presidents who have sailed into State House with a legislative super-majority perhaps may not have realized the opportunity that the times had afforded them. The current president seems fully aware that his ambitious legislative agenda will need to be approved by a parliament in which his coalition does not have the super-majority of years gone by. The president presented his legislative goals to the bicameral parliament very early. I list some of the president’s stated goals below.

The president stated that under his administration, he is keen for agricultural productivity – of farmers, fishermen and herders – to rise “dramatically”. He also stated that parliament should do its duty by supporting the provision of land for affordable housing. Perhaps most memorably, he stated his intention to change the tax regime by taxing wealth, consumption, income, and trade – in that order. And he decried the land fragmentation that has been occasioned by Kenyans seeking and succeeding to purchase 50×100 plots for themselves.

Underlying each and every one of the issues that the president mentioned in the above paragraph is the vital and essential issue of land. Questions of its availability, its productivity, its cost and the alternative uses to which it may be put are unavoidable and inescapable as enablers to the attainment of the president’s agenda. As far as productivity is concerned, large tracts of productive land lie fallow and unused – “owned” by those who will not put it to use. The government will struggle to buy land for affordable housing – because land is far too expensive in precisely those areas where housing is so sorely needed. I have lived in a house in which the door to the shower could not fully be opened because at some point that door would knock the showerhead when you opened it. The price of land, dear reader, is in that shower-room. There are numerous apartment blocks in Nairobi in which if the bonnet of the car parked first is not nestling snugly under the stairway leading into the apartment, the gate simply will not close. The price of land, dear reader, is in that apartment’s parking lot – and elsewhere in the apartment, I’m sure. (Indeed, the price of land is so high that it has proven and will continue to prove to be an impediment to the improvement of the nation’s infrastructure; land compensation cost KSh33 billion during the construction of the standard gauge railway, for example.) And the land fragmentation that the president rightly regrets is a combination of both these factors: the fact that large tracts of land are unavailable to a public that would otherwise have put them to more productive use; and the fact that land prices are high and rising so that it is seen as a more durable asset in which to park family savings, such that smaller and smaller pieces of land have more and more value. In short, resolving the land problem in Kenya is now fundamental to any administration’s success. A day of reckoning must soon come, and it is better to get out in front of it.

The government will struggle to buy land for affordable housing – because land is far too expensive in precisely those areas where housing is so sorely needed.

There is a simple solution to each of these problems, although I must caveat this statement by saying that “simple” does not necessarily mean “easy”. Land is a natural resource; it is not manufactured by anyone. There exist schools of economic thought that state that the taxation of such natural resources for the national benefit is the best way to realize their value on behalf of the people. Let us examine this thinking further by means of a thought experiment.

Imagine, for example, that there was a blanket tax rate on land of, say, KSh1,000 per acre per month, or KSh12,000 per annum.

(It would be important for such a new tax to be offset by a commensurate reduction in income tax, to stay within the president’s stated principle of taxing wealth first and income second-to-last.)

We shall now examine the effects of this tax for Family A which owns the quarter of an acre on which they have built their family residence. Such a tax would amount to KSh250 per month, or KSh3,000 per annum. In all likelihood, Family A would be able to pay it, even without offsetting it from income tax. But let us now examine the effects of this tax for Family B which owns 100 acres of land. Such a tax rate would amount to KSh100,000 per month, or KSh1.2 million per year. Given that – as earlier stated – this amount is to be offset from that family’s income tax, such a family would only be unwilling to pay this tax if they were not already farming the land, or in some other way making it produce at least the KSh1,000 (per acre per month) needed to pay the tax. In other words, only the owners of idle land (or, more fairly, the idle owners of productive land) would be disturbed by this change in the tax regime.

(It gets even more interesting when the tax rate is a flat percentage based on the value of the land. Let us say the rate is 2 per cent per annum. A parcel of land valued at KSh1 million would attract an annual tax of KSh20,000. A parcel valued at KSh100 million would attract a rate of KSh2 million per annum. This is even more fair and just because an empty lot in Nairobi city centre is losing us far more productivity than an acre of land in Samburu. This is what is known in economics as a land-value tax, and it is the holy grail of taxation policy. But I digress.

Upon the introduction of a land tax, in very short order, one of three things would happen. Families like Family B could sell their land. The immediate availability of large tracts of land for sale in order to avoid the tax would have the economically salubrious effect of depressing the price of land quite quickly, availing it for careful planning. We would have to take care to avoid the mistakes of the past, where planning for the use of this most important of resources has been largely non-existent and land allocation has fallen prey to corruption. Even where newly-available land is to be bought by a new owner, it should be carefully allocated to those who would actually farm it productively, and such allocations should not be corrupt. Japan achieved this by having these decisions made by local land committees, and this fair redistribution of land kicked off that nation’s economic take-off.

Alternatively, Family B could lease the land for the tax rate or slightly more. Although theoretical, a land lease rate of KSh1,000 per acre per month is quite fair and would enable the land to be put to use by a good agriculturalist – the youthful unemployed of our day. (Such an approach while helpful, would not be a silver bullet, and would need to be allied with extension services, capital provision, assistance with market development, and other support.) This would at once help to reduce unemployment – the single most important economic problem of our time – and attain the target of increasing the national agricultural productivity that the president talked about in his speech.

An empty lot in Nairobi city centre is losing us far more productivity than an acre of land in Samburu.

Lastly, Family B could put the land to the uses to which it should have been put all along, in order to generate the KSh1,000 per month required to pay the tax – and keep the land.

All of these outcomes – provided they are correctly carried out – are beneficial. In China, for example, grain output leapt by 70 per cent in the decade after land redistribution. However, to ring-fence and insulate these beneficial outcomes from typical Kenyan venality, the land tax must be inescapable. It may be necessary to make it public information whether the tax for a piece of land has been paid or not. Further, during land redistribution the public should be involved, as was the case in Japan. In addition, the institutions in charge of these processes should be staffed by individuals who are above reproach. It is also important to note that a certain reading of Article 209 of our Constitution could conceivably prevent the national government from imposing such a land tax. Sound judicial advice should therefore be sought before proceeding with these changes.

Dear Mr President: please tax the land, and not your people.

Continue Reading

Op-Eds

Great Lakes and Horn of Africa in Flux: Which Way President Ruto?

Newly elected President William Ruto has his work cut out crafting a coherent political strategy to address the crises bedevilling the Great Lakes Region and the Horn of Africa.

Published

on

Great Lakes and Horn of Africa in Flux: Which Way President Ruto?

On September 13, William Ruto was sworn in as the fifth president of Kenya following a tightly contested election that had to be adjudicated upon by the Supreme Court of Kenya. The inauguration ceremony was attended by almost 20 heads of states and governments including all the presidents of the East African Community. As the celebrations fade and the reality of the work that awaits sinks in, President Ruto has a full in-tray of regional security crises around the Great Lakes Region and the Horn of Africa that require his attention. To some observers, he has big shoes to fill—those left by his predecessor, retired president Uhuru Kenyatta who has been hailed by some for having an aggressive and assertive foreign policy agenda. This article analyses the key regional issues that President William Ruto must pay attention to as he emerges from the shadows as a Deputy President to become a full president of one of the anchor states in the Great Lakes region and the Horn of Africa.

First, President Ruto comes into office at a time when the East African Community has admitted a new member—the Democratic Republic of Congo. The inclusion of the DRC brings with it the challenge of the unending conflict of the Eastern DRC where the M23 and other rebel groups continue to cause havoc and destruction. Second, the conflict in Ethiopia between the Tigray Defense Forces and the Ethiopian government has been re-ignited once again, with reports of each side violating the ceasefire agreements signed earlier on. Third, South Sudan has recently extended the tenure of the transitional government for another two years, meaning that the elections scheduled for December will be postponed. The fledgling Revitalised Transitional Government of National Unity still faces an uphill task in bringing order and peace to the country. Fourth, Kenya remains a key player in Somalia, with its troops still forming a key part of the AU Transition Mission in Somalia (ATMIS).

DRC and the emerging regional security complex

The security challenge facing the Eastern part of DRC is of great interest because it is inextricably linked to the emerging regional security complexes within the Great Lakes Region. Therefore, it has the potential to engulf the entire region if not well addressed. Furthermore, this is the first time the EAC is being called upon to mobilise an intervening regional force to be deployed in a member state.

This comes against the backdrop of a bitter exchange of words between Presidents Felix Tshisekedi of DRC and Paul Kagame of Rwanda over who is responsible for the re-emergence of the conflict waged by the M23. This unending blame game between Rwanda and DRC threatens to sour the goodwill among the presidents of the EAC. President Ruto’s predecessor, former president Kenyatta, had laid a smooth path for President Tshisekedi to join the EAC and cultivated a very close working relationship that saw Kenya make an entry into the DRC market. This also led the Kenya Defence Forces to joining the UN peacekeeping MONUSCO mission. Kenya assuming the command role of the regional force in DRC was a culmination of these efforts by President Kenyatta to portray Kenya as a reliable ally of DRC.

During the presidential election campaign in Kenya, President Ruto made comments describing DRC citizens as people who liked dancing a lot and wearing high-waisted trousers, and not involved in dairy farming, a comment that almost caused a diplomatic spat between the two countries. Therefore, as he takes his place in the EAC Summit, President Ruto has a lot to repair in terms of relationship building with his DRC counterpart who is a known ally of Raila Odinga, his competitor in the just concluded elections. Already, Ruto’s hands are tied by the EAC Heads of State Summit’s decision to nominate President Kenyatta as the lead of the East DRC peace efforts that he had initiated. President Ruto should therefore follow in the footsteps of his predecessor and emphasize the collective will and role of the EAC in addressing this complex security issue.

The restive Horn and IGAD competing interests

While President Ruto was preparing to be sworn in, the Tigray Defense Forces issued a press release agreeing to participate in the African Union-led mediation efforts. This was a departure from their past communications which were full of mistrust of the AU. At the time of writing, the African Union has organised a meeting of the parties to be held in South Africa.  Prior to this, fighting was reported to have resumed, with reports that Ethiopian forces had attacked and bombed certain areas within the Tigray region. Further reports indicate that neighbouring Eritrea has also invaded the border regions, further complicating the conflict.

In Somalia, the threat of the Al Shabaab terrorist group remains real for both Kenya and Somalia, and there is a need for greater collaboration between the countries’ two leaders. Kenya still has its troops stationed in Somalia under the AU Transition Mission in Somalia (ATMIS). Besides the Al Shabaab terror threat, Kenya and Somalia are still embroiled in a maritime dispute following Kenya’s rejection  of the ICJ ruling that favoured Somalia.

The Revitalised Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan (R-ARCSS) continues to face headwinds as there seems to be no clear indication as to when it will be fully implemented. The US’s withdrawal of support has dented confidence in the South Sudan peace process. Furthermore, the recent decision to postpone the elections until 2024 has thrown the prospects of a peaceful resolution of the conflict into doubt.

To address some of these challenges, President Ruto needs to visit some of the countries engaged in conflict. At the time of writing, President Ruto was scheduled to visit Addis Ababa, his first visit to a regional capital and the seat of the African Union. Second, he needs to visit Asmara to speak to one of the key actors in the Tigray conflict, President Isaias Afwerki who for the longest time has been treated as a pariah in the region. Subsequently, President Ruto should rally his peers to fully engage Eritrea on some of the regional security challenges.

Third, President Ruto should push the United States and the European Union to press the AU to treat the conflict with greater urgency. There have been reports that the AU, led by its Chair Moussa Faki, has been lethargic in responding to the crisis. These allegations were recently given prominence by former president Uhuru Kenyatta’s decision to skip the planned mediation talks in South Africa. In a letter outlining his reasons for skipping the talks, Kenyatta urged the AU to provide “clarity on the structure and modalities of the talks”.

President Ruto should rally his peers to fully engage Eritrea on some of the regional security challenges.

In addition to this, President Ruto should urge the international community to prevail upon the AU and Moussa Faki to drop former Nigerian president Olusegun Obasanjo as the lead mediator and replace him with former president Kenyatta. So far, the TPLF has expressed reservations about the role of Obasanjo whom they see as too soft on Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed. This is because, as a former head of state, Kenyatta lacks the political influence he previously commanded as a sitting president to call to order all the actors in the conflict. Therefore, without the AU/IGAD backing Kenyatta as the lead mediator, his mission will not achieve the desired outcomes.

Fourth, President Ruto will need to approach the Somalia case with a lot of caution because of the fluidity of the politics in Mogadishu. He will need to avoid the mistakes of his predecessors and treat Somalia as an equal despite the internal challenges the country faces. On the maritime dispute, President Ruto has to find a working formula which will benefit both Kenya and Somalia and diffuse any tensions that emerge from it. There are signs that relations will be better; in a recent interview on Al Jazeera President Ruto was full of praise of Somalia’s President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud, saying that he was ‘’more progressive and committed to fighting Al Shabaab”. This was a thinly veiled dig at his predecessor, President Farmaajo, whose tenure was riddled with diplomatic spats between Kenya and Somalia.

Kenyatta lacks the political influence he previously commanded as a sitting president to call to order all the actors in the conflict.

Fifth, President Ruto needs to be assertive on South Sudan leaders to fully implement the R-ARCSS agreement. Kenya seems to have taken its foot off the gas pedal when it comes to South Sudan. While Kenya continues to chair the Reconstituted Joint Monitoring and Evaluation Commission (RJMEC) through Maj. Gen. Charles Gituai, key observers agree that Kenya has since fallen behind Uganda and Ethiopia as the key player in South Sudan. Will he reverse the trend and have Kenya regain its foothold in South Sudan? A big decision will be whether President Ruto will retain former vice president Kalonzo Musyoka as Special Envoy or whether he will replace him.

While Kenya is often praised for its role as an anchor state in a region engulfed in chaos, its regional foreign policy does not appear to be based on a coherent political strategy. This lack of coherent strategy in its foreign policy has made Kenya vulnerable to international and domestic sources of instability. As President Ruto begins his tenure and embarks on a regional tour starting with Addis Ababa, the seat of the African Union, will he follow his predecessor’s footsteps or chart his own course?

Continue Reading

Trending