Foreign Interference in Kenya’s Elections?
Uhuru Kenyatta wins while facing charges by the International Criminal Court
By Abayomi Azikiwe
Global Research
March 11, 2013
Pan-African News Wire
Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta has won the national
presidential elections in the East African nation of Kenya. Kenyatta,
the son of the first president of the country, Jomo Kenyatta, has come
under fire from International Criminal Court (ICC) as well as the
governments of the United States and Britain.
Kenyatta representing The National Alliance Party (TNA) won 50.07
percent of the vote eliminating the need for a run-off vote. His closest
rival Raila Odinga, representing the Coalition for Reforms and
Democracy (CORD) and the son of Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, a leader as well
in the Kenyan liberation movement of the 1950s and 1970s, won 43.2
percent of the vote.
Voter turnout was over 86 percent illustrating the high-level of
interest in the poll. Odinga rejected the outcome of the election
results and is challenging the electoral commission’s tallies through
the courts.
The atmosphere surrounding the elections in Kenya was relative
peaceful. Five years ago in the aftermath of the voting, violence
erupted between supporters of the run-off candidates Raila Odinga and
Mwai Kibaki.
During the unrest in December 2007 and January 2008, some 1,200
people lost their lives. An international team of negotiators from the
United Nations and the African Union flew into the country and led talks
resulting in the formation of a unity government between Kibaki and
Odinga.
This time around both leading candidates have pledged to maintain the
peace. Odinga, although challenging the outcome, has said that his
opposition to the official results will take place in the courts and not
in the streets.
The ICC charges against Kenyatta stem from the unrest in the
aftermath of the last election. He is accused of financing and
organizing attacks on supporters of Raila Odinga.
The tabulation process for the voting was delayed due to problems
associated with a new electronic system. The delay in the results fueled
some tensions in the country.
Violence five years ago took on an ethnic character since the
majority of supporters of Kibaki were Kikiyu and those of Odinga are
Luo. In Kisumu, a stronghold of Odinga, where the violence erupted in
December 2007, some began to shout “No Raila, No Peace.”
Nonetheless, Odinga was quoted as saying “Any violence now could
destroy this nation forever, but it would not serve anyone interests.”
However, he did say that the elections were marked by “rampant
illegality” and the electoral process had placed “democracy on trial in
Kenya.” ((Reuters, March 9)
Implications for Foreign Interference
Although the Kenyan Supreme Court has stated that it will handle any
challenges to the elections fairly and swiftly, the U.S. and Britain
have both been accused of using the indictments against Kenyatta and the
election results as a leverage to intervene in the internal affairs of
the country. Chief Justice Willy Mutunga, who was appointed in 2011,
said that “We at the Supreme Court are prepared to hear any petition
that may be filed impartially, fairly, justly and without fear,
ill-will, favor, prejudice or bias and in accordance with our
constitution and our laws.” (Reuters, March 11)
Kenyatta and his running mate, William Ruto, are facing charges
before the ICC. Both men have denied the allegations and say that they
will work to clear their names.
The fact that the electorate in Kenya voted in favor of Kenyatta is
an indication of the rejection of the ICC and the western imperialists’
attempts to influence the voting. Kenyatta accused the British
government of trying to shape the outcome of the vote by warning that
any contact with his administration would be at a distance.
The U.S. and other imperialist states indicated that a victory by
Kenyatta would complicate relations even though Kenya has been a close
ally of Washington and London in the neo-colonial war being waged in
neighboring Somalia. Kenya has over 2,000 troops in Somalia
participating with the African Union Mission to Somalia (AMISOM) which
is largely financed by Washington and coordinated through the U.S.
Africa Command (AFRICOM).
According to Alex Perry writing in world.time.com, “If the result
withstands Odinga’s challenge, a win for Kenyatta would represent the
most stunning articulation to date of a renewed mood of self-assertion
in Africa. Half a century ago, Africa echoed with the sound of
anticolonial liberation. Today, 10 years of dramatic and sustained
economic growth and a growing political maturity coinciding with the
economic meltdown in the West and political dysfunction in Washington
and Europe have granted Africa’s leaders the authority and means to once
again challenge intervention on the continent, whether it comes in the
form of foreign diplomatic pressure, foreign aid, foreign rights
monitors or even foreign correspondents.” (March 9)
Kenyatta said in his victory speech that “Today, we celebrate the
triumph of democracy, the triumph of peace, the triumph of nationhood.
We expect the international community to respect the sovereignty and
democratic will of the people of Kenya. The Africa star is shining
brightly and the destiny of Africa is now in our hands.” (March 9)
U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Johnnie Carson said prior to the
Kenyan elections that “choices have consequences.” This was designed to
influence the outcome of the vote.
The ICC has been severely criticized in Africa due to the fact that
all of its indictments are centered on leaders and political figures
targeted by the U.S. and other imperialist states. Kenyatta will be the
second head of state facing indictments by the court based in The Hague.
Republic of Sudan President Omar Hassan al-Bashir has been under
indictment by the ICC for several years. He, too, has rejected the
indictments as a tool utilized by western powers against Sudan.
Most states in Africa and the Middle East have ignored the
indictments against President Bashir along with the African Union and
the Arab League. Bashir has traveled to numerous African and Arab states
for international conferences in defiance of the ICC and the western
imperialist states, some of whom, like the U.S., are not party to the
Rome Statue which established the ICC.
In an editorial published by the Zimbabwe Sunday Mail entitled
“Lessons From Kenya’s Elections,” it states that “All indications point
to the fact that this election will have far-reaching implications—not
just for relations between Kenya and Western governments but also for
relations between Western governments and the rest of the African
continent. “ (March 10)
This same article goes on to point out that although Oginga Odinga,
Raila’s father, was a true patriot of Kenya and Africa, his son is quite
different in regard to his political orientation. Raila Odinga has
served as a mouthpiece for U.S. imperialist interests in Africa
attacking Zimbabwe and other states targeted by Washington.
The Zimbabwe Sunday Mail observes that Odinga “has come across as a
puppet of the West, a man not given to independent thinking. Despite
enjoying the support of some Western powers and benefitting from the
advantages of incumbency, Raila has once again flattered to deceive.”
Noting the significance of the developments in Kenya, The Sunday Mail
stresses that “Uhuru Kenyatta’s victory sends a strong message to the
bullies in Washington, London, Paris and Brussels that the people of
Africa will no longer be intimidated by racist overlords. In spite of
the International Criminal Court charges that dangled above his head
like the proverbial sword of Damocles, Uhuru has gone on to win a tough
election. It is a huge achievement.”
It will be very interesting to see how the Obama administration
proceeds in regard to its relations with Kenya. The country’s strategic
location and role within the region will continue to make it a focal
point for Washington’s involvement.
Abayomi Azikiwe Editor, Pan-African News Wire
