Kenyan elections: Attorney General intervenes

I doubt that this intervention – courageous though it may be – will have much effect. The initial difficulty is the cessation of internecine warfare. There are many causes for the violence – not all of them political by any means.

It’s my view that the tribes in Kenya must reach the conclusion that they do not wish to continue killing each other and want to work collectively towards a truly democratic society. The only question is how many deaths will that take. Many other African precedents have been set, nearly all of them involving some sort of genocidal warfare. Sadly Kenya and, no doubt in due course, Zimbabwe, must endure the fire before it can be moulded into a peaceable society.

Well perhaps this is not about powers of one individual, or indeed of a few in a powerful elite. The killings and mayhem are being carried out by many. My guess is that the sentiments leading to this violence are widespread.

Politicians or those in power usually have enough sense to a) never to involve themselves directly in such disgusting acts and, b) always to ride on the crests of waves of public emotions. Given that, any cessation will arise from the grass roots, rather than being imposed by force. After all, even the most powerful armies or police forces will be defeated by a determined and numerous populace.

Thus we must now wait until the bloodlust has been slaked. When that happens those ‘in power’ will be obliged to negotiate ‘peace’.

Genocide is perhaps an exaggeration, however we are witnessing large numbers of deaths – mostly of Kikuyu, of course. Those committing these murders will eventually tire of this and realise that however they may feel, this cannot be a permanent state of affairs. Sooner or later they are going to have to get back to the daily business of survival. So the question is then, how long would this take?

One should recall other countries – Rwanda being an example – where savage tribal warfare has taken place. Eventually both the Hutu and the Tutsi realised that things could not continue as they were. In that case genocide did take place, as it did partially in Kosovo or Lebanon, and is presently taking place in Iraq. Even Northern Ireland could be regarded as an example of the ultimate effects of inter-tribal warfare. In none of these cases was ‘peace’ really ‘imposed’. In most cases the indigenous populations simply and finally wished to cease killing each other. They had tired of the constant state of civil war.

Kenya is on the edge of full civil war but has not quite reached that point. It may or may not, but whilst the killings go on remorselessly the chances ratchet upwards.

Then again, maybe we should take care to differentiate between Civil War and Tribal War.

There are clear differences in the motivations of the protagonists in the English Civil War (for example) and those in the Bosnian conflict – and all too many others. It is those motivations which are key to resolution.

Sadly the outcomes are very similar, varying only in the degrees and extent of ferocity.

The resolution is to be found in that difference.

The ‘warfare’ is/was based on tribal animosities. If it was caused by a general (and non-tribal) disatisfaction with the (apparent) election outcome the resolution would be different.

My suspicion is that it will take much more than a simple election re-run to heal these rifts. I’d also hazard that the only long term solution will involve some sort of power-sharing (viz Northern Ireland). That sharing would have to be seen as acceptable and fair to all parties.

For now it’s a question of how to get to the point of agreement on power-sharing via a peaceful interim.