Kenya has witnessed an intensification of the debate surrounding tribal politics, a contentious issue that has long plagued the nation’s political landscape. This renewed discourse follows President William Ruto’s stern warning to politicians against propagating tribal divisions, highlighting the complex and often contradictory nature of Kenyan politics
President Ruto’s admonition came in the wake of escalating tensions within the Kenya Kwanza administration. At the heart of the controversy is Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua, who has been accused by Ruto’s allies of stirring tribal sentiments, particularly through his advocacy for a united Mt. Kenya region. This has led to accusations that Gachagua is undermining national unity and fostering divisiveness.
Tribal politics is not a new phenomenon in Kenya. It is deeply entrenched in the national psyche, a legacy of both colonial manipulation and post-independence power dynamics. Successive regimes have exploited ethnic affiliations to galvanize support, often at the expense of national cohesion. As political analyst Martin Andati notes, “President Ruto is condemning what Gachagua is saying but what he is talking about is completely at variance with his politics.” This dichotomy underscores the pervasive influence of tribalism in Kenyan politics, where leaders publicly denounce ethnic divisions while privately leveraging them to maintain their grip on power.
For many politicians, tribal affiliations are a double-edged sword. On one hand, they provide a reliable base of support; on the other, they risk alienating other communities and deepening societal rifts. The current political tirade against Deputy President Gachagua is seen by many pundits as driven more by personal interests and fears of losing political traction in the Mt. Kenya region than by genuine concerns about national unity.
This perspective is supported by the historical precedent: political leaders, including those currently in office, have often utilized ethnic identities to rally their constituencies. This strategy has ensured short-term electoral gains but at a high cost, perpetuating a cycle of division and mutual suspicion among Kenya’s diverse ethnic groups.
President Ruto’s calls for unity and his denunciation of tribal politics must be viewed within this broader context. While his rhetoric emphasizes national cohesion, the underlying political maneuvers suggest a more complex reality. Ruto’s administration, like its predecessors, is not immune to the allure of tribal politics. The challenge lies in balancing the immediate political expediency of ethnic mobilization with the long-term goal of fostering a truly unified nation.
The path forward for Kenya involves addressing the structural and societal factors that perpetuate tribal politics. This requires a multi-faceted approach, including electoral reforms to reduce the emphasis on ethnic blocs, economic policies that address disparities across regions, and education initiatives that promote national identity over tribal allegiance.
Political leaders must also demonstrate genuine commitment to unity through their actions, not just their words. This means eschewing the temptation to exploit ethnic divisions for political gain and instead fostering inclusive governance that reflects Kenya’s rich diversity.
