|
The `Gikuyu question` a serious hindrance to EA political federation
2008-01-12 10:00:27
By Mwondoshah Mfanga
East Africa has had at different historical stages faced some specific political-economic problems that have been a hindrance to the region`s forward movement towards political federation.
During the search for political independence the `Buganda question` in Uganda was the major hindrance factor, but today, it does not seem to be a serious block to the attainment of political federation in the region.
Instead, the `Kikuyu question` in Kenya appears to be a seriously hidden factor in the attainment of political federation in the region and the just ended general elections in Kenya have attested this.
During the fight for political independence, Mwalimu Nyerere said he was ready to delay the attainment of the independence of Tanganyika so that the three regional countries of Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda could get political independence under the setting of East African cooperation.
This, however, did not work out as planned because the Britons, who were then ruling Uganda as a protectorate, failed to agree over how the`Buganda question` could have been treated under the setting of independent Uganda.
Indeed, the `Buganda question` had to be left intact and Uganda had to achieve independence in 1962 under Dr Milton Obote as the overall first President with the Buganda autonomy in place.
It was General Idd Amin Dada who had to be employed later by Obote to address the Baganda privilege question by attacking the King`s Palace and reduce his status into an entity like other Ugandans.
When the current President Yoweri Museveni took over in 1986, he restored the symbolic status of the chieftaincies, but did not give them the powers they had during the colonial period.
However what should be noted is that during the heydays of Buganda, the tribe was strong economically-with agriculture mainly focusing in coffee, banana and cotton as the money spinner.
Many of its members also were, and still are, the most educated in Uganda and in the region and occupying the capital city, the Bagandans have always been the focal point in the development of Uganda and no real progress can eschew them.
The failure by the Britons to strike an agreement on the status of the Baganda in independent Uganda is what made Mwalimu to quickly proceed with the attainment of the independence of Tanganyika and as a result on December 9, 1961 he saw the light of the day.
However, in Tanganyika, which came to be Tanzania in 1964 after the unification with Zanzibar, there was a slightly similar situation to that of Buganda. The Paramount Chieftaincy of Kilimanjaro under Mangi Mareale was similar, claimed a similar status to that of Buganda in Uganda.
Nyerere however moved very quickly and swiftly to disbanding chieftaincy and later reducing the special status that Kilimanjaro was claiming in independent Tanganyika by absorbing the dissident elements into the greater government.
So the `paramountcy` question of Kilimanjaro was also resolved with the independence of Tanganyika, despite its members being powerful economically and the most educated in the country, they live a harmonious life with the rest of the ethnic groups because they have no special status.
In Rwanda and Burundi, there have been problems of the Tutsi factor, which led to the genocide of 1994. Thanks to the interference by the international community and today, these countries that are members of the EAC, are addressing their ethnic problems at home.
In Kenya, things were different at independence, and today those differences have manifested themselves into bigger contradictions that threaten not only the independence of Kenya, but also the existence of the region as a single economic and political federation.
Yet this is a question -which has turned into a Kikuyu hegemony - that has to be addressed within the national setting of Kenya, short of which it will affect the existence of the regional confederation.
Kikuyus, unlike Bagandans and people from Kilimanjaro, fought for the independence of Kenya, and in fact shed blood in the cause of the political liberation.
In fact Bugandans were wiling to have the independence of Uganda postponed so that their status could be known first.
It was the same case with `Mangi Mkuu` of the Chagga, who was quoted in the 1950s as saying that Tanganyika would not have been ripe for independence until after 25 years.
Occupying the Central part of Kenya, they are the wealthiest and politically the most strong in the East Africa’s most economically stable country.
Among them are those who feel that because they are the ones who shed blood under the Maumau movement in the course of removing the British colonialists, then they are the only ones who deserve to hold the reigns of power for ever. What has been the political practice therefore?
At independence in 1963, Jomo Kenyatta, a Kikuyu, became the first President of that country, but what followed was the entrenching of the Kenyan economically and in fact the take over from the Whites with the Kikuyus carving strongholds for themselves in various parts of the country.
Daniel arap Moi, a Kalenjin from the Rift Valley province, took over after Kenyatta’s death, but some political analysts say he would not have reigned for 24 years without the `imprimatur` of the Kikuyu.
Meanwhile, instead of the Kikuyu being absorbed into the rest of the ethnic groups they, since independence, have been extending their hegemony over other ethnic groups, sometimes at the extirpation of the latter both economically and politically.
When Moi decided to retire in 2003, he left the throne to Emilio Kibaki, also a Kikuyu, whose victory is being disputed by Raila Odinga on the account that there was massive rigging during elections held about two weeks ago.
With such a consistency of `everything Kikuyu`, the some of the rest of the Kenyans feel that probably they have no right to take the highest post in the Kenyan government, and probably it is because of this that much resentment has been building over time against the Kikuyus.
That is why Kenya more or less has remained with the same provinces since independence and any attempt to try to introduce Majimbo (Orange-Democratic Movement policy) has been resisted.
The reason is that the Kikuyus are afraid of being divided, because by dividing them, their political power would be reduced.
But believe it or not, the best way for Kenyans to reduce the threatening levels of tribalism which they are experiencing now is to divide the present provinces and tribes for easier political governance and facilitate the forging of regional federation.
Why should the Kikuyu question be solved before East Africa goes into political federation?
The disputed election results in Kenya must be an eye opener to everybody in East Africa that, if not checked, the Kikuyu question could affect even the proposed East Africa Federation.
The Wangwe Commission, when collecting views from Tanzanians as to how the East African political federation would be fast tracked last year, it was told that the locals were not ready for the regional entity now because they were afraid of tribalism in Kenya and non ending wars in Uganda.
At least Ugandans are making progress in settling their feuding northerners, but Kenyans seem to be reluctant to settle the question that has existed for decades. Instead they are perpetuating it at the cost of shedding more blood.
Some Kenyans who have rallied beyond the tribal edifice to try to have an ethnic free country know the dangers of building political pillars on the basis of tribalism.
That is why they are ready to have another person and not necessarily a Kikuyu.
The most deadly danger is if the current political logjam is mishandled in the East African Community setting, whereby if the opposition takes the matter to the regional court, Kibaki might even be barred from attending the EAC summit.
If such a situation will be left to prevail, would the regional body really be able to operate?
But it should also be understood that one of the EAC tenets is that it should be free of political quarrels at home.
Perhaps Kenya should be asked to address its ethnic problems or else be kicked out of the bloc.
|
