Latest news with #UhuruKenyatta
Business Insider
07-08-2025
- Politics
- Business Insider
How 2025 could mark the beginning of the end for Rwanda-Congo hostilities
Although military conflicts have long plagued Africa's Great Lakes region, the relationship between the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Rwanda, its eastern neighbor, saw a significant shift in 2025. Conflict in Eastern Congo escalated in 2025 with attacks by the M23 rebel group on Goma, prompting international condemnation. While Angola and other mediators failed initially, Qatar facilitated renewed dialogue between representatives of Rwanda and the DRC. U.S.-brokered discussions led to the establishment of a Joint Oversight Committee in Washington, marking a diplomatic breakthrough. What began as another tragic chapter in the ongoing instability of eastern Congo escalated into a full-blown geopolitical crisis, culminating in a series of peace talks that may yet redefine the region's future. M23's offensive in the Democratic Republic of Congo Conflict flared up again in January 2025, when the M23 rebel group, long suspected of getting help from Rwanda, launched a concerted attack on Goma, a crucial city in eastern DRC. The onslaught was savage and swift, killing hundreds of civilians and causing significant displacement. Within days, more than 900 dead were discovered on Goma's streets. The world condemned Rwanda, and it came under tremendous scrutiny for its alleged involvement in the attacks. Despite Kigali's denials of complicity, regional and international players imposed sanctions and threatened economic repercussions. A path to peace following weeks of bloodshed In early February, DRC President Félix Tshisekedi attended a joint conference of Eastern and Southern African leaders in Tanzania. The event was held in reaction to the escalating violence, which had resulted in a humanitarian crisis. Despite M23's unilateral ceasefire, their advance into Bukavu in South Kivu continued, demonstrating the fragility of any informal agreements. Recognizing the urgency, both the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and the East African Community (EAC) intervened. In a significant display of solidarity, they nominated three African politicians to promote peace talks: former Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta, former Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo, and former Ethiopian Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn. The mediators brought credibility, expertise, and a pan-African mandate to the bargaining table, but failed to achieve any significant milestone in creating peace. By March, Kinshasa was still adamant about not dealing directly with the M23 rebels, despite regional pressure. The DRC administration said that granting them legitimacy at the negotiating table would compromise national sovereignty and accused the organization of serving as a foreign proxy. This hardened position was reinforced even as global actors, such as the United Kingdom, called for inclusive dialogue involving all parties. Angola was introduced as a new possible mediator on March 12. In contrast to previous diplomatic attempts that mostly ignored the rebel organization, it suggested direct talks between the Congolese government and the M23. A few days later, on March 18, the Angola-led discussions collapsed as the M23 delegation left, blaming influence from other parties, mainly EU sanctions. A week later, Angola formally ended its mediation role, preferring to focus on African Union initiatives. Enter Qatar and the U.S.: A Diplomatic Pivot By late March, a new round of negotiations sprang up, this time hosted by Qatar. President Paul Kagame of Rwanda and President Félix Tshisekedi of the DRC met through Qatari mediation. A joint statement issued by both parties, together with Qatar, acknowledged previous peace initiatives, notably the Luanda and Nairobi talks, and suggested a fresh push to engage diplomatically. Qatar selected April 9 as the official date for the next round of peace negotiations in Doha. As the new diplomatic impetus grew, the United States intervened more urgently. By late April, US assistance had helped take discussions closer to a solid framework. On April 25, in Washington, Rwanda and the DRC agreed to work toward a peace and economic cooperation deal, one that emphasized mutual respect for sovereignty and the creation of a comprehensive draft agreement by May 2nd. Conditions for Peace With diplomatic lines more active than ever, the U.S. began to demand harsher terms to move the process along. Among these was the demand that Rwanda withdraw all of its military personnel from eastern Congo, a vital trust-building gesture viewed as non-negotiable by both Kinshasa and international observers. Diplomats from the United States also requested guarantees about the cessation of cross-border funding for armed groups, verification procedures, and initiatives to foster economic growth in the eastern provinces, which have been neglected and destroyed by decades of turmoil. Washington's presence added weight to the discussions and helped alter the tone from antagonism to cautious collaboration. July 31: A First Step in Implementation The culmination of these efforts occurred on July 31, 2025, when Rwanda and the DRC hosted the first meeting of their Joint Oversight Committee in Washington. This committee was entrusted with supervising the gradual implementation of the US-brokered peace deal. This encounter signaled a watershed moment in the two countries' long-strained relationship. While tensions have not been completely resolved, and suspicions remain high, the establishment of a joint committee showed a mutual acknowledgment of the importance of structured, verifiable action. It also showed the role of external diplomacy in pushing both countries toward responsibility and partnership. Long Shadows and Lingering Questions Even while these diplomatic breakthroughs provide some reassurance, the tasks ahead are severe. The underlying grievances, land rights, ethnic conflicts, regional power struggles, and rivalry for mineral wealth have not magically gone away. Similarly, trust between Kigali and Kinshasa is tenuous at best. One accord is unlikely to demolish the region's decades-long history of proxy wars and changing allegiances. Nonetheless, 2025 may be regarded as the year in which both parties made significant progress toward long-term peace. While the path ahead remains undefined, and the conflict's origins are deep, the formation of a Joint Oversight Committee and the US-backed framework for collaboration are significant steps forward.
Yahoo
12-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Is William Ruto the most disliked president in Kenya's history?
Kenya's William Ruto rode into office on a wave of enthusiasm among ordinary people who hoped he would live up to his promises to improve their lives. Instead, he is facing unrelenting criticism – seen as unmatched in the country's history. Seemingly frustrated by the intensity of the backlash, he on Wednesday asked why such public outrage was never directed at his predecessors, including Daniel arap Moi, who ruled with an iron fist for over two decades marked by political repression and human rights abuses, and others who departed under clouds of controversy. On Wednesday Ruto posed: "All this chaos, why wasn't it directed at [former presidents] Moi, Mwai Kibaki, Uhuru Kenyatta…Why the contempt and arrogance?" Analysts describe the current wave of public anger toward President Ruto, which has seen 10 people killed over the past year, as "unprecedented", uniting Kenyans across ethnic, religious, and class divisions. Protests against his administration began barely a year after he came into power. Three years in, many aggrieved Kenyans now want him gone – amid unrelenting protests with rallying calls of "Ruto must go" and "Ruto Wantam" (Ruto for one term). When Ruto was vying for the presidency, he portrayed himself as a common man, who came from a childhood marked by poverty and resilience. He appealed to the ordinary folk as a person they could draw inspiration from - having risen from chicken seller to president. Contrast that to earlier this year, when a newspaper splashed a headline asking whether Ruto was "Kenya's most hated president", a sentiment that has often echoed across social media platforms and public discourse. It marks an extraordinary change in Kenyan politics, often shaped by ethnic allegiances and class divisions. Just as Ruto was seen as transcending those barriers to clinch the presidency, the same dynamics now appear to be working against him. This week the phrase "We are all Kikuyus," trended on social media as young people rejected attempts to reintroduce the ethnic divisions that have long plagued Kenyan politics. A counter narrative of "We are all Kenyans" emerged but failed to gain similar traction – with some seeing it as an attempt to dilute the expression of solidarity in the first message. The Kikuyu, Kenya's largest ethnic group from the Mt Kenya region, overwhelmingly backed Ruto in the 2022 elections, together with Rigathi Gachagua, who hails from the region, as his deputy. But Gachagua's hounding from office last year through a dramatic impeachment process, which he described as a betrayal, sparked discontent in the region. In the aftermath, some politicians allied to Ruto have accused Kikuyu elites of fuelling opposition against the president. Political analyst Mark Bichachi says the opposition to the president is not ethnically driven, but is happening across diverse communities in urban and rural areas. He terms the "public outcry against a president and a regime" both "unprecedented" and "historical", even surpassing the political upheavals of the 1980s and 1990s when Moi led a one-party state. The period was marked by brutal crackdowns and a bloody fight for multiparty democracy, but Mr Bichachi tells the BBC that this did not generate the kind of pressure now bearing down on Ruto, adding that the tensions then were linked to the Cold War and were felt across the continent. Mother mourns 'beautiful' 12-year-old shot while watching TV during Kenya protests Why the death of a blogger has put Kenya's police on trial 'Shoot in the leg' - Kenyan leader orders police to curb violent protests But academic Dr Njoki Wamai says the criticism levelled at the president is nothing unusual, but part of a political tradition during moments of crisis. "All presidents, when they've gone against the constitution, against the will of the Kenyan people, have always faced a lot of criticism," she tells the BBC. She points to past leaders such as the founding president Jomo Kenyatta and his successor Moi - who both faced an intense backlash and loss of public trust during critical moments - including after the assassination of key political leaders and the coup attempt against Moi in 1982. "What is different [this time] is that the scale of spread of information is higher," she says, noting the impact of Kenya's digitally savvy youth, whose widespread access to social media and digital tools has amplified public discourse. She also describes Ruto as always having been "very conservative," suggesting that his political outlook clashes with the more liberal values embraced by many Kenyans - particularly young people. This ideological mismatch, she argues, has contributed to growing tensions. The current resistance campaigns are largely youth-led, online-based, decentralised and seen as leaderless, mostly unfolding outside the established political class. Since last year, they have been driven by anger over the high cost of living, aggressive taxation, corruption and police brutality. But pointing to ethnic politics and incitement as fuelling the latest unrest, the president said on Wednesday: Let's stop ethnic division, hatred, pride and contempt. We are all Kenyans". He vowed to use "whatever means necessary" to maintain peace and stability. He called on the police to shoot in the legs protesters who were targeting businesses, rather than killing them. His remarks sparked more outrage and mockery. Since last year, the Kenyan government has responded to protests and dissent with brutal crackdowns, including mass arrests and alleged abductions by security operatives. It is a strategy that rights groups say has only deepened public outrage and alienated the citizens from the state, with the police accused of using excessive force to quell the protests. More than 100 people have been killed in successive waves of anti-government protests since June last year. The latest one on Monday claimed 38 lives, marking the deadliest day of unrest yet. Rather than serve as a catalyst for police reform or push efforts to pacify the demonstrators, the deaths have often served as a spark for subsequent protests, turning grief into rage. The government has blamed the violence on protesters, accusing them of attacking police stations and even trying to stage a coup. Political communication expert Hesbon Owilla calls the unrest "probably the most intense outrage against a regime" in Kenya's history. He says it has brought people from all walks of life to unite in defiance. He puts it down to how the president communicates to the people. He says Ruto's promises to uplift the fortunes of ordinary people were "real, extremely real" and shifted the campaign from ethnic mobilisation toward issue-based politics. "Then he became president. We are still waiting. What Kenyans are experiencing is worse," he tells the BBC, capturing the deep sense of disappointment among many Kenyans. He says that unlike past governments that made cautious promises, Ruto made, and continues to make, sweeping pledges leading to broken expectations. "The disillusionment is creating the rage," he says. Citing the example of the order to shoot protesters, he also says that the president often speaks when silence might serve him better - overexposing himself and inadvertently making serious national issues feel personal. As a result, when there is criticism, it tends to be directed squarely at him, rather than being attributed to a failure of governance systems. Even so, Ruto has repeatedly highlighted his administration's efforts to better the lives of all Kenyans, pointing to the government's flagship affordable housing project, a universal health scheme, digital jobs, and an overseas employment programme as key achievements. While inspecting one of the housing sites this week, he acknowledged the severity of youth unemployment but emphasised that the problem predates his presidency. He insisted that his government was the first to take deliberate steps to tackle the crisis, citing state initiatives such as the housing project that he says has created hundreds of thousands of jobs. The president appealed for patience, as the problem would take time to resolve. Yet patience, especially amid the high cost of living, unmet expectations, and growing frustration, is not something that most Kenyans feel they can afford. Some of those flagship programmes have come at a steep cost to Kenyans, who now have 1.5% housing levy and a 2.75% health insurance tax deducted from their monthly incomes. The pain of paying some of these higher taxes has dominated everyday conversations, especially with a perception that higher taxes have not resulted in better public services. To the government's credit, Mr Owilla says some of the initiatives, like the universal healthcare project, have had a great impact, and others may eventually deliver for many. But Mr Bichachi argues that the government has "lost touch with how people feel", and its tone has remained unchanged despite rising public resentment. He says the issue is unlikely to change based on how the government performs – describing it as a "love-hate relationship" between the people and the presidency. That is "how we find ourselves where we are", he concludes, referring to the intense resentment that is now faced by the president, who was once one of the "the most applauded and lauded leaders to come onto the Kenyan state". Are East African governments uniting to silence dissent? BBC identifies security forces who shot Kenya anti-tax protesters El Chapo & Deputy Jesus - why Kenya's president has so many nicknames New faces of protest - Kenya's Gen Z anti-tax revolutionaries 'We live in fear' - forced expulsions taint Kenya's safe haven image Go to for more news from the African continent. Follow us on Twitter @BBCAfrica, on Facebook at BBC Africa or on Instagram at bbcafrica Africa Daily Focus on Africa
BBC News
12-07-2025
- Politics
- BBC News
Is William Ruto the most disliked Kenyan president in history?
Kenya's William Ruto rode into office on a wave of enthusiasm among ordinary people who hoped he would live up to his promises to improve their lives. Instead, he is facing unrelenting criticism – seen as unmatched in the country's frustrated by the intensity of the backlash, he on Wednesday asked why such public outrage was never directed at his predecessors, including Daniel arap Moi, who ruled with an iron fist for over two decades marked by political repression and human rights abuses, and others who departed under clouds of Wednesday Ruto posed: "All this chaos, why wasn't it directed at [former presidents] Moi, Mwai Kibaki, Uhuru Kenyatta…Why the contempt and arrogance?" Analysts describe the current wave of public anger toward President Ruto, which has seen 10 people killed over the past year, as "unprecedented", uniting Kenyans across ethnic, religious, and class divisions. Protests against his administration began barely a year after he came into power. Three years in, many aggrieved Kenyans now want him gone – amid unrelenting protests with rallying calls of "Ruto must go" and "Ruto Wantam" (Ruto for one term). When Ruto was vying for the presidency, he portrayed himself as a common man, who came from a childhood marked by poverty and resilience. He appealed to the ordinary folk as a person they could draw inspiration from - having risen from chicken seller to that to earlier this year, when a newspaper splashed a headline asking whether Ruto was "Kenya's most hated president", a sentiment that has often echoed across social media platforms and public marks an extraordinary change in Kenyan politics, often shaped by ethnic allegiances and class divisions. Just as Ruto was seen as transcending those barriers to clinch the presidency, the same dynamics now appear to be working against week the phrase "We are all Kikuyus," trended on social media as young people rejected attempts to reintroduce the ethnic divisions that have long plagued Kenyan politics. A counter narrative of "We are all Kenyans" emerged but failed to gain similar traction – with some seeing it as an attempt to dilute the expression of solidarity in the first Kikuyu, Kenya's largest ethnic group from the Mt Kenya region, overwhelmingly backed Ruto in the 2022 elections, together with Rigathi Gachagua, who hails from the region, as his Gachagua's hounding from office last year through a dramatic impeachment process, which he described as a betrayal, sparked discontent in the region. In the aftermath, some politicians allied to Ruto have accused Kikuyu elites of fuelling opposition against the analyst Mark Bichachi says the opposition to the president is not ethnically driven, but is happening across diverse communities in urban and rural terms the "public outcry against a president and a regime" both "unprecedented" and "historical", even surpassing the political upheavals of the 1980s and 1990s when Moi led a one-party period was marked by brutal crackdowns and a bloody fight for multiparty democracy, but Mr Bichachi tells the BBC that this did not generate the kind of pressure now bearing down on Ruto, adding that the tensions then were linked to the Cold War and were felt across the mourns 'beautiful' 12-year-old shot while watching TV during Kenya protestsWhy the death of a blogger has put Kenya's police on trial'Shoot in the leg' - Kenyan leader orders police to curb violent protestsBut academic Dr Njoki Wamai says the criticism levelled at the president is nothing unusual, but part of a political tradition during moments of crisis."All presidents, when they've gone against the constitution, against the will of the Kenyan people, have always faced a lot of criticism," she tells the points to past leaders such as the founding president Jomo Kenyatta and his successor Moi - who both faced an intense backlash and loss of public trust during critical moments - including after the assassination of key political leaders and the coup attempt against Moi in 1982. "What is different [this time] is that the scale of spread of information is higher," she says, noting the impact of Kenya's digitally savvy youth, whose widespread access to social media and digital tools has amplified public also describes Ruto as always having been "very conservative," suggesting that his political outlook clashes with the more liberal values embraced by many Kenyans - particularly young people. This ideological mismatch, she argues, has contributed to growing current resistance campaigns are largely youth-led, online-based, decentralised and seen as leaderless, mostly unfolding outside the established political class. Since last year, they have been driven by anger over the high cost of living, aggressive taxation, corruption and police pointing to ethnic politics and incitement as fuelling the latest unrest, the president said on Wednesday: Let's stop ethnic division, hatred, pride and contempt. We are all Kenyans".He vowed to use "whatever means necessary" to maintain peace and stability. He called on the police to shoot in the legs protesters who were targeting businesses, rather than killing them. His remarks sparked more outrage and last year, the Kenyan government has responded to protests and dissent with brutal crackdowns, including mass arrests and alleged abductions by security operatives. It is a strategy that rights groups say has only deepened public outrage and alienated the citizens from the state, with the police accused of using excessive force to quell the than 100 people have been killed in successive waves of anti-government protests since June last year. The latest one on Monday claimed 38 lives, marking the deadliest day of unrest than serve as a catalyst for police reform or push efforts to pacify the demonstrators, the deaths have often served as a spark for subsequent protests, turning grief into government has blamed the violence on protesters, accusing them of attacking police stations and even trying to stage a communication expert Hesbon Owilla calls the unrest "probably the most intense outrage against a regime" in Kenya's history. He says it has brought people from all walks of life to unite in puts it down to how the president communicates to the people. He says Ruto's promises to uplift the fortunes of ordinary people were "real, extremely real" and shifted the campaign from ethnic mobilisation toward issue-based politics."Then he became president. We are still waiting. What Kenyans are experiencing is worse," he tells the BBC, capturing the deep sense of disappointment among many says that unlike past governments that made cautious promises, Ruto made, and continues to make, sweeping pledges leading to broken expectations."The disillusionment is creating the rage," he says. Citing the example of the order to shoot protesters, he also says that the president often speaks when silence might serve him better - overexposing himself and inadvertently making serious national issues feel personal. As a result, when there is criticism, it tends to be directed squarely at him, rather than being attributed to a failure of governance so, Ruto has repeatedly highlighted his administration's efforts to better the lives of all Kenyans, pointing to the government's flagship affordable housing project, a universal health scheme, digital jobs, and an overseas employment programme as key inspecting one of the housing sites this week, he acknowledged the severity of youth unemployment but emphasised that the problem predates his insisted that his government was the first to take deliberate steps to tackle the crisis, citing state initiatives such as the housing project that he says has created hundreds of thousands of president appealed for patience, as the problem would take time to patience, especially amid the high cost of living, unmet expectations, and growing frustration, is not something that most Kenyans feel they can of those flagship programmes have come at a steep cost to Kenyans, who now have 1.5% housing levy and a 2.75% health insurance tax deducted from their monthly incomes. The pain of paying some of these higher taxes has dominated everyday conversations, especially with a perception that higher taxes have not resulted in better public the government's credit, Mr Owilla says some of the initiatives, like the universal healthcare project, have had a great impact, and others may eventually deliver for Mr Bichachi argues that the government has "lost touch with how people feel", and its tone has remained unchanged despite rising public says the issue is unlikely to change based on how the government performs – describing it as a "love-hate relationship" between the people and the is "how we find ourselves where we are", he concludes, referring to the intense resentment that is now faced by the president, who was once one of the "the most applauded and lauded leaders to come onto the Kenyan state". You may also be interested in: Are East African governments uniting to silence dissent?BBC identifies security forces who shot Kenya anti-tax protestersEl Chapo & Deputy Jesus - why Kenya's president has so many nicknamesNew faces of protest - Kenya's Gen Z anti-tax revolutionaries'We live in fear' - forced expulsions taint Kenya's safe haven image Go to for more news from the African us on Twitter @BBCAfrica, on Facebook at BBC Africa or on Instagram at bbcafrica
Yahoo
09-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Is Kenya's president safe in a crowd? Security expert scans VIP protection checklist
Protecting any president requires multiple layers of intelligence, physical security and rapid response security protocols. Exact operational details are classified, but there are global best practices in VIP protection. The issue of presidential protection in Kenya has become particularly relevant following an incident in early May 2025 when someone in a crowd threw a shoe at President William Ruto during a public event, hitting his hand. I have studied policing and security policies in Kenya for over 15 years, interacting closely with the country's security protocols. In my view this incident exposed several critical security lapses around the elite officers tasked with protecting the president. The security of the president is a critical issue in Kenya. The country is exposed to terror groups like the Somalia-based Al-Shabaab and other criminal networks in the region. In 2021, a businessman embedded himself into the presidential motorcade and drove into then president Uhuru Kenyatta's official residence. In 2017, an unidentified man who was said to have illegally accessed the highly protected state house grounds was shot dead by presidential guards. There are multiple layers to Kenya's protection protocols. They include National Intelligence Service officers, the Kenya Defence Force, Presidential Escort Police officers drawn from the highly trained General Service Unit, bomb disposal experts and regular police officers. Their deployment depends on the nature of the presidential engagement. While the shoe incident may be passed off as simply embarrassing, it should serve as a wake-up call to tighten security protocols around the president without necessarily compromising his public engagement with citizens. Prior to any presidential visit across the country, security teams conduct a thorough reconnaissance of the destination. This includes coordinating with local policing agencies, clearing airspace, mapping secure transport routes and identifying nearby medical facilities in case of emergencies. Presidential motorcade routes are pre-planned and a dry run is made. This often includes mapping alternative routes to avoid predictability should there be assailants along a presidential route. It is common to see some roads temporarily closed and security officers conducting sweeps for any threats or explosives. In areas deemed high risk, counter security sniper teams are covertly deployed in strategic areas. Cases of attacks on presidential motorcades are rare in Kenya. However, in 2002 during presidential campaigns, angry opposition supporters stoned then president Daniel Moi's motorcade. In November 2021, an angry mob hurled rocks at then deputy president Ruto's motorcade. The National Intelligence Service and Presidential Escort Unit covertly scout locations in advance, assessing potential security vulnerabilities. Crowd sizes, and entry and exit points for the head of state are mapped out in advance. In cases where meetings are held in town halls or huge tents, attendees are screened using metal detectors and/or physical searches. Uniformed and plainclothes security officers embed themselves in the crowd to monitor any threats. The president and any dignitaries accompanying him have at least three layers of security. The inner ring consists of close protection officers who are always within an arm's length of the president to physically thwart any threats. The middle ring has armed security guards who watch for, among others, sudden movements and abnormal behaviour within the crowd. The outer ring consists of regular police and paramilitary units from the General Service Unit who secure the outside perimeter. The presidential motorcade is a coordinated convoy of heavily armoured vehicles. It includes lead and chase cars, communication units and emergency response teams. Traffic is managed by local traffic police officers to ensure unobstructed movement. Routes are kept confidential until necessary. The president's security may opt to use a decoy vehicle if there is a security threat, to confuse and derail potential risk sources. In all these cases, there is a contingent of specialised General Service Unit officers, called the Recce unit, that always accompanies the president. Kenya's presidential security precautions follow standard VIP security protection like those for heads of state across the world. However, in some neighbouring countries, for instance, presidents move in heavily armed military convoys. This has not been seen in Kenya. If a potential threat is detected, the president is immediately shielded and whisked away to a secure vehicle or evacuated by air in high-risk events. In such cases, the Kenya Defence Forces secures the president. Despite stringent security measures, incidents can occur. For instance, in March 2025, a British tourist was fatally hit by a vehicle in Ruto's motorcade. This prompted investigations and reviews on motorcade safety protocols. Such events highlight the challenges of balancing presidential security with public safety, especially in densely populated urban areas. The shoe-throwing incident targeting Ruto highlighted five major failures in presidential protection protocols. First, crowd screening and access control failures. The alleged assailant was very close to the president, suggesting an inadequate distance between the crowds and the president. The inner ring of security also failed to spot the perpetrator raising a shoe in the air to use as a projectile. This indicates weak front-row eye sweeps and scans by the president's security. Second, there was an apparent delay in security response. The elite officers around the president should have subdued the alleged attacker within seconds. It could mean most had their eyes on the president or cameras, as opposed to scanning the crowds for any sudden movements. Third, security allowed the president to stand too close to a crowd that hadn't been screened. Best practices require a no-go zone of three to five metres for individuals who have not been scanned or screened. Fourth, there was an apparent gap in intelligence and threat assessment. Aggressive or agitated people next to the president should draw the attention of security officers. Plainclothes security officers are usually deployed to monitor crowd behaviour. It isn't enough to rely on uniformed officers. Undercover agents are critical for flagging pre-attack signals, such as nervousness or repeated adjustments of positions. Fifth, there was no clear evacuation plan for the president. After the incident, the president continued speaking. In high-risk scenarios, protocols often demand instant relocation of the president to a secure vehicle or helicopter, where the military takes over and airlifts him to safety. Kenya's presidential security detail may be forced to: increase standoff distance between the president and crowds deploy more plainclothes officers to blend in and monitor crowds around the president mandate stricter screening of those in close proximity to the president conduct more frequent security risks drills for rapid neutralisation of potential threats. The exact details of presidential security in Kenya are confidential. However, the overarching structure aims to provide comprehensive protection to the president while maintaining public safety and order during official engagements. No security protocol is 100% foolproof. But a balance needs to be struck between overly aggressive crowd control and accessibility. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Douglas Lucas Kivoi, The Kenya Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis (KIPPRA) Read more: We set out to improve literacy among struggling readers in Kenya – what we learnt Europe is moving to reposition itself in Donald Trump's new global order Predictive policing AI is on the rise − making it accountable to the public could curb its harmful effects Douglas Lucas Kivoi does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Al Jazeera
01-05-2025
- Politics
- Al Jazeera
Kenya's pact of silence with its military is breaking
When the Kenyan government blocked the public screening of a BBC documentary investigating the military's role in the killing of protesters, it was about more than censorship. It was about protecting a decades-old pact – a silent agreement between the military, the state, the media, and the public: the army stays out of overt politics, and in return, no one looks too closely at what it's doing. That pact is now under threat, and the backlash has been ferocious. Government-aligned MPs have accused the BBC of inciting instability, calling for the broadcaster to be banned from operating in Kenya. Social media campaigns have been launched under hashtags like #BBCforChaos, framing journalism as sabotage. But what is really being defended is not national security, it's the manicured silence that has kept Kenya's military above scrutiny. This decades-long silence has been carefully cultivated since independence. Two failed military coups, in 1971 and 1982, and the terrible records of military regimes across the continent, instilled a lasting fear of soldiers as political actors. To avoid future insurrections, successive governments kept the army well-watered and fed in their barracks and out of the headlines. In return, the public – and especially the media – looked away. No see, no coup. But behind the scenes, the Kenya Defence Forces (KDF) were growing in strength. Throughout the 1990s and 2000s, they expanded their capabilities, acquired new hardware, and cultivated a myth of discipline and professionalism. The invasion of Somalia in 2011 brought the KDF out of the shadows. Now centre stage, the military took up the banner of patriotic warriors fighting terrorism and instilling discipline into the famously corrupt civilian public service. In the following decade, the administration of President Uhuru Kenyatta appointed retired and serving military personnel, including the then-defence forces chief, to a variety of civilian governance roles. But as the military's power and visibility expanded, there was little expanded public oversight and scrutiny. This is despite the very public failures that came in the aftermath of the ill-advised invasion which shattered the myth of integrity and competence. The invasion itself, launched to great media fanfare, was soon bogged down. After a yearlong slog to the Somali port of Kismayo, Kenyan troops were almost immediately implicated in a smuggling racket, trafficking sugar and charcoal out in collusion with al-Shabab, the very enemy they were sent to fight. In 2016, at least 140 soldiers were killed in a single al-Shabab attack on the KDF base in El Adde – Kenya's deadliest battlefield loss. Back home, things weren't going much better. The invasion inspired a wave of terrorism. The KDF's bungled and criminal response to the 2013 attack on the Westgate mall in downtown Nairobi which killed 68 people, badly exposed it. Soldiers systematically robbed the mall while pretending to battle terrorists. Less than two years later, the military was back in the news, having again bungled the response to an attack on the Garissa University College, which left 147 people dead. Throughout all this, the military responded with silence and spin. There was no public inquiry. No reckoning. No accountability. Similarly, there were few calls for accountability when the KDF grabbed a chunk of Lenana Road, a major Nairobi thoroughfare, to expand its headquarters, or when its top brass were implicated in attempts to influence the 2022 presidential election. None of these incidents sparked serious media investigation or political debate about the military's role. Kenya's mainstream media have largely internalised the terms of the pact. Defence reporters rarely publish anything critical of the army. Many function more as conduits for military press statements than as independent journalists. The KDF, in effect, enjoys a veto over how it is portrayed. That's what makes the BBC documentary so dangerous – not because it poses a real threat to stability, but because it disrupts the performance of silence. It challenges the idea that the military is untouchable, and that truth about its conduct must be suppressed for the greater good. But a viable democracy cannot be built on fear. Kenya cannot thrive while shielding one of its most powerful institutions from public accountability. If journalists are vilified for telling the truth, and if media houses censor themselves to stay in favour with generals, then the line between civilian rule and military impunity is already dangerously thin. The real threat to national security is not the BBC. It is the refusal to confront the army's failures and abuses – and the willingness of so many to stay silent in the face of them. Kenya must break the pact. The military must be accountable not just to its commanders, but to the people. And journalism must be free to expose the truth, even when it makes the people with guns uncomfortable. The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.
