By: Huguette Kazeneza and Gerald Acho of HIPSIR
The CIHA Blog is dedicated to bringing to the fore public debates and scholarship from different parts of Africa that are important for humanitarian work. The Hekima Institute of Peace Studies and International Relations (HIPSIR)—CIHA Blog’s newest institutional partner—is a preeminent forum for generating ideas and debate about peace-building and humanitarianism in all of its aspects. The following post is from a recent forum on preventing violence and sustaining peace in Kenya. In this forum, participants brought out the tension between addressing historical injustices while simultaneously moving towards a shared vision for a more inclusive future society. The debate highlighted important points regarding a need to critically review the legacy, values and indigenous cultural resources that Kenya already has. Out of the discussion emerged an agreement that simply applying an imposed model of “peacebuilding” has not and will not work and that for the country to move forward, a critical dialogue about the dialogue itself regarding contextualized issues of peace and violence in Kenya must take place in an ongoing manner.
Background
In spite of a strong peace process which was set up in 2008 following the most severe political crisis experienced by the country since its independence, Kenya has continued to experience election-related violence every four years. During the post-election violence (PEV) in 2008, more than 1,500 people lost their lives in only a few weeks. In the years following the PEV, many forums have discussed how violence might be prevented during Kenyan elections. However, there is still a continued need to establish successful strategies for preventing violence and sustaining peace in the country in a forward-looking and holistic way. The objective of the public forum at HIPSIR was to share comparative insights from various contexts on different strategies that have helped to prevent political violence and possible implications for Kenya. The public forum was hosted on January 25, 2018 by the Hekima Institute of Peace Studies and International Relations (HIPSIR) in Nairobi in cooperation with the Inclusive Peace and Transition Initiative (IPTI) at the Graduate Institute in Geneva, Switzerland. The presenters were:
- Ms. Shamsia Ramadhan who is a peacebuilder;
- Dr. Babu Ayindo, PhD, Story Teller and Peacebuilder; and
- Dr. Thania Paffenholz, PhD, Director of Inclusive Peace & Transition Initiative (IP&TI).
Shamsia Ramadhan: Strategies for Sustaining Peace
Ms. Shamsia Ramadhan presented on “strategies for sustaining peace in Kenya.” She began her presentation with the affirmation that despite peacebuilding initiatives at different levels in Kenya, the country still lapses into political violence every election year. According to Ms. Shamsia, this indicates that there is something that peacebuilders are not doing right. Issues including inequality, exclusion, marginalization, under-representation, and a politics of winner-takes-all continue to remain a problem in Kenya. This leads to questions regarding how to deal with issues that are not reversible such as historical injustices. From a peace-builder’s perspective, “strengthening institutions, inclusivity, devolution and good governance” will go a long way towards answering such questions.
On the other hand, the agenda of the current government focuses on “manufacturing, affordable housing, healthcare, and food security.” Ms Shamsia asked if this will really help address the challenges facing the country. Where are the voices of Kenyans in this government-led four-part agenda? Ms. Shamsia reiterated her points through a series of questions:
- “How do we move peacebuilding from being event/process driven?”
- “Can peacebuilders engage in peacebuilding and at the same time engage in (impartial) politics?”
- “Are the methodologies applied appropriate? What is the effectiveness of peacebuilding work if the issues keep resurfacing?”
- “What can we do as peacebuilders/citizens of this country to address the political scenario for the future?”
Ms. Shamsia asserted that there are some untapped potentials for sustaining peace in Kenya such as institutions that are in place like the National Peace Architecture that includes multi-sectorial platform which bring together civil society organizations and community institutions to address different issues across the country. The Peace Policy in Kenya also makes peacebuilding not just a priority for civil society but engages the government and is sustained by the 2010 constitution. To answer the recurring question of how peace be sustained in Kenya, Ms. Shamsia argued that dialogue, integrating peacebuilding into ongoing and planned developmental projects, making use of the national peace architecture, ensuring sure that Agenda 4 [1] of the 2008 resolution is implemented would help build lasting peace in the country.
Babu Ayindo: “Why has Kenya not yet acquired hekima (wisdom)?”
The second forum presenter, Dr. Babu Ayindo, started with the word “hekima” which is Swahili for “wisdom that comes with a long experience.” Dr. Ayindo asked why, despite long experience with conflicts and violence, Kenya has not acquired hekima. He then focused his presentation on understanding what is meant by the various terminologies around “dialogue” comparing monologue which is the process of one person talking and the rest listening, to dialogue where two people are talking to each other (he noted that dialogue can also be negative when one person hijacks the conversation). Quoting Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Ayindo stated that “education is a dialogue and dialogue is revolutionary where teachers and students are all learners.” So, what are the implications for Kenya, Dr. Ayindo asked.
- First, Dr. Ayindo asserted that the country needed to dialogue about dialogue.
- Second, to apply hekima and critically review the legacy, values and indigenous cultural resources.
- Third, to debunk that the number one issue of this country is tribe and ethnicity. Politicians have contributed to making sure that this myth is heavily trafficked. Dr. Ayindo argued that the politicization of tribes is a problem.
- Fourth, since the idea of reconciliation seemed so hard to come to terms with by many communities, Dr. Ayindo proposed co-existence as a preferred solution.
Thania Paffenholz: The Implementation of Peace Processes
The final presenter, Dr. Thania Paffenholz, gave an international perspective of how dialogue has been carried out in Kenya, and key aspects of dialogue. She affirmed that, as it is in many countries, a peace agreement can be reached, but the big issue is always the implementation. In Kenya, Agenda Four which deals with long term measures and solutions such as constitutional, institutional and legal reforms; land reform; poverty and inequity; unemployment, particularly among the youth; consolidating national cohesion and unity; and transparency, accountability and addressing impunity still needs to be implemented in full. Dr. Paffenholz focused on three points:
- In the first place, there is the international prevention and peace agenda which countries have signed. Citizens should remind their government that they have signed it and should be committed to it. Since the UN Secretary General has made sustaining peace and prevention of violence his priority, and prevention according to the UN and the World Bank is all about exclusion and inequalities, and it is not about economic inequalities but political inequalities. The emphasis for Kenya then should be on inclusion. This new agenda shifts thinking from an analysis and mapping of the existing conflict to an emphasis on the way forward towards a more inclusive society.
- Dr. Paffenholz’s second point tackled the question of how to get to this inclusive society. Is it through dialogue? What kind of dialogue is needed? According to Dr. Paffenholz, community dialogue is very important, but she wondered if it is enough. When the government is not included or if community dialogue is not included in the government policy, then the process becomes weak. Any new government coming in can just forget about it and even destroy what has been constructed at the community level. There is a dependency of the community level on the top level if the community is not included in the process. The strategy, she asserted, should be to combine the two levels. The political elites also need to be accommodated but even that is not enough. The important thing to do is to ensure a link between national dialogue and the political deal. Another big risk is when people feel disconnected with what is happening at the high level. Dr Paffenholz talks about the dialogue on the dialogue, a space where people can say what should be discussed in the main dialogue and which architecture of dialogue they want. The dialogue on the dialogue is important mainly in a country where there are different opinions. It gives people the opportunity to debate on what should be discussed, who should participate, and what is it for. She affirmed that if the national dialogue doesn’t have clear objectives and clear mandate it will not succeed.
- Dr. Paffenholz’s final point was regarding how to get there. The first thing she advised is to look at the blockages. For example, why is Agenda Four (long term measures and solutions) not implemented? Secondly, the role of the civil society. Usually when there is a crisis the civil society does the mobilization, lobbying, advocacy, etc, and participates a lot, however when the peace agreement has been reached, the civil society gets fatigued. This is in fact a moment to work for the implementation of what has been reached. Thirdly, the joint vision about the country. Kenyans need to work on their national identity. In this, the education system can help in building a national identity, integrating peace education and national identity in the curriculum. The young people are the key for any future change.
Conclusion and Observations (by Gerald Acho)
Public forums on political violence or electoral violence in Kenya have often pre-supposed that the failure to implement Agenda 4 (long term measures and solutions such as constitutional, institutional and legal reforms; land reform; poverty and inequity; unemployment, particularly among the youth; consolidating national cohesion and unity; and transparency, accountability and addressing impunity) is the reason for continued political violence in Kenya. However, this position is simplistic in that even Agenda 2 (Immediate measures to address the humanitarian crisis, promote reconciliation, healing and restoration) has not been well implemented. The inability to effective implement Agendas 2 and 4, and the lack of goodwill from the government in implementing and supporting peacebuilding initiatives has contributed to the failures of peacebuilding initiatives in Kenya. On the other hand, the inability of peacebuilders to address historical injustices and to seek justice for victims of political violence threatens the implementation of peacebuilding initiatives. As long as the perpetrators of political violence either directly or through proxy are not brought to book, victims will always feel resentment and unjustly treated. These are issues which need to be addressed before sustainable peace can effectively be achieved in Kenya.
[1] The National Dialogue and Reconciliation Agreement was signed in Nairobi on 1 February 2008. The dialogue sought to provide a peaceful solution to the political impasse and violence that had engulfed the country, following the December 2007 general elections. The following were the main agendas of the dialogue: Agenda No. 4: Long term measures and solutions (such as constitutional, institutional and legal reforms; land reform; poverty and inequity; unemployment, particularly among the youth; consolidating national cohesion and unity; and transparency, accountability and addressing impunity). Retrieved from: http://www.klrc.go.ke/index.php/our-work/national-accord-and-agenda-four-commissions.