Peace Call To The Youth Of Côte D’ Ivoire

By the Youth Bridge Foundation and the African Youth and Governance (AYG) Conference

‘It is only by being committed to peace that we can give a chance to the youth of today and future generations to thrive and allow the African people to enjoy dignified life experiences.’ – Dr. N’Dri Thérèse Assié-Lumumba, Professor at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, Ivorian, Daughter of Africa and Patron of YBF

Youth Bridge Foundation and the African Youth and Governance (AYG) Conference is deeply worried about the ongoing post-election conflict in Côte d’Ivoire. YBF and AYG are particularly concerned about the tensed political climate and resultant violence in Côte d’Ivoire with the youth as both perpetrators and victims of the violence.

On the platform of the African Youth and Governance (AYG) Conference- Accra 2009 and again in August 2010, Youth Bridge Foundation and the entire AYG-Conference Community questioned whether the ever increasing youthful population of Africa, currently estimated at 60 per cent of the continent’s total population presents a potential threat to stability or potential resource for development.

We agreed that for the youth to be a blessing rather than a curse to the continent, a lot depends on the actions African Governments, politicians, the International Community and the citizenry of Africa take or purposefully refuse to take today to prepare the youth for the future.

Regrettably, the Côte d’Ivoire debacle suggests that we are yet to learn the lessons of the past and failing to provide the right leadership to steer the youth of Africa away from violence and destruction. It was not long ago that Kenya suffered similarly civil strife leading to the death of over a 1,000 people mostly young Africans and causing severe disruptions to the economy of Kenya and neighbouring African countries.

Some compelling facts and figures from Sir John Holmes (UN Under-Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs) in report to the UN Security Council on the electoral conflict in Kenya (2007) is worth recalling in this context. He reported that:

  • Over 73 per cent of the assault in Kenya was carried out by youth aged 14-29 years.
  • Economy: (a) The Kenyan State lost US$1.3 Billion (just on production);
    • (b)Tax Revenue: 3-days after the election, the business community lost 2 Billion Shilling (equiv to US$30.42 Million) worth of taxes daily due to the unrest.
  • Ripple effect of Kenyan’s conflict on Tanzania, Uganda, Burundi and Rwanda was devastating.
    • Tanzania: Rely on Kenyan’s Ports for transportation of over 90 per cent their daily consumables.
    • Uganda: with over 80 per cent of Uganda’s imports passing through the Port of Mombasa, Uganda revenue authority reported daily income losses of up to US$600,000.
    • Burundi: Commercial trade and humanitarian assistance to Burundi rely solely on Kenyan ports.

Having crossed over to New Year 2011, the Youth Bridge Foundation and the African Youth and Governance Conference Community remain:

CONVINCED that Africa’s greatest resource is its youthful population (60 per cent of the continent’s population) and that through their productive participation and positive mobilization, Africans can surmount the continent’s many challenges;

ALARMED by the continuous loss of lives violently and slowly due to lack or inadequacy of medical services, and high sense of insecurity which disproportionately affects the vulnerable (women and children) in Côte d’Ivoire;

NOTE that the protection of lives and access to food and shelter is every Ivorian’s human right;

RESPONDING to the recent charge to African youth, at African Youth and Governance Conference (Accra 2010), as contained in the Communiqué, to resist any form of political or social negative mobilization that contribute to the problems of the African continent rather than solutions;

THEREFORE APPEAL TO:

 

Young People of Côte d’Ivoire:

  1. To be reminded that they have the responsibility to steer Côte d’Ivoire into stability;
  2. To remain calm in the light of all the efforts at negotiation and diplomatic talks;
  3. To demonstrate that they have a land to cherish, a future to protect, a challenge to overcome but a commitment to build the future today;
  4. Not to take up arms and allow themselves to be used for violence;

 

Youth wings of the two contending political parties particularly the Young Patriots:

Embrace the above appeal and give peace a chance.

 

All Stakeholders (ECOWAS, AU, International):

Not to give up too quickly on peace without compromising the principles of free and fair elections.

 

Signed

 

SETH OTENG

Executive Director

Youth Bridge Foundation

African Youth and Governance Conference Initiative

Accra, Ghana

Websites:www.aygconference.org / http://www.youthbridgefoundation.net

Email: info@youthbridgefoundation.net

Tel.: +233-302- 938999 / +233-24-3229505

 

Can we call the MPs bluff?

By Odhiambo T Oketch

As we usher in the New Year, we must all stand up and be counted. The country ended the year on a wrong note from our Members of Parliament and I bet we should call their bluff.

Let us interrogate the team that put up a spirited effort to have Kenya withdraw from the ICC process. This is the same team that sang in parliament that we should not be vague- it is the Hague. This is the same team that thwarted 3 attempts in Parliament that could have set up a local tribunal.

At that time they thought that the ICC process will come 30 years down the line, and they said as much.

What comes to mind is the shifting of allegiance as corrupt networks show all and sundry how powerful they are. In so voting, Parliament was in actual fact entrenching impunity. We are being shown how powerless we are as a people and that the Lords of Impunity can play with our national psyche at will.

We all know what ails Kenya. We know how the corrupt have captured power structures and choked the Judiciary. They have now regrouped to operate from the precincts of Parliament and we are cheering them on.

We must condemn our Parliamentarians in the strongest terms possible for showing insensitivity to the plight of the Internally Displaced Persons. MPs must not play roulette with the plight of IDPs; that now they assemble at Panafric Hotel to raise funds for them and the next instance they are voting to protect the interest of the war lord!

As we start the New Year, let us re-focus on the dictates of our New Constitution, which many of them fought so hard to shoot down. We must rededicate our efforts to fight corruption in all its manifestation. It is sad to auction the National Assembly and use the House to advance parochial interests; interests that are at variance with our national aspirations.

Parliament must remain above reproach at all the times. But some of our current group in Parliament are loaded guns ready for hire. It does not matter to them the merit of the assignment. What matters to some MPs is the amount you put on the table and they shoot.

Look at how Hon William Ruto has handled himself in the recent past. The man operates as if he is the paragon of virtue while the rest of our leaders including the President are zombies. The man is inciting the Kalenjins against Kenyans on a daily basis and the National Integration and Cohesion Commission looks on as if nothing is happening. Do they need to be prompted?

As much as the man is running off the field, Ruto is a time bomb ready to explode and he wants to explode with innocent Kenyans. If there is hate speech, do not go far off from Ruto. The man has a slimy tongue and as the Bible says, the tongue can be a tricky slimy tool. Ruto is using it to the fullest. Someone should tell him to stop digging; he is in a hole. He needs our collective redemption.

The last bit is the confusion these chaps want to visit on us that they are the young leaders we should vote for. I want to be very clear on this; if Ruto is the change that we need, then I need no change.

We are struggling to build one Kenya that has respect for all; Ruto does not respect all.

We are struggling to build one Kenya for all; Ruto and his team are busy dividing us on a daily basis. He preaches hatred any time he opens his mouth. He can easily make fools to fight. The good thing is that many Kalenjins have called his bluff and refused to be that vile.

We want a Kenya that is free of corruption and impunity. I am sure we cannot get this from this team that is masquerading as the face of the young leaders ready to salvage Kenya. Many of the leaders in this camp thrive on impunity. They preach hatred and corruption shadows all their movements.

Kenyans must support the ICC process to help us regain some sanity in our way of doing things. The perpetrators of the Post Election Violence must be punished. We have proved that we cannot punish these guys three years down the line, the world must hence punish them.

Let us not be hoodwinked by these young people who believe in nothing. They stand for nothing and they have nothing to offer. The only thing that unites them is the fear of one Raila Amolo Odinga becoming the President of Kenya.

2012 beckons and my voters card is ready.

Odhiambo T Oketch

Komarock Nairobi

National Cohesion Should Be Anchored In The Younger Generation

By Ndolo Asasa

The National Cohesion and Integration Commission (NCIC) is currently holding a 4 day consultation workshop with elders drawn from various communities nationally on fostering national cohesion. This is a good start, though the strategy attracts a yawn!

While the elders hold an important position in national cohesion, the future of a sustainably integrated Kenya lies in the hands of the younger generation and the middle class. As such, NCIC must demonstrate freshness and courageously place the youth at the centre of their programmes. It must stop pushing the youth to the periphery and treating them as users of decisions made elsewhere.

It is hoped that NCIC will shift its focus to the youth as a strategy of emphasizing new thought on the Kenya being: the youth have more at stake as they are the custodians of the future and generally have less historical baggage than the elders that ties them to the status quo or romanticized tribal cocoons of the past.

Being the only Commission of the Agenda IV created commissions that is permanent in its nature, it is important that its strategy and style also reflect that state of permanency. It is high time government institutions started running their programmes with a with a firm focus on the future and sustainably by heavily involving the youth and shedding off now entrenched prejudices against the capacity, focus and commitment of the youth.

By the way, what is the average age of the perpetrators of the post election violence in relation to the average age of the commissioners of the Agenda IV created commission?

The youth must be more centrally used in the efforts to solve existing and anticipated societal problems of the Kenyan nation for a sustainable future.

The writer is a human rights defender who blogs on http://ndoloasasa.blogspot.com/

Kenya’s IDP crisis: Only history can judge our collective inaction

IDPsIn the aftermath of the 2007 general election over half a million people were displaced. Fleeing homes, loosing livelihoods and loved ones. To date some of the 2007 internal refugees still remain both in camps and transit sites. Yet the anomaly of internal displacement is not new to Kenya. From pre-independence many Kenyans have been forcibly removed from their homes, having to settle elsewhere as refugees within their own country.

In contemporary history, the IDP crisis has been closely linked to the country’s electoral process, particularly with the advent of the country’s multi-party era. The crisis became the proverbial elephant in the living room – a topic that was too taboo to mention. For years following the post-election clashes of the 1990s the Moi regime swept the issue under the carpet, maintaining that there were no IDPs. However, with more freedom of expression and opening up of the media, the plight of IDPs has gained more limelight.

Kenya’s internal conflict has been almost like clockwork set to the political scene during general election years of 1992, 1997, 2002 and 2007 as well as the constitutional referendum of 2005. Every five years people have had to flee their homes and that is why the IDP situation falls into the category of a “complex emergency”.

So why term Kenya’s IDP crisis a complex emergency? For the simple reason that unlike natural catastrophes, people loose all they have in a matter of minutes yet the underlying cause is politically instigated and conflict-generated (Macrae and Zwi, 1994).

The United Nations’ Office for Co-ordination for Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) (which draws its definition from the Inter-Agency Standing Committee) defines complex emergencies as ‘a humanitarian crisis … where there is total or considerable breakdown of authority resulting from internal or external conflict …. (IASC, 1994). However, this reliance on authority breakdown has been criticized. David Keen author of the book “Complex Emergencies” writes on OCHA’s definition having shortcomings arguing that in the case of 1994 Rwanda, the problem was not so much the breakdown of authority, rather that the “authority” being imposed was “ruthless” and had “vicious efficiency”.

Indeed Kenya has always had a government, and the UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement stipulate that it is this same government that should ensure that the IDPs receive requisite humanitarian assistance, are resettled and reintegrated back into society. However the Kenya government has mismanaged this obligation.

The Government’s Ministry of State in charge of Special Programmes initiative to resettle the nation’s IDPs has been dubbed “Operation Rudi Nyumbani” which includes financial assistance and transport among other short- term measures.The causes of displacement and obstacles to resettlement have not been adequately addressed and the Ministry’s stop-gap activities have failed to assure Kenyans that the Operation is not just a PR exercise so the government looks good to donors.

There has also been a disturbing tendency where anyone (whether an IDP or an interested party such as the Kenya Human Rights Commission) who questions how an unaccountable government can accountably distribute funds and materials to IDPs are met with torrents of abuse and muzzling.

Queries on government commitment and initiatives to assist IDPs to ensure long-term peace have centered on: poor co-ordination and corruption; insecurity; child and gender based violations; inadequate shelter and compensation for loss. The Kenya Human Rights Commission in an October 2008 report “A Tale of Force, Threats and Lies” even accused the government of forcing IDPs to go back to their homes.

As for the UN and those that adhere to the IDP Guidelines and rules regarding complex emergencies, they have been confined in that they have to deal with the government of day and trust that the government will most effectively and equitably distribute humanitarian assistance. However when the lives of people and those of future of generations are at stake, a dire need emerges to make sure that this complex emergency does not become a permanent one. It is thus imperative that the international community demands that the government ensures that the rights of all IDPs are upheld.

Indeed recent political events have shown the danger of inaction in enforcing strict observance of ethical standards regarding resettlement. Just last week, the government decided to compensate settlers in the Mau forest. This is hardly the first time such a compensation scheme has been conceived, however the common occurrence has been that the majority of the money falls into the pockets of the fat cats who grabbed the land.

The eponymous Ndung’u report lists no less than the families of former presidents Jomo Kenyatta and Daniel arap Moi as those who grabbed land for squatter resettlement. On this issue, Nobel Laureate Prof. Wangari Maathai was today quoted in the media saying, “… the Kenya government does not have money, it’s your taxes. So if they don’t have taxes they will ask the World Bank to give them money to come and compensate leaders who misused their power (to acquire) land they should never have acquired …” As it is, the Ministry of State for Special Programmes requires more funds which will come from the National Budget and the excess from donors. Isn’t it about time to first question whether Operation Rudi Nyumbani has been a success and whether indeed the government should still spearhead IDP assistance?

In August 2000, Fr. John Anthony Kaiser, a crusader for the rights of internally displaced persons was murdered. He was vocal speaking out on the injustices meted out to the displaced. However, almost a decade later, even more people languish miserably away from their homes.

As it is who knows how many more people will join the ranks of IDPs come the next general election, or for that matter the anticipated constitutional referendum? We also need to re-examine our outlook towards Kenya’s IDPs. In an age of reality television where shows such as Big Brother Africa keep viewers glued to their screens; alas when it comes to our brothers and sisters living in camps we are no longer voyeurs. Indeed, there is no difference between our IDPs and those in Darfur, yet though our eyes face the screen watching news stories on their plight, we no longer see the real suffering; we no longer question why this is happening; we only say a silent prayer that come 2012, we will not be the ones taking up airspace as IDPs.

Is it only in Kenya where we have become immune and impervious to news stories on corruption, impunity and gross violations of human rights? Could this be because this is the country where even those that engineer and carry out grand larceny on our nation’s coffers have the opportunity to transform themselves into tele-vangeslist? Is that why we do not find it dysfunctional to watch the IDPs in their tattered clothes which cover emaciated bodies and hold up despondent faces?

Update: read an interesting take on Kenya’s IDPs

Remarks By Secretary Of State Clinton At ‘Townterview’ Hosted by CNN and KTN

Clinton UoNVICE CHANCELLOR MAGOHA: Secretary Clinton, your Excellencies, Dr. Sally Kosgey, the minister for education, science, and technology, Chancellor Wanjui, PS higher education, Your Excellencies, invited guests, participants, ladies, and gentlemen, on behalf of the University of Nairobi and on my own behalf, I warmly welcome you all to the university and to this open dialogue forum. The University of Nairobi wishes for very successful and rewarding event. Thank you very much.

I now invite Honorable Dr. Sally Kosgey, the minister for higher education, to invite Secretary Clinton. (Applause.)

MINISTER KOSGEY: Secretary of State of the United States of America, congressmen – my friend, Congressman Payne, your Excellencies, ladies, and gentlemen, I’m pleased to welcome you to the University of Nairobi.

May I salute you, Madame Secretary, for visiting Kenya and our continent so early in your new Administration. Half a century ago, a young, democratic government in the United States of America initiated the airlift program to assist an emerging Kenya address its intellectual capacity needs to run a new republic. This initiative led to other generous contributions by U.S. philanthropists and institutions. Many Kenyans have contributed and continue to contribute to the development of Kenya, who are beneficiaries of these initiatives from the United States of America. Today, many Kenyans of all generations continue to share values with the people of your country with reference to economic and political developments.

Madame Secretary, a few years ago, Kenya initiated a free universal primary education. Much has been done to make secondary education also free. We salute your country for your contributions to this sector. However, funding for higher education and also for science and technology remains low, yet we are aware that this sector is essential for development. We hope the United States of America will continue to support us in this field and work with us in enhancing and deepening the higher education and science and technology sector. We are particularly keen on targeted cooperation in science and technology and research for development.

Madame Secretary, the last time there was such a large gathering to hear a visitor at this university was on the occasion of a visit by a senator from Illinois who came here – (applause) – who came here to share his vision with young Kenyans. He definitely captured the imagination of many, and I’m pleased that today, you have found an opportunity to share with young Kenyans in your interactions the views and aspirations of all Kenyans and relations with the United States.

Madame Secretary, I want to emphasize once more that we are pleased to see you here; we are pleased that you have chosen to come to Kenya at the beginning of your official visit as the Secretary of State. Now, I want to hand over to Beatrice Marshall. Where are you?

MS. MARSHALL: Dr. Sally Kosgey, Minister – thank you very much indeed, Dr. Sally Kosgey, Minister for Higher Education, Science and Technology. Now, welcome to this open forum. U.S. President Barack Obama was in Africa recently with a powerful message to a hopeful continent. He said, and I quote, “Countries like Kenya which had a per capita economy larger than South Korea’s when I was born have been badly outpaced. In my father’s life, it was partly tribalism and patronage in an independent Kenya that, for a long stretch, derailed his career.” End of quote.

Now given his Kenyan lineage, millions of Kenyans are expectantly looking to the President of the United States, a leader of the free world, to help in breaking our unique chains of poverty and underdevelopment. But the question is: Are these expectations realistic? Today, Kenyan youth and civil society have a rare opportunity to engage the U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton.

But first, before we field those questions to Secretary Clinton, I’ll hand you over to my colleague, CNN’s Fareed Zakaria.

MR. ZAKARIA: Thank you, Beatrice. Thank you, all of you, for hosting this event, the University of Nairobi, the Government of Kenya, and of course, most importantly, thank you to Madame Secretary, the Secretary of State of the United States, Hillary Rodham Clinton. For all of those of you outside this hall, we are coming to you from Nairobi, a unique town hall being hosted by the University of Nairobi with a very special guest, the Secretary of State of the United States, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Madame Secretary, let me ask you a few questions to get us started and to let people get a sense of the kind of questions they should feel free to ask. You spoke a great deal when you have been in Kenya about the need for the reform agenda to be implemented, for the investigation and prosecution of post-election violence to take place, and you used language that was surprisingly frank, some people thought even tough.

In your conversations with Kenyan leaders – you met with all the senior leaders – did you get any assurances that things are moving in the right direction? Because so far, most external observers believe that they are not.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Fareed, I want to get to that because that’s a very important question, and I noticed the sign as I was driving into the university, “This is a corruption-free zone,” and I think that – (applause) – I think that the goal of the university and the young people here – civil society, many members of the private sector, and of course, reformers within government at all levels – is to expand that zone to cover the entire country and to provide the opportunity for people – (applause) – to have a chance to go as far as their hard work and talents will take them.

And I also really want to echo my thanks to the minister and to the chancellor and all the dignitaries here on the stage with us, and particularly to this great university, which has such a reputation for excellence not only in Africa, but beyond the continent. And of course, it is a pleasure to be at the university where now-President Obama came as a senator and delivered a very strong message even then. How many of you were here when President Obama, then-Senator Obama, arrived?

Well, I reread his speech and I just wanted to begin my response to Fareed’s very important question by reading the last paragraph of then-Senator, now President Obama’s speech at this university in 2006: “In today’s Kenya, it is that courage that will bring the reform so many of you desperately want and deserve. I wish all of you luck in finding this courage in the days and months to come, and I want you to know that as your ally, your friend, and your brother, I will be there to help in any way I can.” And the message that I delivered in public and in private was a message directly from President Obama. He cares deeply about this country. And it is very touching and moving to me to see the feelings of kinship and relationship that exists between the people of Kenya and our President.

So the question truly goes to the heart of the matter. The reform agenda is imperative for Kenya’s future to unlock the potential to fulfill the promise that Beatrice told us came from President Obama’s speech in Ghana, where he said something which students of economics know – that in the early 1960s, at the time of independence, smart investors bet on African countries like Kenya, and wrote off countries like South Korea. The argument was that Kenya had the infrastructure, it had the education, it had people with a sense of the future; it had fought a struggle for liberation.

And now, as President Obama pointed out in his speech in Ghana, the fact is that Kenya has not fulfilled its economic promise, and I believe, in part, because it hasn’t yet realized fully what it means to have a functioning, dynamic democracy, and a free press and an independent judiciary, and a sense of future gains from present-day sacrifice among the people who have run the country. The people of Kenya work very hard and the professional people in Kenya are among the best in the world. The private sector is dynamic. The government has to reform itself if Kenya will be all it can be.

That is the message that President Obama and I have delivered. It is tough, but it’s also lovingly presented. President Obama very much wants the people of Kenya to be the leaders of a reform movement that will deliver results for the people of Kenya, and where no one will any longer say that, as someone said to me just yesterday – the common parlance tragically summed up is, if you have a problem in Kenya, why hire a lawyer when you can buy a judge? (Laughter.)

So yes, we want to see the reform agenda because we know that it’s not just the violence after the election, but it is an accumulation of decisions that are not in the best interests of the people of Kenya. And the leadership with whom I met said that the constitutional reform will be coming forward – I hope it does – that police and judicial reform will be coming forward, and of course, the big question about how to end corruption and impunity in public service.

And I have urged that the Kenyan Government try to find the way forward to handle this themselves, but if that is not possible, and people think it is not, then the names that have been turned over to the International Court of Criminal Justice will be opened, and an investigation will begin, and Kenya will not be making these very tough decisions for itself, which is a kind of rite of passage for democracies, dealing with people and making sure impunity is not permitted.

So I hope and I pray that whatever route is taken, it leads to the reforms that are so necessary for this great country. And I’m joined in that by Congressman Donald Payne and Congresswoman Nita Lowey, who are with me; Assistant Secretary Johnnie Carson, who was once our ambassador here; and of course, our current serving ambassador. All of us bring this message from President Obama.

MR. ZAKARIA: Let me ask you about one part of it you talked about, which is the potential for the names of the alleged perpetrators of the post-election violence to be sent to the International Criminal Court in The Hague. This is something the Kenyan National Commission of Human Rights has recommended in the report that came out last month. Does it hinder your ability as Secretary of State of the United States to push these issues when you consider the fact that the United States is not itself a signatory to the International Criminal Court?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, that is a great regret, but it is a fact that we are not yet a signatory. But we have supported the work of the court and will continue to do so under the Obama Administration.

MR. ZAKARIA: But do you wish we were a signatory?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I think it – I think we could have worked out some of the challenges that are raised concerning our membership by our own government, but that has not yet come to pass. The way the court works is that a nation that is a signatory, including an African nation, could refer this matter of the post-election violence to the international court. And I saw a poll of Kenyans saying that a vast majority of Kenyans agree with the Waki Commission that that should be done. And in my conversations, even with ministers in the government who understand how important it is to deal with this matter, they too have said that probably that is the only road forward.

As an outsider and as someone who knows how difficult these decisions are, that is not something that I will play a role in, but I think it’s important that a decision be made. If there’s not going to be a special local tribunal that has confidence of the people, then I think the people deserve to know that someone is going to put in motion the process to hold people accountable, and it may well be that that is the ICC. So that’s going to be up to Kenyans.

MR. ZAKARIA: The second part of what you talked about was corruption, which is, as you know, a huge problem in Kenya. And while there has been talk about combating it, and the signs of corruption-free zones are now seen more often, in 20 years there has not been a successful prosecution of any Kenyan politician or official on corruption charges. Many people suggest that the only way to put teeth in this policy, to make good on the tough part of the tough love, is to withhold aid at some point if there is not reform on the corruption agenda.

Could you imagine a situation when the United States or other Western donors withhold aid because corruption is not being tackled?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, that would not be our choice because a lot of our aid goes directly to nongovernmental organizations and to work of people like Wangari Maathai, my friend and the Nobel Prize winner from Kenya. And we don’t want to deprive the people who are doing work, like I saw yesterday at the Kenyan Agricultural Research Institute, training women farmers who do 70 percent of the agricultural work in Kenya, like most of Africa.

So we are not considering that, but we are considering steps that would target individuals about whom there is overwhelming evidence and belief that they have contributed to and participated in corruption at a massive level, and also the kind of post-election violence and extrajudicial killings that are so troubling. That is a possibility that we will consider.

But let me raise another idea. I said in my speech yesterday before the AGOA Forum, quoting one of our famous judges, that sunlight is the best disinfectant. And I think there’s an opportunity for young people and for civil society to use modern technology to run corruption watches and reporting. There are some examples of this beginning around the world where you basically surface what is going on. And it goes on at all levels of society, and frankly, look, it goes on in our society. We have to go after it all the time ourselves. You have seen people get arrested in America, whether they’re governors or they’re Congress members, if there is a belief that they have committed an act of corruption.

And I think there ought to be a way to use interactive media, especially the internet, obviously, and some of the new vehicles like Twitter, et cetera, to report in real time allegations of corruption. My friend Nita Lowey, our congresswoman who is here, runs the committee in Congress that determines in the House of Representatives all the aid, the foreign aid. And she met over the past couple of days with women who are entrepreneurs. They get microfinance. They do work like beauty salon work or selling gasoline or doing work at a low level, many of them living in Kibera. And much of their hard-earned income goes to protection money, goes to bribes. So here they are working as hard as they can to raise their families, and everybody has their hand out.

Now, what if we had groups of young people anonymously reporting all of this? I think there ought to be new ways of thinking about how civil society can take on corruption. And of course, there needs to be leadership from all levels of government within the civil service, within the elected ranks of government, and reporting mechanisms. You have a very vibrant free press, as I have seen for myself, which does an excellent job on many of these issues. But I think even more could be done.

So the short answer is yes, we will consider consequences aimed at individuals, not aimed at the people of Kenya.

MR. ZAKARIA: For my last (inaudible) let me actually turn to Wangari Maathai, in a sense, which is – when you were nominated Secretary of State, The New York Times asked a bunch of people to offer up questions that people might ask of you, and one of the people they asked was Wangari Maathai. And I’m just going to ask her, if I may, to recall the question that you asked of the Secretary, which related to China’s influence in Africa, African leaders’ desires to build ties with China, and the potential you worried about. And I wonder if you could just express it.

MS. MAATHAI: Well, thank you very, very much, Mr. Zakaria. Secretary of State, it’s wonderful to have you here in Nairobi in Kenya, East Africa. I’m sure I’m speaking on behalf of all of the people of this sub region in welcoming you here and saying thank you very much for coming.

At that time, and even now, there were – the concern that I – I have two concerns that I can probably bring out together. But the concern over China was the fact that here we are in a continent that is extremely rich. Africa is not a poor continent. Anything you want in the world is on this continent. It’s like the gods were on our side when the world was being created. (Applause.)

Yet we are considered among the poorest people on the planet. There’s something seriously wrong. And one of it, of course, is good governance.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes.

MS. MAATHAI: Even though we don’t like to be told, the truth of the matter is if you govern yourself in a responsible way, in an accountable way, if you share your resources in an equitable way, you’re more likely to please your people, and they are likely to have the energy to produce more. (Applause.)

So I was wondering, especially in relation to conflicts and competition over resources on this planet, what can a strong, powerful country like the United States of America do to persuade other strong countries like China to do business in Africa, with a consciousness that we must also demand from our leaders good governance?

SECRETARY CLINTON: That’s a great question, Wangari, great question. (Applause.)

MS. MAATHAI: So that we can – so that we do not allow ourselves to be exploited yet again by these oncoming, upcoming economical giants, but who come and want to do business with our leaders without wondering and being concerned about human rights issues, equity issues, and governance issues. Thank you. (Applause.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you. Look, I think that’s one of the most important questions for Africa. Africa historically has been exploited during colonialism and post-colonialism by corporations and by your own leaders so that the fruits of this richness that exists in the earth, in the waters of Africa, have not gone to the people.

And it is one of the biggest concerns that I have, because there is so much money being made right now, and it’s not any one country; it’s not any one corporation. But it is unfortunately aided and abetted by poor governance that doesn’t realize that the money needs to go back to the people in very tangible ways to build the economy, to build the infrastructure, to create sustainable employment. Because extractive industries do not leave sustainable economies and environments unless there are rules that are enforced.

And I often use an example that I think is a good model – Botswana. At the end of the colonial period in Botswana, the people of Botswana will tell you it was very fortunate because the colonialists – in that case, it was Britain – left right before diamonds were discovered – (laughter) – right? And there was enlightened leadership in Botswana who said, “We have diamonds. What shall we do with them?” And what they did was to create a mechanism so that funding and revenues from the exploitation of the diamonds went to build the infrastructure. So those of you who have been to Botswana know they have a very good network of roads, they have potable water everywhere. I mean, they invested in their people.

Contrast that to what’s going on in the Congo, where I’ll be in a few days, the Democratic Republic of the Congo. I’ll be in Goma, and I will be there primarily to speak out against the unspeakable violence against women and girls in eastern Congo. It is the worst example of man’s inhumanity to women. And women are being used in conflicts.

Now, what are the conflicts about? Well, yes, there are tribal and other reasons why the conflicts are going on, but get below the surface. It’s because there are mines in eastern Congo that produce the minerals that go into our cell phones and our other electronics. There is a lot of money being made by a lot of people, but it sure isn’t helping the people of the DRC.

I could go across the continent. Look at Nigeria, another great country. Nigeria imports petroleum products even though it’s the fifth-largest producer of petroleum in the world. That is bad governance. That is a failure of rules that are enforced for the benefit of the people. And we have got to speak out about this. And it is a question, as Wangari so rightly says, of who is in charge and whether they have the best interests – not of their own families in mind; everybody will take care of their own families – but of the people they are supposed to govern and lead.

And I am just absolutely convinced that Africa’s best days can be ahead if we get a hold of this whole question of the use of natural resources and who benefits and where the revenues go.

MR. ZAKARIA: And what do you say to Prime Minister Odinga if he says he doesn’t need lectures on good governance from outside? (Applause.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I had quite a good conversation with him, and I told him that I was bearing a message from the son of Kenya, Barack Obama. (Applause.)

MR. ZAKARIA: So it’s not really an outsider?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I think that he has a great deal of understanding of what we are trying to say. I mean, we are very committed to helping Kenya. But as President Obama said in his speech in Ghana, the future of Africa is up to Africans, and the future of Kenya is up to Kenyans.

But I don’t think we would be friends, as we have been for more than 50 years, if we did not share our concerns. It would be easy to just stand on the sidelines and say help us on terrorism, help us on Somalia, help us here, help us there, and not say, but how about really looking at these internal issues and trying to figure out what you’re going to do? Because we want Kenya to have a leadership role in the 21st century, and the people of Kenya to have the potential that your hard work and talent deserves.

MR. ZAKARIA: Beatrice Marshall from our affiliate, KTN, do you want to ask a few questions or gather together some of the extraordinary people here and have them ask some questions?

MS. MARSHALL: Right. Thanks, Fareed. We are going to take questions now from the floor. The floor is open and we’ll take our first question from Peter Karuki (ph.). Peter, you can ask your question. Please stand up, be brief and to the point.

QUESTION: Thank you, Madame Secretary of State. My name is Peter Karuki (ph) from civil society. Now, following the general elections of 2007, the U.S. Government was actually one of the first foreign governments to recognize the results. That recognition was soon thereafter withdrawn. Now following the crisis that ensued, there was a commission formed to look into the election problem and electoral reforms proposals. Now that commission did make a finding that that election was itself a sham.

Now given the question of impunity that Kenya is facing, what is the position of the U.S. Government in regard to constitutional and legal change in government, given that the finding of that commission raises serious legality questions about this government? And I would like to know what your position is, given that Kenya is, in another three years, facing a general election. Thank you.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Peter, our position is that the reform agenda is absolutely essential to be accomplished before the next election in order to avoid the kind of conflict and irregularities that were alleged and have been proven coming out of the last election.

In the work that I’ve done in many places around the world, no one can reform a government from the outside. It takes the people of the country and particularly the role that civil society and the private sector played in trying to deal with the aftermath of the election. So yes, I mean, we can encourage, we can lecture, we can offer assistance, we can try to highlight good practices. But it has to be done by the people of Kenya. And I think the electoral reform, the judicial reform, the police reform, the constitutional reform all have to be done before the next election. Now, how that happens is truly up to the government and the people of Kenya.

But let me just also say that what we saw coming out of that election, in terms of violence, was very disturbing because of the groups and the tribal violence that took place. There has to be a lot of outreach and discussion and healing at the local level. People have to believe in one Kenya, which was really the slogan and the goal coming out of colonialism. And so anything that can be done to push the reform agenda, to hold the government accountable – and there are people within in the government who want this reform agenda to go forward. I’ve had many conversations in the last 24 to 36 hours, intense conversations.

But it’s very often difficult inside a government to move the levers unless you can say, oh, but they’re pushing us, they’re pushing us. So there has to continue to be the kind of pressure and demands that came from civil society before. But I would also ask that you make sure it’s not just on this level, but the (inaudible) goes down into society so that people will not respond to provocation again, that they will feel that the reforms will benefit them and their families. I think that’s a big piece of what has to happen as well.

MS. MARSHALL: Secretary Clinton, thank you very much. We’ll take some more questions from the floor. Of course, President Obama has stressed on the importance of youth taking their opportunity, and today we’d like to hear a little bit more from Kenya’s youth.

Caroline (ph), could you please ask your question.

SECRETARY CLINTON: I think if you talk, it’ll pick up. Let’s try it, Caroline (ph).

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: No? Here comes Beatrice.

QUESTION: My name is Caroline Rutto (ph) from Citizens Assembly. The challenge that youth face in this country is lack of access to information, lack of employment, and lack of capital. I would like to ask how far or how will the U.S. Government help the youth access the skills, technology, and knowledge that can help them benefit from the AGOA?

The other thing I would like to ask is: How far are you willing to help youth also participate effectively? Youth try to participate, but there is no real level playing ground. They cannot participate in governance. And how far are you willing to help us mobilize, and to help us mobilize so that you can participate effectively in governance and demand for a corruption-free government? Thank you.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I know that our Embassy and our government, mostly through USAID, the Agency for International Development, has worked with youth groups. I know the ambassador was telling me about some of the meetings he’s held with representatives of youth groups and civil society. And we want very much to encourage the next generation of leaders and to try to provide some of the support and the tools that young people need in order to participate. So we would welcome any specific suggestions.

We have, as you know, a very big commitment of aid programs, but we want to make sure that they go to where they will have the greatest impact. At the AGOA Forum, what we offered was more help by the United States to assist entrepreneurs and small businesses get into the American market. There are so many products that can go into the American market duty free, but a lot of people don’t know how to access it. So we are prepared, through our Embassy and through the very talented people who work there, to be of assistance. So if you have specific ideas, please let us know.

MS. MARSHALL: All right. We’ll take another question here from the floor.

QUESTION: My name is Martin Allo (ph) from the (inaudible) side of Kenya. I just wanted to stay with the issue of free and fair elections a bit, and perhaps ask you to clarify what the American position is, because we’ve seen in the recent past, beginning with Kenya, that we’re seeing less and less free elections, and then followed by Zimbabwe. In Kenya, we saw American position falter a little bit, first recognized and then retract. In Zimbabwe, there seemed to be a very clear stand that there wasn’t trust that Mugabe was going to do a free and fair election from the first instance.

And so it seems to me that once that has gone, we seem to see the same situation in Zimbabwe, power sharing in Kenya, power sharing. And there seems to be a silent (inaudible) he has to do with business with these, and that seems to be questioning the very idea of democracy. I’m wondering we can actually have some variations of democracy. Should we be expecting that American position will be very clear and very straight, that we cannot have anything less than free and fair elections? Thanks.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, let me say three things about that. As some of you know who have followed Fareed’s work, he coined the phrase “illiberal democracy.” Elections are held, they can be free and fair, they can be unfree and unfair. But what happens is someone gets elected and then they basically begin to dismantle the building blocks of democracy: cracking down on the press, cracking down on the judiciary, employing corruption instead of merit. You know all of the aspects of that.

So clearly, it is not only our policy, but it is our intent to do everything we can to ensure as free and fair elections as possible. And there are many vehicles for doing that. I mean, the United States has groups that work to provide technical assistance and monitoring of elections. The European Union does. The United Nations does. There are a lot of different ways that we can participate with the Kenyan Government and Kenyan civil society to ensure that the elections are as free and fair as possible.

Once an election is held, of course, there is always the problem of winners and losers. And sometimes in a free and fair election, those who lose feel aggrieved and create foment within society, and their followers will never believe the election was free and fair, even if it was. We have a little experience of that ourselves, going back to our 2000 election where there was a lot of real pent-up rejection on the part of many Americans.

So holding elections that have credibility is something I believe every country owes its citizens. And I often look to India. Now think about India; this huge democracy with very hard-fought elections, and in the last 20 years, going back and forth between the Congress Party and the BJP. But they have figured out how to run an election where the result can be surprising and unpredicted but accepted. They moved elections into a civil service body that is immune from politics. They used – they were one of the very first to use computerized elections; 450 to 500 million people vote, many of whom are illiterate, but they have figured out a way to convey the basic message about who the people are running for office. I said, only half-jokingly, after our problems with our 2000 election and then our 2004 election and some of our constituencies, that we should outsource our elections to India. (Laughter.)

But there are models around the world. And there are lots of ways for civil society to look at the best practices, work with the university and the scientists and researchers and political scientists and others here, and say this is what a free and fair election looks like, and here are the foundational steps that have to be taken in order for it to be accepted.

Once the election happens, though, the United States, like every government, is left with a very difficult choice. And what we historically have done, and we did it in Zimbabwe, we rejected the Mugabe election. But the people within Zimbabwe came to us and said we’ve got to make the best of a very bad deal. The Prime Minister Tsvangirai was in Washington. The President and I met with him in the Oval Office. He said, look, this is very difficult for me. You’re in government with people who’ve tried to kill you and your associates for years. But this is for the best of the people of Zimbabwe, so please help us.

That puts us in a very difficult position. We don’t want to legitimize what was a wrong election. We don’t want to do anything that helps Mugabe and his supporters, because we reject their illegitimacy – we believe that about them. But when the people who have been on frontlines struggling come to you and say, please help us, we’re not going to turn away. We’re going to try to be thoughtful and careful and not – we said we’d help them on – helping farmers get their fields back in shape and get their crops in, and we would try to pay the schoolteachers directly. Because we heard from the reformers inside the government that they actually had a reformer minister of education who began to survey. The schools were in total disarray, the teachers had been scared off, the children no longer came. And one of the first things that this minister received was a telephone call from President Mugabe’s office telling the minister to come pick up his new Mercedes Benz. He said, “I don’t need a Mercedes Benz. I need teachers and schoolbooks.”

So this is a very difficult evaluation. So understand how we try to work though this.

MR. ZAKARIA: But if I may just press the question of – what he seems to be suggesting is is the message being sent out to African leaders is rig the election, refuse to leave power, and eventually there’ll be some kind of grand coalition which you’re a part of. (Applause.) And if you look at the Kenya Government, it’s 94 ministers, each drawing a salary of about $15,000 a year, which in Kenya is a fairly large sum of money, bound together in a kind of mutual compact of greed and corruption. Is that going to solve the problems of the country? (Applause.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: No, it is not. It is not going to solve the problems of the country. But I guess my message is that the United States cannot solve the problems of Kenya. And that as a government with many interests, and particular interest in the well-being and the future of the people of Kenya, and hopefully future leaders among this audience, we can take a position, like we have from time to time, where there is absolutely no pretense of democracy and we can have no diplomatic relations and we can have sanctions. But we don’t think that’s an appropriate response in a situation like this.

Politics is better than conflict. So even if you don’t like the political outcomes, because people have figured out ways to work with those against whom they have been involved in politics or even who they don’t believe have the best interest of the country at heart, it is not up to the United States, I do not believe, to say, well, we won’t work with you. It is up to us to do what we are doing, what the President has done, what I have done on this trip, which is to say we expect so much more of you, we believe in you and your potential.

But we cannot dictate to you who you have in your government. You have to determine how to influence and change this government, and do not be deterred by the difficulty of it. I think that is our message, Fareed, because we have a lot of very strong connections with Kenya. We want to continue supporting this university. We don’t want to say, well, we don’t like the government so we’re not going to support the university. I don’t think that’s a very smart conclusion to draw.

MS. MARSHALL: All right. Part of your itinerary will take you to the DR Congo, and we have here a student from the DRC with a question. Go ahead with your question, please.

QUESTION: My name is Jean Bonair Congolu (ph). I’m, as I said, a citizen of Democratic Republic of Congo and (inaudible) post-graduate (inaudible) conflict in this university. And it seems you have added your voice in what is going on in Goma all eastern Congo. As you are going to be there very soon, my concern is as you are going there, because the problem in Congo is the multi-billion company who are outside Africa, who are influencing the ongoing conflict in the DRC. What is your foreign policy takes of the multimillion company who are financing conflict in that region?

Secondly is the role of the militias, the armed groups. If those are non-invited or those are invited by the neighboring states, what is the American takes in ending the militia’s activity, as you said, raping women, killing children, recruiting the young men like us to join the army by force so that they may continue disturbing the government of Kinshasa? And another thing is –

MR. ZAKARIA: How about at least we keep it to those two very important questions?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, obviously, we are very concerned about conditions in the DRC. And in many ways, the problems that we see in the DRC are so acute because much of the country is ungoverned. In the entire country, I think it’s right to say there’s only something like 300 miles of paved road. It is a very difficult set of challenges that we’re facing in trying to work to improve governance and the rule of law inside the DRC. But we are very committed to doing so.

But we also, while we’re kind of working to try to change things in the medium and long term, we have these short-term emergencies of the violence in the east, which is militia-fueled, which has been going on for years. And there are many different fingers in that pot, stirring it, and creating the conflict.

And we are looking for ways to try to create conditions where the corporations and the countries who are exploiting the mineral wealth understand it is in their interest to try to help diminish the conflict, where the UN peacekeepers play an even more effective role, where the military of the DRC is well enough trained and committed to helping to end the conflict.

So we are working on both of those levels, dealing with the crisis and the emergency and trying to help set some processes in motion that can create a better outcome over the next several years. It’s very difficult. I’m not going to sit here and tell you we have the answers. The United States, even with our new President, cannot tell people what to do and expect it to happen. You have to work with people. You have to create the conditions that will change the behaviors and realize the kind of outcomes that we think are in the interests of the people of these countries.

MS. MARSHALL: Secretary Clinton, we – you are going to be meeting Somalia authorities during your visit here in Kenya. The concerns of America in regards with instability in the Horn of Africa region, what will be your message to the Somalia authorities? What will be your message to the Horn of Africa leaders?

And secondly, sanctions against Eritrea, the U.S. has threatened sanctions against Eritrea. Will that assist in restoring, really, stability in Somalia or helping in the problems of Somalia?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I’ve had many conversations about Somalia over the last days here. And with the border that Kenya shares with Somalia, the instability in Somalia is of great concern. It’s also a humanitarian issue because about 10,000 Somali refugees come across the border when the fighting is intense every month. And so there’s a lot that Kenya worries about, and understandably so. And we’re – I’m going to be meeting with Sheikh Sharif, the president of Transitional Federal Government. And was it a perfect election? Of course not. But the legitimacy of his election is something that we want to recognize and support him as he tries to assert governance over parts of Somalia that have been riven with conflict since 1992. It’s a tragedy. I mean, there are many Somalis in Nairobi and in Kenya, people who would love to go home if they could make a living and raise their families in peace, and they cannot.

So our goal is to try to help create conditions of stability. And the African Union has military forces in Somalia, a program called AMISOM. They are trying to create areas of their conflict-free zones. We need to get some of the neighbors to quit funding the terrorist organization, al-Shabaab. And I think there’s a lot of work to be done there. We’ve made it clear that we want to be supportive. But again, this is an African-led mission, and we applaud that and we want to support the African intervention into Somalia.

MS. MARSHALL: All right. We’ll hear more from the floor and our young people. Go ahead with your question. Please be brief and to the point.

QUESTION: Thank you. My name is Yoshin Amori (ph). I work for (inaudible) youth initiatives. I have a question. You have had a meeting with the prime minister and the president and other state and non-state actors. What is your impression on the existence, if at all, of political – real political goodwill for implementation of real reforms in Kenya? And if at all, you may have lost hope on our leadership, the way Kenyans have, then what do you think are the options that Kenyans have to ensure that we reform this country and that we have a leadership that will implement what Kenyans want? And what would be the role of the United States in implementing such a strategy? Thank you. (Applause.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I work for a president who believes in hope – (laughter) – and so we don’t give up hope, we just try to figure out different ways to see it made into reality. As I said, I think that there are people within the leadership – I’m not going to name names, I just would be doing that based on my own impressions, which I don’t think would be fair – but there are people within the leadership who really understand the necessity for these reforms. Whether they can be successful or not is still up in the air.

But at the very least, they must do electoral reform to avoid the kind of outcome that you experienced before. And they must do judicial and police reform. Put aside the question of holding people accountable and ending impunity, which I think is much harder for them to get their arms around because of the obvious implications. But on electoral reform, police, and judicial reform and constitutional reform, there should be a constant pressure from civil society and the private sector.

And I think there are ways of doing that, making this a daily effort and not losing hope, because there have been many situations where reform took a long time and it was very hard won. Think about our civil rights revolution. There are many – we could be transported back to Alabama or Mississippi in the 1950s or the early 1960s. And instead of me sitting here, it might be Dr. King or one of our other great civil rights leaders. And the questions might be, well, why? We can’t keep waiting. We have to do this. It’ll never change. And the answer would be, yes, you have to organize and you have to be smarter and you have to work harder. And guess what? We finally got there. And we now have a president who would not be president were it not for the sacrifice and the persistence and the perseverance of those who came before. So it is my hope that those of you who are pushing for reform, keep thinking about ways of putting the right kinds of pressure to bear on those in power.

And when you say, well, what else can you do, Kenya strikes me as a very political culture. I’ve talked with Americans who have worked here in the embassies. They’ve been around Kenya. They’ve been in small villages. Everybody has a political opinion. (Laughter.) I mean, you could never have gotten out of your village and maybe not even be educated, but you understand that politics counts in Kenya. And so you think about it and you express your opinion. You have to then not just be in civil society, as important as that is and the path that many of you have chosen, and I applaud you for it, but at the same time, some of you have to be in politics.

Max Weber talked about the hard boring of hard boards in politics. And very often, the people who are left standing are the people who just never gave up. So you have to be willing to take on the political challenge as well as the reform challenge. Start now. I mean, I don’t know enough about Kenyan politics, but are there parties that either you can join or you can form? Are there ways of getting out and beginning to plan for the 2012 elections right now? I mean, I’ll tell you, we have people in America who are already thinking of running for president in 2012 and 2016 and 2020.

MR. ZAKARIA: Nobody on this stage.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Nobody on this stage, however. (Laughter.)

MR. ZAKARIA: Last question from the floor.

MS. MARSHALL: Yes, yes. We are going to take our final question from Halima (ph).

QUESTION: Thank you. My name is Halima Mohamed Saleh (ph). I work with (inaudible) Kenya from coastal region. I wanted to ask because Muslim community, especially the women, have been marginalized. And I don’t know what the United States of America have to contribute to the (inaudible) success of the Muslim community. Second thing is that if you have a program, probably on international dialogue, so that people can understand more on our community and instead of actually criticizing and not wanting to know more on Islamic culture. Thank you. (Applause.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: Those are very good questions and good points. Let me just – let me go specifically to her questions and then just broaden it as I end my answer.

Yes, we do have programs aimed at the Muslim community. As you know, the President’s speech in Cairo was meant to be the beginning of a dialogue. We are working through the State Department and the rest of our government to create such discussions both within the Muslim community and between the Muslim community and other communities. And I am particularly concerned about opportunities for women, women of all faiths, all tribes, all ethnicities, all everything. I think that no society can be successful unless women have their full rights and have the ability to participate fully in their countries. (Applause.)

So this is an area that we are particularly concerned about. And I hope that – is somebody from the embassy, Ambassador, that if we could get your name, so we could follow up with you to see what specifically we could do?

But let me broaden this. I think that some of the violence that came after the last election was shocking to Kenyans. And I believe there is a great opportunity for civil society to engage in a dialogue across Kenyan society, not just with Muslims, but with different parts of the country, with different tribes in the country, to begin to really figure out how you unify the country and create a sense of commitment to the future that will benefit everyone. And that would be a great undertaking for Kenyan civil society to decide to do.

MS. MARSHALL: All right. I’ll hand over to Fareed. I understand our time is limited.

Fareed.

MR. ZAKARIA: Our time is limited, and I’m just going to end with one very specific question. This is a news report I saw while preparing for this town hall, and it involves a woman, a young woman, a very attractive young woman. A Kenyan city councilman says he offered Bill Clinton 40 goats and 20 cows for his daughter’s hand in marriage five years ago. (Laughter.) He is still awaiting an answer. And I thought on this occasion, you know, Mrs. Clinton, if you think about it – (laughter and applause) – if you think in the current global economic climate with asset values have gone down, your stock portfolio is probably down, your government has had – your husband has had to do a little bit of government work, take time off from the private sector, it’s not a bad offer. (Laughter.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, my daughter is her own person. She’s very independent. So I will convey this very kind offer. (Laughter.)

MR. ZAKARIA: And we thank Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. We thank the University of Nairobi, the Government of Kenya and our associates, our affiliate, and (inaudible). Thank you so much.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you, Beatrice. Thank you very much. (Applause.)

Snippet from the University of Nairobi Dialogue

Secretary Hilary Clinton’s remarks at Nairobi’s AGOA press conference

AGOA 1FOREIGN MINISTER WETANGULA: Good afternoon, gentlemen and ladies from the media. I’m happy to be here this afternoon with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who jetted in last evening to attend the AGOA Forum. After the opening of the forum, where you all were, she’s had very in-depth bilateral discussions with President Mwai Kibaki, who was accompanied by the Right Honorable Prime Minister Raila Odinga, the Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka, and a number of Kenyan ministers.

Several issues were discussed, including but not limited to the bilateral relations between Kenya and America. The two sides agreed that we are satisfied with the level of engagement between our two countries, and we shall strive to make it even better.

The Secretary of State raised issues about our engagement in Somalia to make the Horn of Africa safer. We also discussed the issue of internal reforms within Kenya, the need to have a new constitution, which the president had mentioned in his speech, the reform of the police force and other security organs, the issue of dealing with the post-election violence arising from the elections of last year but one.

We also discussed the issues of travel bans or other travel advisories between America and Kenya, where they’re renewed every other time. We raised the issue of piracy and the need for America to partner with other countries involved in the war against piracy to make the Indian Ocean shipping route safer.

President Kibaki and his team assured the Secretary of State that reforms are on course, that the war against impunity in the country is on, that the war against corruption is on, and all sanctuaries of corruption will be destroyed to make Kenya a cleaner and safer place to do business, that Kenya is committed to its role in the region as a leader, to bring normalcy to Somalia, to continue assisting the Sudan, and all other neighbors that require our assistance. And above all, President Kibaki conveyed his gratitude to the American Government led by President Obama, and the continued positive support to the country, and confirmed that Kenya will do everything possible to play its role within the community of nations.

Kenya also did raise – and the Secretary of State has assured the President and his team that she’ll look at it – the question of our benefitting from the Millennium Challenge Account, which you know Kenya is at the threshold level. We wanted it to be looked at and see if it can be raised to the comeback level. And finally, we have agreed that our relationship is historical, it’s strong, it must be made stronger, we must be open to each other, we must continue talking to each other candidly, and whenever criticism comes our way, we must take it as a positive step towards improving our relations and not as a reverse to this relationship. And we have left the meeting all happy and satisfied that that is the direction to go.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you so much. It is a pleasure to be here with the foreign minister. I thank him for the work he has done in preparation for my meetings, and I’m very grateful for the hospitality that your country has shown me and my delegation.

The United States and Kenya share a long and deep history of friendship and cooperation. We consider Kenya a key strategic partner, a regional leader, and a nation of almost boundless potential. I have just come from a candid and wide-ranging conversation with the president, the prime minister, the vice president, and other ministers of the government where we discussed, in depth, the steps that are needed to realize that potential and to seize the opportunities that I discussed in my speech earlier.

The United States worked hard last year with Kofi Annan and the team of African Eminent Persons to support the Kenyan people to resolve the crisis that afflicted this country. Unfortunately, resolving that crisis has not yet translated into the kind of political progress that the Kenyan people deserve. Instead, the absence of strong and effective democratic institutions has permitted ongoing corruption, impunity, politically motivated violence, human rights abuses, and a lack of respect for the rule of law.

These conditions helped fuel the post-election violence, and they are continuing to hold Kenya back. The reform agenda agreed to by the coalition government and discussed in the speech that President Kibaki and Prime Minister Odinga gave this morning must be fully implemented not just to avoid a repeat of the previous crisis or worse, but more importantly, to set the stage for a better future, a future worthy of the dynamic people of this country, a future of economic growth, democratic development, social justice, and the opportunity for every Kenyan child to live up to his or her God-given potential. I wanted the leaders to know that we respect greatly the way that the Kenyan people pulled their country back from the brink of disaster once, and the ongoing connection between the private sector, civil society, and the government that is the key to resolving these issues.

I also want the government and the people of Kenya to know that President Obama feels a personal connection and commitment to the future of Kenya. It is, of course, a result of his own personal connection, his father’s life. But it is also because, as he said in the video this morning, he has such a great deal of affection and admiration for Kenya. He has come to this country, the first time in the late 1980s, and of course, shortly before he began running for president. We want you to know that we will stand with you. We know that democracy does not come easily. It hasn’t come easily to the United States or any country. We have our own challenges. But we have worked for more than 230 years to perfect our union, and we know we have more work to do. The election of President Obama demonstrates that progress is possible. And I can personally attest that political rivals can become productive partners in the service of the country and the people they love.

We also know that a lot of that hard work is underway. And we commend the Waki Commission’s efforts to identify steps to improve the performance and accountability of state security agencies.

But finally, we know that just as President Obama said in his speech in Ghana that the future of Africa is up to the African people, the future of Kenya is up to the Kenyan people. The United States stands ready and willing and eager to be of assistance to build on the more than 50 years of partnership and friendship we have between us. And despite the setbacks of the recent past and the difficult road ahead, President Obama and I are convinced that the leaders of this nation have the capacity to reclaim the dream of one Kenya.

Now is the time to find and exercise the will, and we will be there with you as you take these steps toward that better future of one Kenya.
Thank you very much.

FOREIGN MINISTER WETANGULA: Thank you.

QUESTION: Thank you. Madame Secretary, my name is Jeff Koinange. I work for a TV station called K24. This question is directed at you. As soon as you landed last night, there was a statement from the U.S. Government criticizing Kenya’s latest move to appoint a TJRC, Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission, in other words, opting to go their own way and not opting to go for a special local tribunal to try the perpetrators of the post-election violence.

Well, basically, the TRC has no powers to try anybody. What more pressure can your government keep applying to the Kenyan Government to make sure that those perpetrators are eventually arrested, detained, whatever, so that, as you mentioned, we don’t limp towards 2012, knowing that those folks are still out there and nothing has been done? What more can be done?
And I have a follow-up.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Do you want to ask your follow-up, and I’ll answer both.

QUESTION: Sure, okay. I’m sorry, yeah. The follow-up is a country right next door, Sudan, there’s a warmonger who has been indicted by the ICC. Nobody seems to be doing anything about it in terms of putting pressure for him to either face justice or whatever. Is it because their country has natural resources like oil, or because they’re dealing with the Chinese it’s a very sensitive situation? In other words, is it sort of a double standard? A lot of pressure being applied on the Kenya Government, no pressure being applied on Sudan, and yet very little is being done both ways.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Let me take your second question first, because I think that it is very significant that a criminal indictment was returned by the International Criminal Court against President Bashir. And that was a very significant step by the international community. The actions by the ICC sent a clear message that the behavior of Bashir and his government were outside the bounds of accepted standards and that there would no longer be impunity.

Now, just as in a criminal process, the indictment has been laid down. The United States and others have continued to support the need to eventually bring President Bashir to justice, but he’s found a lot of protectors, and mostly in this continent, where people have allowed him to travel and have not used the forces of their own judicial and law enforcement institutions to arrest him, to turn him over the ICC.

We know this sometimes takes time. If you look at some of the international tribunals, there are periods of time during which the investigation takes place, if it does get started – in this case, it did – then if an indictment is returned, there is often time before the person indicted is brought to justice.

So I actually think that what has happened in Sudan sends a very strong message. And of course, one of the reasons why the United States and other friends of Kenya are encouraging Kenya to handle this internally is so that it is not sent to the ICC. The ICC won’t act if a country is dealing with internal problems on its own.

And with respect to your first question, the ministers explained to me that there is a constitutional impediment to creating a local tribunal outside the ordinary judicial system, and that there is required to be a constitutional amendment in order to create a local tribunal, which has not passed the Kenyan parliament. I think that is regrettable because, obviously, the government has come up with this constitutional amendment, and there are reasons why it is preferable to the Truth and Justice and Reconciliation Commission because it would have the ability to actually prosecute perpetrators.

We have made our views known. As you referenced, a statement from our ambassador summarized those views. I know this is not easy. I understand how complicated this is. It’s complicated, in part, because politically how do you go about prosecuting the perpetrators without engendering more violence from those who are supportive of the positions or the affiliations of the perpetrators. So it does take a lot of political will and leadership.

And we continue to believe that a special local tribunal is in the best interest of Kenya, so as to avoid having outsiders determine the outcome here. But as you know, Kofi Annan and the people working with him have handed a sealed envelope of ten names to the ICC, which has a lot on its plate. It’s not acting immediately, of course, because I think there is still the hope that Kenya will resolve this matter on its own, and that is certainly the American hope as well.

MODERATOR: (Inaudible.)

QUESTION: Thank you, Madame Secretary. If you don’t mind going a little bit outside Africa for a moment. On North Korea, the two journalists were released. From your conversations with your husband, with former President Clinton, what’s the signal that he gets and what’s the impression he gets from Kim Jong-il? Is North Korea ready to go back into the denuclearization talks? And could you also confirm, the North Koreans say that there was an apology on behalf of former President Clinton?

SECRETARY CLINTON: The last question is that’s not true, that did not occur. But let me just take a step back here and say that we have been working hard on the release of the two journalists. We have always considered that a totally separate issue from our efforts to reengage the North Koreans and have them return to the Six-Party Talks and work toward a commitment for the full, verifiable denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

I was very pleased to get the news that my husband’s plane had taken off from Pyongyang with the two young women onboard. They are on their way to California, where they will be reunited with their families.

I had a very brief conversation with my husband. We did not go into the details of some of the questions that you’re asking. There’ll be time to talk about that later. This was mostly just to communicate directly how relieved and pleased he was, and we are, with the successful completion of this mission.

As I said in a long set of remarks in Thailand about two weeks ago, the future of our relationships with the North Koreans are really up to them. They have a choice. They can continue to follow a path that is filled with provocative actions which further isolates them from the international community, which resulted in the imposition of sanctions by the Security Council and the full cooperation of the international community, including and led by China for the implementation of those sanctions under the resolution. Or they can decide to renew their discussions with the partners in the Six-Party Talks. We have always said that there would be a chance to discuss bilateral matters with the North Koreans within that regional context, and that is still the offer today. So it is up to them.

I mean, we have successfully completed a humanitarian mission that was a private mission that was undertaken by my husband, and we’re very relieved about that. But now we have to go back to the ongoing efforts to try to enlist the North Koreans in discussions that the world wants to see them participate in.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) from NTV in Kenya. Secretary Clinton, I’ve got a couple of questions for you. Firstly, you said that in your discussion about the TRJC and the local tribunal, the government did indicate to you that they are unable to pass it through parliament. Is this not, in fact, hypocrisy on the part of the Kenyan Government, because in the past year they’ve been able to pass other constitutional bills through parliament? And when it comes to local tribunals, it’s proving to be harder. Is it not, in fact, (inaudible) vested interests in government that are doing that?

Number two, are you, as the U.S. Government, considering visa bans or other sanctions against those suspected to have masterminded the post-election violence?

And finally, critics say that President Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga have become cozy, relaxed, and slackened the pace of reforms, reforms you talked about with them today. What is your government actually doing to ensure that they keep their eye on the ball and that these reforms, including the constitutional reforms of the judicial and the security forces and whatever else you talked about, do actually come to pass for the benefit of Kenya?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I can only report to you what the president, the prime minister, the vice president, and the other ministers told us: that they are committed to the reform agenda that they agreed to when they entered into a coalition government; that they believe they are getting close to a constitutional draft that would answer some of the difficult questions that Kenyans are looking for, like land reform and the like; that they are proceeding with police and judicial reform despite some setbacks which they recounted to me.

We very much want to support them in moving this agenda forward, and I made that abundantly clear. I delivered a very frank statement from President Obama that he also would like to do everything we can to see this reform agenda delivered on. And I think the Kenyan Government knows that if we can be of any help, we stand ready to do so. We’ve made that offer.

I think that it’s difficult for someone who’s not in the Kenyan political process to comment on the actions of the Kenyan parliament. We have enough trouble with our own Congress in Washington, where we have a very big Democratic majority, but the President doesn’t always get what he wants to have done the first time out.

But I wanted publicly to say that to members of parliament trying to resolve this issue internally is far preferable to losing control of it and seeing it go to the International Criminal Court or out of the hands of Kenyans themselves. As hard as it is to resolve this in Kenya, I think it is better for Kenyans. So certainly, if parliamentarians are watching your news programs, it would be in the best interest of the future of Kenya for that to be taken care of within the parliament.

And finally, with respect to any actions that our government might take, those are always available and open to us. We hope that that doesn’t come to pass. We very much want to see the coalition government succeed. We want to see the reforms passed.

And finally, on the question about whether the president and the prime minister are getting along, I think that’s a good sign. I know when I accepted President Obama’s request to take this position, many people said, oh, it will never work, that there’ll be all these problems. And in fact, we are working very closely and personally together. That doesn’t mean, in this context with the president and the prime minister, that they still don’t have issues that they have to work on.

But you won’t get anything done if people don’t cooperate and if people don’t have a personal relationship. I mean, politics around the world depends upon relationships. You can’t get things done if people don’t have a level of trust between themselves in order to take some very tough decisions. And so I’m hoping that the kind of interaction that I had today with the president and the prime minister, which was very positive, very frank, very open, is indicative of continuing progress on behalf of this important agenda.

MODERATOR: Okay. The final question —

SECRETARY CLINTON: Wait, how about the foreign minister? Would you like to add anything, sir?

FOREIGN MINISTER WETANGULA: Yes. I think I should. (Inaudible) and all my Kenyan colleagues here know the level of reforms that we are undertaking. And I want to assure you that in a democracy, even if you have the majority in parliament, it is very dangerous and risky to marshal parliament to do what you want. You must let them vote with their conscience, and our parliamentarians have indicated to you and the whole country that this is their preference.

What we must do, and I think it’s important that Kenya must do, is not to lose sight of the reform of the constitution – create strong institutions that will make it difficult for the events of last year to occur again in this country. I think that, as a long-term measure, is very critical.

Secondly, on the question of persons that bear the greatest responsibility for the problems of last year, the route to The Hague has never been closed. It is always there. The envelope is there, and we don’t need to give any concern for the ICC to act. But I’ve always said, and I think the Secretary of State has reiterated, that it’s neater, it’s better, it’s in the interest of this country for us to resolve most of our issues locally than to seek international support. And I do think that the avenue for prosecution, even through the current criminal system – criminal justice system, is not closed. If adequate reforms are made that meet the confidence of the public, I think people can still be prosecuted locally.

SECRETARY CLINTON: And I would just add it would be a very welcome sign to see prosecution through the regular court system. That would be an appropriate response.

FOREIGN MINISTER WETANGULA: Absolutely.

MODERATOR: The final question, Washington Post, Mary Beth Sheridan.

QUESTION: Thank you. This is a question for Secretary Clinton. What do you make of the fact that nobody accused in this violence has been punished in a year and a half – Kenya has a very long culture of never punishing any top officials – and that the very ministers who are suspected of instigating the violence are the ones that killed the possibility of the independent tribunal? How can you have any faith in them on this issue? Thank you.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I think we’ve made it very clear that we are waiting, we are disappointed that action hasn’t taken place yet. Our Assistant Secretary Johnnie Carson, who served as an ambassador here and has a great deal of regard for Kenya, has spoken out. Our ambassador has spoken out. I mean, we’ve been very clear in our disappointment that action has not been taken. And of course, it is far preferable that it be done in the regular course of business that prosecutors, judges, law enforcement officials step up to their responsibilities and remove the question of impunity.

We in the United States sometimes go to having special tribunals, special prosecutors for certain politically connected wrongdoing, and so we know that trying to create another entity may be appropriate. But if it can’t get created, then you’ve got to go back to the system you have. And a truth and justice and reconciliation commission without any ability to bring people to justice is not going to satisfy many of the deepest concerns that are expressed by the Kenyan people.

And I’m not understating, or I don’t mean to underestimate, the difficulty of doing this, of creating some kind of pathway for holding people accountable. But in today’s world, where information is communicated instantaneously, people are no longer going to put up with that. You can find information out so easily by people Twittering and otherwise communicating that governments have to be more transparent and governments have to be more accountable. And I used that phrase that I very much like in my speech that sunlight is the best disinfectant; bring it out and try to resolve it. Now does that mean everybody has to be prosecuted right away? Well, there probably has to be some process put in place, but there needs to be a beginning. And I think that’s what we are looking for, and that’s what we’re hoping to see from the current government.

FOREIGN MINISTER WETANGULA: Thank you. Finally, let me say something about the issue Jeff Koinage raised on the Sudan. First of all, I don’t think it is true that America is harsher to Kenya than it is to Sudan. But on the issue of the indictment of President Bashir, the African Union took a position, and the position is very clear and we have articulated it many times. One, the AU does not and has not and will not say that President Bashir is innocent, because we have no capacity to say that. He has been investigated, he has been indicted.

What the AU asked the Security Council to do was that within the context of Article 16 of the Statute of Rome, the Security Council could suspend the warrant for a year because there was visible progress in Sudan, that there was internal discussions, there were talks going on in Qatar, and we wanted to see whether that texture can bring relative calm and peace in the country, because we do know that peace, security, stability and all these factors must be looked at within the same context. And nobody will stand in the way of President Bashir being arrested and prosecuted, but for now, the AU’s position is that let’s see what internal mechanisms can be done. I don’t think the AU is asking for too much.

Thank you.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: Somalia? Well, we had a very long discussion about Somalia.

FOREIGN MINISTER WETANGULA: Yes, it took the centerpiece of the discussions.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes. And we very much appreciate Kenya’s efforts working on its own and with the international community. We recognize the border problems that Kenya has with its long border with Somalia. We certainly offered whatever help and assistance we could provide to Kenya to deal with the border, the refugee flow, which Kenya is trying to absorb 6,000 refugees and —

FOREIGN MINISTER WETANGULA: Ten thousand a month.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Ten thousand a month. So Kenya’s bearing a big burden for the instability and violence within Somalia. The United States is supporting the Transitional Federal Government. I’ll be meeting with Sheikh Sharif tomorrow to discuss what else the international community can do to try to support his efforts to stabilize Somalia, to create a functioning government. But we know we’re facing a very difficult conflict, and we also know that the presence of al-Shabaab and terrorist elements within Somalia poses a threat. It poses a threat to Kenya, poses a threat to the stability of Africa and beyond. So this is an area where we’re going to work even more closely together.

And on another area, piracy, I would just say that Kenya, again, is absorbing a lot of the burden from the international community. Kenya offered to receive the pirates, to hold the pirates. They need more help in doing that. The United States is leading an international contact group on piracy. We want to provide more assistance to Kenya, which is offering this very important service.

So we talked a lot about the work that Kenya is doing within the regional and global security context, which is absolutely invaluable.

FOREIGN MINISTER WETANGULA: Thank you very much, Secretary of State, and have a good afternoon.

Secretary Hillary Clinton’s key note address at the AGOA conference

The Coming of Anarchy: Lessons from West Africa

images1An article published in the mid 1990’s “The Coming of Anarchy” by journalist Robert Kaplan offers several lessons which if not considered, could result in failed states ala Liberia, courtesy of the youth who rise up and say ENOUGH!

The post-election violence of 2007 and early 2008 aptly demonstrated that the barrier between crime and politically instigated tyranny is becoming increasingly blurred, particularly in urban centres. Kaplan’s description in his article of cities in West Africa, echoes the state of Kenya’s urban slums where “streets are unlit; the police often lack gasoline for their vehicles; armed burglars, carjackers, and muggers proliferate”.

Polygamy & the Family Breakdown

Contributing to youth disaffection is the practice of polygamy which adds to the alienation of young people even within their “extended families”. Marriage breakdown, increasing incidences of sexual crimes and the resorting to commercial sex work by our youth, has promoted a population explosion as well as HIV/AIDS for which contraction rates remain highest amongst this population segment.

Mini-slum nation-states

Similar to pre-coup Abidjan, Ivory Coast with names such as “Chicago” and “Washington” for slum-districts, Nairobi’s slums boast names of conflict regions: “Kosovo and (mini) Mogadishu” which in turn are “governed” by street militias (“jeshi’s”) bearing similarly militaristic names such as “Baghdad Boys”, “Kosovo Boys” and the notorious “Taliban”. These sprawling slums continue to grow as more young people migrate to cities. Deforestation in rural areas has also brought with it adverse effects of climate change where rains are no longer assured forcing the young unemployed to migrate. The newcomers exert increased pressure in the urban low-lands which in turn has led to inter-ethnic conflicts within the slums.

Just like Kaplan’s view of 1990s Conakry which he describes as “a nightmarish Dickensian spectacle to which Dickens himself would never have given credence”, our cities and towns have now become venues of beggars with children with protruding bellies who seem “as numerous as ants”. Kaplan concludes that in states where man is recklessly depleting natural resources and with increased populations, nature will eventually take its revenge.

A case of nature taking back its own

And it has. Incidents such as the recent flooding in Nyanza attest to this. Populations have now had to move further inland, which could trigger a conflict with the upper regions settled communities.

Kaplan posits that the environment should be understood and acknowledged as a matter of national security. However, housing development in urban centres has been haphazard, facilitated by corrupt municipal authority officials turning a blind eye when issuing building permits. The most recent incidence of this was the recent collapse of a building in Mvita, Mombasa which has so far claimed the lives of at least 3 people. Building experts have for long been lobbying against the construction of multi-storey buildings asserting that coastal soil is not as resilient as interior soils for building foundations. So far the developer of the collapsed building remains at large.

Nevertheless, the demand of a growing urban population continues to ensure that developers have a ready market. The resulting high density estates have in turn led to water reserves being severely compromised. While Kenyans watched with consternation about the cholera epidemic in Zimbabwe, little did they believe that the disease would somehow find its way into our borders.

The Coming of Anarchy

Just like the recent youth-led takeover in Madagascar, Africa has for long had uprisings among the youth population. African history has many examples where “Soweto-like stone-throwing adolescents” finally had it with aging leaders and took matters into their own hands against such repressive regimes.

However there does remain a window of opportunity to pre-empt this. If only the Ministry of Youth Affairs would pay due cognizance to the urban youth population living in squalid conditions, by pushing for the mainstreaming of youth interests in government policies that focus on strengthening families, internal security, health, environment and land reforms.

On the other hand, if the status quo remains, not even Nairobi’s skyscrapers will be able to conceal the anger of the youth when they finally decide to make a stand.

Business Planning: Looking forward to 2012

When will it ever end?

The politicians are at it again, this week’s topic of course is “that envelope”. As entrepreneurs it has now become imperative for our business plans to take into consideration political risk. Many businesses are still reeling from the after shocks of the post-election violence, whilst some of our fellow entrepreneurs lost their businesses and still languish in IDP camps.

This political risk to enterprise goes further than just Kenyan borders. Our fellow East African entrepreneurs should not forget the impact the blocked highways had on the availability of fuel and commodities in their markets.

Since the politicians won’t let us forget, we at Yipe decided to re-publish this blog posted on October 2nd on our sister site. It was written in response to the jostling for positions in political parties for the 2012 elections. Now with all this talk about “that envelope” and the Waki Report that was rejected yesterday “in toto” by ODM, it behoves us to revisit the issue of business planning for 2012….

Business Planning: Looking forward to 2012

As much as politicians may try to deny it, campaigns for the 2012 Kenyan elections are on. Leaders are being anointed as flag bearers, this not even long after the bloody chaos that marked the beginning of 2008.

At Yipe, we just put up a new advice section for startups, but whilst doing that I thought, is it worth the bother? After all, apart from the lives lost and people displaced living in camps, many entrepreneurs lost their livelihoods. It must take a lot of faith on their part to take the bull by the horns (so to speak) and begin a new venture.

As political parties race to comply with the requirements of the new Political Parties Act, news reports frequently tell us this or that leader has been appointed torchbearer to vie in the next elections.

Now, every startup has (or we hope has) a plan, but seriously have we planned for 2012 and indeed 2013 after the results are declared? Unless your business plan is to re-locate out of Kenya, this is a critical consideration. If we don’t it will be as someone (it may have been Judge Johann Kriegler recently formerly of IREC) said, what happened at the beginning of 2008 will look like a Christmas party in 2012 if nothing is done to prevent it.

It seems like the debate for an official “grand” opposition to our “grand” coalition has taken over the national agenda as opposed to pertinent issues such as constitutional review and the agenda 4 items.

So if politicians have forgotten to ensure that 2012 and 2013 are safe for doing business in Kenya, what can the micro and small entrepreneur do? Should we just have a four year plan and spend the beginning of 2012 closing or looking for (gullible) buyers for our businesses?

Will there be any repercussions of what happened this year on consumer demand come 2012? Maybe people will be scared to spend, remembering how prices skyrocketed because normal product distribution channels were closed. This effect could trickle westwards and affect markets in Uganda and Rwanda who bore the brunt of delayed shipments (particularly of fuel) when the Mombasa-Kisumu highway was blocked.

On the other hand, the post election violence may mean booming business in 2012 as consumers stock up in case of the re-emergence of violence. However, this will be felt in a slow market come 2013. What about the kiosk owner in Kibera, Mathare or any other flash-point for that matter? Have they thought if they will stay open past the elections? And if so, how will they manage to get their products past the protestors and the policemen, that is assuming that their property is not looted.

Location, Location, Location: the mantra for business

It matters not where you are in Kenya or indeed Uganda or Rwanda (if you depend on supplies from or through Kenya) for that matter, your business will be affected in some way if due to the early campaigns and jostling for prime positions in political parties means that nothing is done regarding constitutional reform, poverty and inequity, unemployment, cohesion, land reform and transparency, accountability and impunity (Agenda 4 Kenyan National Dialogue and Reconciliation).

On an individual level what can we do?

Recently I did a test that asked me to describe myself in 10 words. My answers in order were my gender, occupation, physical attributes, nationality, belief system and my roles in family and the wider society. It’s a test you should try. Simply imagine you have 10 words to describe who you are to someone who has never met you. But know there are no correct answers for this test. In a nutshell you are who you believe yourself to be.

What does our social identity have to do with our role in 2012 and 2013? The post election violence was mainly driven by ethnicity, with members of one community attacking the other, and the victims responding in revenge attacks.

That means that my ethnicity either marked or saved me from being a victim of the violence. Yet from my top 10 social identities, my ethnic group is not a priority in how I perceive myself as a person and member of Kenyan society. In fact in terms of grouping I feel more affiliation with my fellow entrepreneurs, women and Kenyans long before my tribesmates. Yet, and I can’t help this, there are other people who have made assumptions about me based on what community I happen to be born in (note: I said “born in” and not belong to). They have already foretold that come 2012 I will vote for a certain leader. If say that leader happens to win or lose, I will bear the brunt of their animosity if I happen to be in the wrong business location at the wrong time. That I cannot help.

But I can help in how I conduct myself and business to show that we are above ethnicity. I can be Kenyan. By treating every person I know and customer fairly and equitably (barring the one’s who don’t pay on time!).

I can ensure that amongst my small social group there is understanding that we are all Kenyan, East Africa or African for that matter. The Ubuntu spirit sums it up: if you hurt, then I hurt.

Leave the politicians to the campaigns (however early they have begun), but when they approach us in 2012 to take up arms or fists against (their) perceived enemies, know that it may be YOU in that IDP camp come 2013 figuring out what business to start-up with the Kshs. 10,000 from “Operation Rudi Nyumbani”.

Ok… I just realized there is hope for the startup section!