How can Africa’s young democracies address violence within their own borders? This paper, published by Africa Development, argues that unresolved quandaries of citizenship and statehood have driven violent conflict in Kenya. The impulsive reactions of a threatened government have generated state violence, with the resistance of citizens ensuing. So far the process of democratisation has inflamed ethnic struggles, leading to the destruction of human life and property. Yet a new social contract, bringing peace and justice, is most likely to emerge from a more thorough, dedicated pluralism.
Violence began in October 1991 near the Rift Valley and quickly spread to several districts in the area. As the fighting’s ethnic dimension became more pronounced, the various motives behind it began to emerge, including the expulsion of non-indigenous people from the Rift Valley. Elites, in turn, have used the violence to justify stronger one-party rule and to warn against the dangers of runaway pluralism and ethnic division. Liberal democracy by itself will not stop the violence, and indeed the state has done little to curb conflict.
This analysis of the causes and effects of recent violent conflict in Kenya yielded the following findings:
- In addition to deliberate manipulation and instigation, the state has reacted in a partisan manner when intervening to stop the violence. Political motives have generally trumped economic and social causes of the fighting.
- Outbursts of violence have challenged and at times stymied the progress of democratisation and improved governance in the country. An ethnocentric and self-interested political culture has grown up.
- The government has allowed such violence to become institutionalised as a way to promote particular policies and attack popular movements.
- Political tolerance has been lacking on the Kenyan political scene, and up to now elites have done little to consciously promote such an attitude.
- Many of those perpetrating the increasingly endemic violence have been frustrated by an absence of political reforms and the government’s resistance to change.
Building on these conclusions, a number of general policy recommendations are identified for the Kenyan state:
- A focus on the symptoms of violence should be replaced by an open and honest assessment of its underlying causes.
- The government needs to adopt a coherent land policy and establish a land commission empowered on tenure issues. Land-based conflicts will only increase with a growing population, and given the emotional attachment of Kenyans to the soil. Glaring inequalities between millions of squatters and wealthy absentee landholders remain a source of tension.
- There is a strong need for civic education to combat intolerance and encourage respect for other ethnic groups. The government, along with churches and NGOs, should spearhead a campaign positively emphasising Kenya’s pluralism and diversity.
- Genuine equality of opportunity with regard to natural and political resources would significantly reduce ethnic and social tension. Democratic governance and economic growth will also contribute.
- Indigenous approaches to resolving conflicts should be encouraged and initiated at an early stage, before violence engulfs entire areas.
- The government should consider instituting forms of compensation or restitution for those victimised during periods of political violence.
