Why ODM pact with UDA can't last long in the broad-based 'plot'

The so-called “broad-based government” born out of the ODM–UDA political handshake was always a fragile construction—an arrangement stitched together in haste, lacking ideological coherence, structural clarity, and, most crucially, a succession blueprint.

It was marketed as a stabilising mechanism during a national political transition, but in truth, it exposed the deep contradictions embedded within both formations. Today, with Raila Odinga’s passing and the reverberations still unsettling the political landscape, the pact stands exposed: shaky and on the verge of collapse. At the heart of the crisis lies a fundamental problem—there were no explicit terms governing the future of the arrangement. President William Ruto hoped that bringing ODM into the fold would neutralise opposition.

In reality, he imported internal contradictions into his own house. The broad-based notion was a political gamble: a move designed to weaken dissent while projecting national unity. But without a defined succession pathway, a shared policy agenda, or a clear framework for power-sharing, the pact became a political free-for-all. 

What has followed is predictable. Raila’s own long history of ambiguous political alignments resurfaced in the days preceding his demise. His double speak on the arrangement raised eyebrows: one moment he appeared to endorse the cooperation with Ruto, and in the next breath, he repositioned himself as a sceptic of Ruto’s governance style and legitimacy.

Raila operated in the space between endorsement and opposition—a position that may have worked during his lifetime due to his towering personality, but one that has now plunged ODM into disarray. 

The clearest indicators of this discomfort came from his two most prominent lieutenants—James Orengo and Edwin Sifuna. Both publicly distanced themselves from the pact, refusing to own or defend it. For Orengo, a seasoned constitutionalist, the deal violated every principle of structured political engagement. For Sifuna, the SG, it amounted to ideological bankruptcy and a betrayal of ODM’s long-standing reformist identity. When the party’s frontline generals reject a deal their leader supposedly supported, it tells you everything about the pact’s legitimacy—or lack thereof.  ODM today finds itself in a full-blown quagmire. Without Raila’s unifying persona, the party is split between three factions: those who want to maintain proximity to power, those demanding a return to opposition purity, and those who simply want to survive politically in their local strongholds.

It is a house divided, quarrelling, and dangerously close to structural implosion. And the ODM–UDA pact is the earthquake that triggered these cracks. Yet the biggest miscalculation was not ODM’s alone. President Ruto is emerging as the ultimate loser in this political misadventure. 

He inherited ODM’s internal chaos and simultaneously weakened the legitimacy of his own administration. The broad-based government diluted his messaging, angered his core base, and emboldened critics who now accuse him of political desperation and betrayal. 

Ruto believed he was playing a masterstroke—absorbing ODM while keeping UDA intact. But the opposite occurred: UDA grew restless, ODM grew rebellious, and the national mood shifted sharply against his leadership. Many Kenyans opposed the pact from the outset. They viewed it as an opportunistic elite arrangement that silenced checks and balances at a time when the country needed strong opposition more than ever. In absorbing the opposition, Ruto essentially absorbed public frustration as well. 

Ruto misread Raila’s signals. He assumed cooperation meant submission, forgetting that Raila had a long-established pattern of moving fluidly across political boundaries. In the end, Ruto walked into a trap of his own making. He extended a political olive branch that now threatens to suffocate his own authority. 

The truth is: the broad-based government was a miscalculation from both sides, but one that harms Ruto more profoundly. ODM’s salvation lies in recognising the pact for what it was a politically incoherent arrangement. The party must reclaim its rightful position as the official opposition, re-centre its ideology, and rebuild its grassroots structures. Accepting that the pact was a blunder is not a sign of weakness—it is the first step toward political revival.  In the end, Ruto’s grand plan is collapsing under its own contradictions. He played a game that looked clever on paper but is now playing him.