Selfish interests, thirst for power is the glue that holds coalitions

The 2027 General Election is not around the corner, but politicians are itching to form coalitions.

President William Ruto has courted former Prime Minister Raila Odinga, but he is struggling to keep him locked in, as evidenced by the growing dissent from within Raila’s ranks.

On the other hand, a team of opposition politicians is regrouping into a formation that they say will “liberate Kenya.” This team comprises former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua, Wiper leader Kalonzo Musyoka, People Liberation Party’s Martha Karua, Democratic Action Party-Kenya leader Eugene Wamalwa and former cabinet secretaries Fred Matiang’i, Justin Muturi and Mithika Linturi.

On Tuesday,  they met at a Nairobi hotel alongside former Trade Minister Mukhisa Kituyi and Jubilee Chairperson Saitoti Torome.

Reacting to the new formation, Saboti MP Caleb Amisi warned that the opposition figures were making a blunder by walking into a coalition blindly.

“Do not jump into coalitions’ photo sessions without knowing what each party stands for in terms of ideology, political history, and their respective benefactors,” said Amisi.

Single basket

His remarks assumed coalitions in Kenya have been based on ideologies, an assertion that history has mostly disproved. Most are formed by politicians with significant followings across different regions, who bring their bases into a single basket. Such outfits have been faulted as ethnic.

“Unlike in other mature democracies, coalitions in Kenya revolve around powerful politicians’ individual and cumulative interests. Politicians who have political or economic capital constitute the ruling class. The ruling elite craft coalitions that serve their selfish interests more often than not, camouflaged as national interests,” argued political risk analyst Dismas Mokua.

“Unsuspecting Kenyans are made to believe that coalitions are anchored in ideologies. All political parties in Kenya have the same DNA. The normal classification of political parties from right to left does not work in Kenya. Selfish interests and political aspirations is the glue that hold coalitions together. Ideological compatibility is the voodoo justification made in public for forming coalitions,” he added.

The opposition coalition is yet to take shape, it has assumed the architecture customary with opposition outfits in recent years. Like a hydra, it has several heads – principals – but lacks a de facto leader.

Given that most harbour presidential ambitions, it is unlikely that a leader among them will be announced soon, as such a move would carry the risk of a fallout. For the longest time, opposition coalitions feature principals, deemed to be equals, but are never really equals.

It has been the case with Raila’s Azimio la Umoja-One Kenya, the defunct National Super Alliance and Coalition for Reform and Democracy. Raila, the flagbearer of all these outfits, has referred to himself as the “first among equals.”

Deputy president

In his arrangement with Raila, there is little doubt that Ruto is the dominant one. In public engagements, he elevates the former prime minister to appear as a co-principal in the Kenya Kwanza administration, invited on stage by Deputy President Kithure Kindiki, but he never really is an equal.

Taking this hint, pro-Ruto allies of the former premier have embraced the idea of supporting the President’s re-election bid, slighting Raila, who has not stated whether he would be shelving his presidential ambitions.

Both sides are motivated by their intention to seize power, the sole reason why political parties are formed, at least according to admissions by countless politicians. And hence they rarely survive subsequent political cycles.

“Ruling elites make and break coalitions at their pleasure, in a good part because of the wabi sabi political philosophy and the Stockholm syndrome. Supporters of the ruling elite always find beauty in the ruling elite’s imperfections and mistakes, as captured in the wabi sabi political philosophy. Supporters of the ruling class have fallen in love with their captors as elucidated by the Stockholm syndrome,” said Mokua.

It is evident that the motivation behind their unity is ousting Ruto, a man they accuse of mismanaging the country. This mirrors the situation in the 1992, 1997 and 2002 elections, when the opposition was almost desperate to end the Kanu reign.

“The desire to make President Ruto a one-term president is the glue holding Gachagua and Kalonzo together. This glue will, however, melt when the duo needs to decide on the presidential candidate,” noted Mokua.

This glue has melted before. Undecided about who should lead the opposition Forum for Restoration and Democracy in 1992, the formation split into Ford Kenya, led by the late Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, and Kenneth Matiba’s Ford Asili. They lost to the former President Daniel Moi.

Ruto intends to secure a second term as President and views Raila as a viable partner, especially now that the President seems to be losing grip in the Mount Kenya region, which contributed the most to his victory in the last election.

His partnership with Raila, solemnised in a cooperation agreement their parties signed, has largely been viewed as inspired by survival, more than anything else. Indeed, at the height of youth-led protests against tax hikes last year, Ruto had seemed his weakest.

Mostly deserted by Gachagua and facing mounting backlash from the Raila-led opposition, the Head of State looked isolated. He recently admitted that Raila helped him “stabilise” his government, shaken to its foundations by Generation Z and Millennials.

Survival is a great motivator in politics. Former President Uhuru Kenyatta would attest to this, as would his predecessor, the late Mwai Kibaki. When Uhuru found himself in Ruto’s shoes, pestered by Ruto, then-deputy president, and Raila, he extended the olive branch to the former premier.

Their truce helped Uhuru steer his government in the latter days of his presidency as it guaranteed him the numbers he needed in Parliament to have his policies pass.

Facing a Raila-led mass action after the disputed presidential election of 2007, Kibaki sought out Kalonzo to give him some semblance of legitimacy.

Opposition figures, too, have found survival and relevance to be worthy reasons for seeking coalitions. Out in the cold, several politicians fizzle out of the limelight.

For everyone bearing presidential ambitions, solid or otherwise fringe aspirants, 2027 seems like the year of possibilities.

Growing dissent

Ruto looks very much beatable, held up mostly by Raila’s support, which has sometimes felt half-hearted. Against the expectation that he would labour to offer the President assurances, Raila has not seemed keen to rein in the growing dissent from within his ranks.

If elections were held today, the argument repeated time without number in recent months goes, Ruto would struggle to win. Critics have gone as far as to predict that it would not matter who the opposition would front: any one of them would make Ruto a one-term president.

There are two conditions to this assertion. The first suggests that the opposition must rally behind a single candidate and recreate the 2002 moment, where a united opposition ended Kanu’s four-decade hold on power. The second is that with the backing of Generation Z and Millennials, even a surprise candidate would bag the presidency.

Politicians in a new opposition formation, which met last Tuesday, are exploring both possibilities. They fancy their chances at beating Ruto based on the numbers they could bring to the table.

If they can avoid a split, the kind of which plagued the opposition in the 1990s, they could deliver enough votes to secure victory. They could potentially rally more than five million votes from their respective backyards.

“The coming together is welcome, for it is a strong signal of willingness to team up and rally behind a common course. It is only their honesty in what they stand for that will see them triumph come 2027. They must also be ready to sacrifice individual ambitions and back one if they are to beat Ruto,” said Beauttah Omanga, a former journalist and political commentator.

Indeed, disintegration would likely secure Ruto a second term, especially if Raila endorses the former’s re-election bid. Together, the two could marshal enough votes to defeat a divided opposition. History offers such a lesson in Moi’s victory against a fragmented opposition in 1992 and later in 1997.

As principals in the new coalition plot to assemble their bases, they are equally interested in securing the youth vote, which could tilt the next polls one way. Ruto is perceived to be unpopular among the youth, who flood social media with trolls against him.

Since last year’s protests erupted, Kalonzo and Karua have sided with Gen-Zs, calling out the government for killing and abducting youthful critics. Gachagua and Muturi have also spoken the language of the young, exposing the security agencies allegedly conducting the abductions.

Matiang’i, who has largely kept a low profile, has attracted some support from the young masses. However, he faces equal opposition courtesy of his legacy as the Interior Cabinet Secretary in Uhuru’s administration, which oversaw serious violations of human rights and civil liberties.

Crafting a strategy to woo the youth vote will prove a challenge for the new coalition, given the resistance they have faced on social media over some of their controversial pasts.