Brash Governor Natembeya now finds power in political restraint

For months, Trans Nzoia Governor George Natembeya cut a distinct figure on Kenya’s political landscape. Brash, outspoken, and unapologetically confrontational.

The former no-nonsense Rift Valley Regional Commissioner seemed determined to carve out his own political space by challenging the established order within the Luhya community. 

His most frequent targets? None other than the community’s perceived top leaders serving in the Kenya Kwanza government: National Assembly Speaker Moses Wetang’ula and Prime Cabinet Secretary Musalia Mudavadi. 

Natembeya’s style was akin to a bull charging into a political arena, scattering opponents and drawing both fervent support and sharp criticism.

Yet, in the unpredictable theatre of Kenyan politics, shifts in strategy are often just around the corner. In recent weeks, observers of Natembeya’s political trajectory have noted a discernible change in tone and approach.  

This apparent pivot has ignited debate and ="https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/rift-valley/article/2001509081/natembeya-i-dont-regret-telling-the-president-the-truth">speculation across the political spectrum<, particularly within the Western Kenya region. Has the ‘Iron Fist’ of Trans-Nzoia truly changed tact, or is this merely a strategic pause, a calculated retreat before a new offensive? 

The most prominent signal of this potential shift came last month during a live interview on a popular Luhya FM radio station. In a moment that reportedly caught his own supporters by surprise, Natembeya declared a moratorium on his attacks against the two senior-most Luhya politicians in the current administration.  

His reasoning, as he articulated it during the interview, was framed with an unexpected degree of empathy. “I have discovered that my fellow brothers Wetang’ula and Mudavadi may be facing very gigantic problems serving in the Kenya Kwanza Government,” Natembeya reportedly stated, adding, “and for this reason, I will just let them be. I will no longer fight or attack them.” 

This statement marked a significant departure from the narrative Natembeya had previously cultivated. His earlier political posturing often painted Wetang’ula and Mudavadi as leaders who had either failed the community, were beholden to external forces, or had not delivered on the promises made to Western Kenya. 

His confrontational style resonated with a segment of the population yearning for a new leadership paradigm, one seen as more assertive and less amenable to perceived political compromises.  

His declaration on radio, however, suggested a recognition of ="https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/counties/article/2001516755/natembeya-vows-not-to-succumb-to-intimidation-impeachment-threats">potential challenges< faced by the duo within the complexities of national government, a subtlety rarely seen in his earlier pronouncements. 

Adding fuel to the speculation fires were widely-circulated photos from the burial of former IEBC Chairman Wafula Chebukati at Sabata Farm in Trans-Nzoia County, a national event attended by President William Ruto. 

The images captured Natembeya and Wetang’ula engaged in what appeared to be a deep, private conversation, exhibiting a camaraderie hitherto unseen in their public interactions.  

There were reports that the encounter might have been subtly facilitated by Natembeya’s handlers, designed to signal a thawing of relations between the two Luhya leaders. Another school of thought attributed the seemingly chance meeting to the unseen, guiding hand of Luhya elders, who often play a crucial, albeit discreet, role in mediating political disputes and fostering community unity. 

Regardless of the true nature of the encounter, its public display reinforced the perception that Natembeya’s political thermostat had been turned down. 

Natembeya’s earlier confrontational narrative had not only captivated segments of the public but also, predictably, drawn sharp reactions from those who saw their influence and leadership models under threat. Immediate response came from a figure known for his measured political approach, Bungoma Governor Kenneth Lusaka. 

Lusaka, a seasoned administrator-cum-politician and a key ally of Wetang’ula, quickly stepped forward to defend the established order and urged Natembeya to show respect for senior leaders in the community, pointedly naming Wetang’ula and Mudavadi.

“Twins can be born the same day but one must come out first. So we can’t have too many leaders at the same time. Right now the one who’s in front is  Wetang’ula and we must all support him.”

He highlighted Wetang’ula’s long and arduous political journey, implicitly contrasting it with Natembeya’s relatively recent entry into elective politics. “Wetang’ula didn’t just wake up one day to become the Speaker of the National Assembly. Even my brother Governor George (Natembeya) knows Wetang’ula has fought political wars, dodged many torturous terrains spanning over 30 years to reach where he’s now. We have no option but to respect and support him since he’s our leader,” Lusaka stated. 

The reaction from the Western Kenya parliamentary group was even more forceful and numerous. A contingent of 27 MPs from the region, drawn from various parties but seemingly united in their opposition to Natembeya, convened to castigate him for what they termed “dangerous politics of witch-hunt.” 

Their collective voice had amplified the concerns raised by Lusaka, adding accusations of political immaturity and ulterior motives.

Leading the charge was Sirisia MP John Waluke, the caucus chairman, who didn’t mince words. Speaking at a church function in Malava, Kakamega County, where Wetang’ula was the chief guest, Waluke directly challenged Natembeya’s political independence.

“We know who Natembeya is working for by his persistent attacks on Wetang’ula and soon we shall name his master,” Waluke declared, suggesting Natembeya is a proxy for external political forces seeking to destabilise Wetang’ula’s leadership.

Shinyalu MP Fred Ikana dismissed Natembeya’s style as remnants of his previous career. 

“Natembeya thinks he is still in the provincial administration where he used to lecture his juniors,” Ikana remarked, implying that Natembeya’s administrative background makes him ill-suited for the nuances of political leadership. 

Likuyani MP Innocent Mugabe brought the argument back to development, suggesting that Natembeya’s divisive politics hinders progress. “No development projects will come to the region if we create divisions among ourselves, as leaders, we must plan ourselves and demand our rightful share in 2027,” Mugabe argued, linking unity under established leadership to the ability to lobby for resources from the national government.

Luanda MP Dick Maungu reinforced the call for unity, referencing other regions as models of political cohesion. “As a region, we must walk together and rally behind our leaders. When you go to Nyanza, Rift Valley and Central, 98 per cent of the community supports one of their own, let us embrace unity and discuss issues affecting us as a community,” Maungu urged. 

Natembeya’s apparent change in approach has naturally invited varying interpretations from political observers.  

Albert Mutambo, a lecturer at Baraton University, views Natembeya’s shift as a strategic move rather than a genuine change of heart. “By engaging in directly fighting both Wetang’ula and Mudavadi at the same time, Natembeya was first trying to capture his own political space and relevance in the vast Luhya community,” he observes. 

He adds, “Now that he feels he has managed to get a big political support of those supporting his ideals firmly behind him, he has decided to do a retreat but it’s a calculated move to gauge the terrain for new attack avenues.”

George Sirengo, a Kisumu-based lawyer, argues that the retreat was less about calculation and more about necessity.

“He had to refocus his style of politics as it was too dangerous,” he contends and adds. “You can’t keep on fighting top community leaders in order to gain relevance. It was important to tone down because his style of politics was going to consume his political career.”

Jane Odungo, a community elder from Kakamega said “Our children fighting in public brings shame to the community. We have tried to tell them that leadership is about respect and working together, even when you disagree. If Governor Natembeya is listening and cooling down, that is good. It shows maturity. But the real work is unity, not just silence.” 

Ben Okumu, a youth leader in Bungoma said “We are tired of politicians fighting over who is the top Luhya leader. We want to see development, jobs, opportunities. Natembeya was speaking truth to power sometimes, but the ="https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/politics/article/2001513170/natembeya-im-ready-to-vie-for-presidency">constant noise was distracting<. If he can now focus on delivering in Trans-Nzoia and working with others for the region’s benefit, that’s what matters to young people.” 

Gabriel Mayeku, a former Councillor at the now defunct Kimilili Municipality in Bungoma County said Natembeya’s initial approach was divisive. “You cannot build bridges by burning them first,” he said.