Kenya Musings

The situation in Kenya these days is very sad. It's hard for me to watch what's going on there without being reminded of what it felt like to be in Cote d'Ivoire in 2002. Not that the details of today's situation have much in common with the Ivoirian conflict, but both situations offer the spectacle of relatively prosperous, stable, and peaceful African countries falling into widespread violence and chaos literally overnight.

On a more encouraging note, though, I thought this piece in the Wall Street Journal made a good point.

"This is Africa," many people have told me, Africans and non-Africans. But what they overlook is that this nation blew up so much precisely because Africa is changing. Ten years ago, bolstering a candidate's results by a few percentage points would have been no big thing. In fact, 20 years ago, an 85% result for the incumbent would have been de rigueur. Today, there are more stringent regulations; more Kenyans know their rights; more monitors were at the polls; Kenya's media coverage was extensive; digital media are accelerating the distribution of information; and many people have cellphones with which they can pass on information.

Stealing an election is no longer that easy, and as we can see, you may not like the reaction. Rig at your own peril.

It's easy to be discouraged and horrified by some of the news coming out of Kenya, but the hasty comparisons to Somalia, Rwanda, and yes, Cote d'Ivoire, probably obscure much more than they elucidate.

Finally, I'm always irritated by the use of the word "tribal" in the coverage of African conflicts. I don't recall ethnically organized violence in the Balkans ever being described as tribal. And besides, ethnic, linguistic, and historical divisions between groups have always been fault lines for violent conflict. It seems like the only reason we don't describe, say, World War I as tribal is because the parties to that conflict had the opportunity to define and organize themselves as nations.