One of the great unresolved issues of political history is this: Does man impose his own ideas of order, meaning and significance on the random events that take place in the course of his life? Or is there actually a clear and recognisable pattern in the way that events tend to shape up?
The writer of the Book of Ecclesiastes in the Bible, mentioned only as 'the philosopher', certainly had no doubt that such patterns exist, when he wrote that “there is nothing new under the sun”.
And this is a perspective that I have often found it useful to apply to Kenyan politics. For it is hard, for example, to avoid the conclusion that there are certain patterns which tend to be revealed with every new president.
For instance, I have noticed that every incoming Kenyan president will within the first few years of his time in office, face an existential challenge to his authority. This may or may not be accompanied by some degree of violence. And it may be one thing or a series of things.
But the challenge always comes. And what should be of great relief to William Ruto, is that the president always survives this challenge, and continues to guide the affairs of the nation thereafter.
I will just very briefly outline the key challenges of this kind that previous Kenyan presidents faced:
President Jomo Kenyatta faced an army mutiny in 1964 and only managed to quell this mutiny courtesy of an intervention by British soldiers who at that time were, thankfully, still within our borders in large numbers.
His successor Daniel Moi of course faced a fully fledged coup attempt, in 1982, which was only put down by “loyalist forces” after the Nairobi CBD had been laid to waste by clashes between the loyalist forces and the 'rebels', with general-purpose looters adding to the mayhem.
President Mwai Kibaki faced not one, but two such existential threats to his authority.
First was the 2005 referendum on a new constitution, which was universally judged to be a humiliating defeat for the president and his supporters. The victorious 'Orange' leadership team that had led the effort to block the proposed new constitution which was supported by Kibaki, immediately formed a political party (ODM – the Orange Democratic Movement). And there were suspicions that a vote of no confidence in the Kibaki government might soon send the president home earlier than had been expected.
He survived this defeat, but then came the 2007-08 post-election violence: the kind of tragic eruption of violence, which would be any president’s nightmare.
Kibaki survived this too.
As for Uhuru Kenyatta, it would seem that he faced an accelerated series of such existential challenges.
From having to lay down the powers of the presidency to proceed to the ICC for trial in 2014; to the Supreme Court nullifying his presidential election victory following the 2017 General Election; to the 'swearing-in' in 2018 of his then political nemesis, Raila Odinga, as 'the people’s president'.
All these were major crises of the Uhuru Kenyatta presidency; and he survived all of them.
Well, it is now President William Ruto’s turn to face the existential crises that seem to be part and parcel of the Kenyan presidency.
In his case, I would say – borrowing from the celebrated Kenyan intellectual Prof PLO Lumumba’s love for classic Greek mythology, and the memorable phrases thereof – President Ruto finds himself “between Scylla and Charybdis”.
The phrase is used to describe “a predicament in which avoidance of either of two dangers means exposure to the other”.
Here we have the Scylla of a deliberate campaign of delegitimisation by the opposition leaders, which is finding traction due to the desperation and despair brought about by high costs of basic commodities; and the Charybdis of an IMF economic straitjacket, which prevents the government from immediately reinstating popular subsidies on such commodities.
It is the President’s misfortune that this crisis has come so early in his tenure.
But if history is any guide, then he is sure to survive this challenge.
