Carl von Clausewitz was a Prussian military general who lived in the 19th Century.
Clausewitz was often intrigued by the manner in which Napoleon, one of the leaders of the French Revolution, changed the conduct of war through his ability to motivate the populace, and gain access to the full resources of the state. This culminated in unleashing a war on a greater scale than had been previously seen in Europe.
In his reflections, Clausewitz argued that war theory could not be a preserve of strict operational advice and planning for and by generals. On the contrary, he contended that military campaigns could be planned only to a very small degree because incalculable influences or events quickly made detailed planning in advance obsolete.
His argument was that three quarters of the things on which action is built in war are concealed and distorted by uncertainty. He defined this uncertainty as being unable to accurately and precisely fully comprehend an army’s own capability, its adversary’s proficiency, and intent during an engagement.
He also observed the confusion of direction, location and perspective on the battlefield by individual soldiers, who sometimes became separated from their officers, when orders became confused due to poor communication.
He called this the fog of war. He stated that war is the realm of uncertainty, and is conducted in a haze of uncertainty. He underscored that a sensitive and discriminating judgement is called for and a skilled intelligence to scent out the truth.
He summed this by saying that in the fog of war, action must come before perfect information because precision and certainty are unattainable goals.
As a nation, we have almost reached the crescendo of war, not the kind of physical armed conflict, but of political supremacy. Because politics, is a mere continuation of war by other means.
Resultantly, we have witnessed party leaders and political brokers caucusing on several occasions.
On the spotlight has been the One Kenya Alliance principals — Wiper leader Kalonzo Musyoka, Ford Kenya’s Moses Wetang'ula, ANC’s Musalia Mudavadi and Kanu chairman Gideon Moi, who this week held another consultative meeting ostensibly to review the status of the coalition.
This has been the latest of several such meetings where it has been reported that the principals meet to deliberate on how to strengthen their unity and select a presidential candidate and running mate ahead of the 2022 elections.
After each meeting, we have expected to hear them proclaim “Habemus Papam! We have a Pope!”. These are the words that the world’s Catholics wait for each time the white smoke rises above the Vatican to announce a new Pope. Only in our case it would be “Habemus praesidis candidatum! We have a presidential candidate!
But alas! This is not to be.
And the reason given is that there are technical teams still sifting through some very technical issues that need to be subjected to further political consensus before a formal coalition can be consummated. However, they have made it official that they shall not revive Nasa.
I submit, however, that the bona fide reason that OKA has a paralysis to announce Habemus praesidis candidatum is because they are banking on perfect, precise and certain information presented to them by their political strategists on who is best suited among the four to outcompete Deputy President William Ruto or Raila Odinga.
But as observed by Clausewitz, this is an unattainable goal because it is impossible to know with any degree of certainty your own political capability, your opponent’s proficiency, and intent prior to engagement in a political war.
As generals in this political war, the four principals and their political strategists need to retake Clausewitz’s military class to understand that in a fog of war, action must come before perfect information.
So to tell us that there will be subsequent meetings before they announce their presidential candidate because this is an ongoing conversation is to completely miss not just the boat, but the ocean too.
But more importantly beyond Clausewitz’s lesson, I offer to give them a mini pro bono class on political coalitions and electoral contests to unlock their paralysis.
There is a sequence to political coalition formation and electoral contest. And you ignore this sequence at your peril because it informs how a society’s interests are aggregated, and how ultimately it settles and embraces a unitary leader.
In politics, you can have a single party that represents a coalition of interests, or a coalition of parties, each of which represents a single or set of interests. To select a presidential candidate, OKA principals should facilitate interrogation of the latter.
The focus on who should be the presidential candidate should shift from being determined by the voting numbers each principal can bargain with. But for this to succeed will require the concerted efforts of the ethnicities these principals represent. Because let us not kid ourselves, our politics are tribal.
For instance, the Kamba nation, not their tribal kingpin, should rank and table their interests to determine how they align with the Luhya nation’s interests. For example, if the paramount interest for both nations maybe agriculture — which for arguments sake I surmise for the Kamba nation would be availability, affordability and accessibility of perennial water, and for the Luhya would be competitive and timely payments of their sugarcane crop — which between the four principals has a convincing strategy that sustainably and effectively fulfils both interests?
Undertaking this exercise down the priority issues would ultimately reveal which principal has the requisite strategies and abilities to lead OKA.
It would shift from the principals need to wait for President Uhuru to endorse one of them as the presidential flag bearer, and from who commands a bigger vote basket to one who has been carefully tested and pre-selected by their electorate. And the resultant leader would be accepted by all those who are in favour of an OKA coalition that prioritises their ranked interests rather than a coalition that merely prioritises ascendance to the throne.
Ultimately this would transform OKA from a coalition of parties representing a single or set of interests, to a single party that represents a coalition of ranked interests. OKA would then persuade the rest of the nation from this premise, as it would demonstrate their willingness and ability to govern on issues that voters have assigned the highest priority.
But this requires hard work.
Begs the question, are OKA principals, their political strategists and the voters who are of the OKA persuasion willing to roll up their sleeves?
My unsolicited advice is to the OKA principals. The greatest enemy we all face is the one we cannot physically see; but we know and sense its presence. Likewise, time in this context is your greatest enemy. It waits for no king, much less tribal kingpins. So, grasp the nettle and announce Habemus praesidis candidatum already.
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy. - Ernest Benn
