Back to Index

This article participates on the following special index pages:

Critical differences between Kenya-s grand coalition and Zimbabwe-s inclusive government
Isabella Matambanadzo
January 29, 2009

Thanks to phenomenal solidarity from folks in Kenya we have been learning much about the transition process in Kenya. While you can see commonalties, there are some critical differences in the Kenya Grand Coalition deal:

1. Zimbabwe's deal has been brokered extra territorially, and predominately in secret locations. A game park....why?

2. Zimbabwe's deal has been brokered in total secret, with citizens dependent on strategic leaks and gossip.

3. There has been a total media blackout on the deal, with a secrecy clause. Kenya's internal media and international media, based inside Kenya for many years, was strong, plural, popular and active. The harassment, intimidation and murder of journalists is well documents, with systematic freedoms of expression under repression through existing law. In fact the deal has instructed that countries hosting exile media shut them down. A recommendation that is a complete violation of international law to do with fundamental freedoms. The deal has therefore been a tool for further harassment of journalists and the press.

4. The intention of the Zimbabwe deal was to retain power for a certain party unconstitutionally and in violation of Article 30 of the constitutive Act of the African Union, which union has been weak and indecisive. In Kenya a panel of Eminent Africans led by a capable broker who acted ethically was in place.

5. At the UN the matter was treated as priority. At the UN the issue was systematically blocked by South Africa working in partnership with Russia and China, of the infamous arms ship: until Durban dock workers refused to off load, but we know the role of South Africa in arms as well.

6. Graca Machel worked in the spirit of UN Resolution 1325 making the concerns of women and girls a fundamental component of the deal. This deal has entrenched and further legitimated the inequalities of women by locking women out as political participators.

7. The race, ethnic and land questions were not grounds for violence and manipulation by the power broker and his allies. They were areas of work going forward. Mediation did not happen while families were mourning their loved ones. Ending violence was a first step in Kenya. Even today Jestina Mukoko and scores of others are in prison on trumped up charges.

8. Kenya's economic was not pulverized and dependent on phenomenal amounts of remittances, manipulated by the state through a false rate of exchange to feed the machinery of violence.

9. There was no hunger, public health crisis & humanitarian catastrophe in Kenya of the sort in Zimbabwe. In fact Uganda started to feel major tremors when the sub-regional transport and communications systems went down

10. Civil Society enjoyed fundamental freedoms and liberties in Kenya, able to publicly organize and operate. And they were threatened. In Zimbabwe HRDs and their families are under persistent and relentless threat, even today.

The one common element is the role of South Africans and South African brokers, for instance there are three critical players: Dumisani Khumalo at the UN, Johan Kriegler's Independent Review Commission and Mbeki. And RSA policy towards both countries. And this is what is critical how one super power engineers a compromise government. These engineered democracies have subverted the will of the people. And provided amnesties for perpetrators of crimes. They are deals of impunity, guaranteed by SADC. In Zimbabwe the mediation produced violence and further the mediator stifled the report of the South African generals which has now been classified secret. Accountability is not a factor at all.

Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.

TOP