Place of dialogue in nation thirsty for action, tired of whirlwind talks

President William Ruto (centre), his deputy Rigathi Gachagua (right), Azimio leader Raila Odinga (left) and other leaders at the KICC after the signing of the IEBC Bill. [Denish Ochieng, Standard]

Generation Z and Millennial protesters have been adamant. They want action. Not dialogue.

On Tuesday, many of them opposed the talks now proposed by President William Ruto and former Prime Minister Raila Odinga.

Their angry online posts showed that their opposition to talks was mostly a protest based on fear, inspired by previous experiences. They are afraid their issues will be swept under the carpet. They fear betrayal, the main reason they want their movement to remain leaderless.

But despite the opposition, it was always ending up in dialogue. Last Friday, President Ruto met young Kenyans on X, the first step in the inevitable talks many stakeholders have pushed for in recent weeks. The youths had opposed a committee Ruto had formed to engage them on their demands.

Under pressure, the Head of State has implemented some of the demands by the youth, the most radical one being the dissolution of Cabinet on Thursday. The move followed a directive for enforcing austerity measures in the Executive and the defunding offices of the First and Second ladies, and that of the spouse of the Prime Cabinet Secretary.

He has formed a task force to audit national debt, which is facing headwinds amid assertions that it is unlawful as the mandate falls in the auditor general’s office.

His administration has also conceded to hiring intern doctors as per terms agreed in a 2017 collective bargaining agreement. But the youths want more and fault the President for faltering on the equally pressing demand of justice for Kenyans killed during the three weeks of protests.

Facing accusations of shielding errant officers during the X Space engagement, Ruto said he would crack down on rogue officers. Despite the assurances, no action has been taken against officers captured on camera brutalising Kenyans, fueling mistrust. 

By forming a 150-member talks team that should include 50 youths, Ruto resorted to a strategy others before him have employed. Indeed, whenever the nation has faced a crisis like the current one, the country has turned to negotiations.

Raila’s ODM on Friday described the talks as being “in the best interest of the country”.

“...and will help address the emerging issues in a structured and coordinated manner,” ODM chairperson John Mbadi said in a statement.

Belgut MP Nelson Koech said the dialogue push matched the President’s promise of talks when he withdrew the Finance Bill, 2024.

“It is commendable that our President followed through on his promise for engagement within the 14 days as he had committed his administration because he means to keep his word to Gen Z and Kenyans by engaging them in broad-based dialogue on issues raised during the protests and lowering the cost of living and the Finance Bill,” said Koech, defending the opposition’s inclusion as being stakeholders in the process, among the youth and other groups.

National discussions have brought out mixed fortunes, with the worst outcomes now convincing the youths that only a few stand to benefit. Dialogue has also registered its positives.

At the height of anti-government protests last year, which had taken a toll on the economy, Ruto and Raila agreed to talks that birthed the National Dialogue Committee report. Wiper Leader Kalonzo Musyoka, who has turned out to be a critic of the proposed talks, co-led the process.

“It was clear that Kenyans want ACTION NOT DIALOGUE. I’ll tell Raila Odinga the same when we meet as Azimio la Umoja One Kenya Coalition Party,” Kalonzo tweeted on Friday.

But Koech faulted this position also held by former Defence Cabinet Secretary Eugene Wamalwa: “What is different between NADCO dialogue and this proposed broad-based dialogue which builds on the NADCO dialogue? Why would anyone not want President Ruto to keep his word to engage Gen Z and Kenyans and want to sell fear of dialogue?”

In early 2018, President Uhuru Kenyatta, who suffered a dent in his legitimacy owing to an opposition boycott of the 2017 repeat presidential election, also reached out to the former prime minister for a ceasefire after weeks of anti-government demonstrations. 

The current Constitution, acclaimed as one of the world’s most transformative, resulted from pressure-induced talks and lessons from previous backstabbing. From Kenya’s darkest moment in history.

Forced to the table by international actors concerned about a bleeding nation, President Mwai Kibaki and Raila in 2008 agreed to form the Grand Coalition Government. Its immediate impact was that tensions ceased, with the Constitution following two years later. 

Kibaki and Raila had been on opposing sides in the 2005 referendum on the new proposed new constitution. Kibaki and his allies had proposed a draft that went against the preceding Bomas of Kenya talks.

Nearly a decade earlier, the Inter-Party Parliamentary Group talks established an electoral commission with which all parties agreed. But the discussions had their weaknesses, the most consequential of which was the retention of the powerful presidency.

There has been dialogue before and after the stated instances. Many of them have, however, contributed to the red flags the Gen Zs and Millennials say they cannot ignore.

“Convincing the young people that they have anything to gain from the talks will be a big task as the dialogue seems like it is intended to deflate their movement. Raila’s history of taking advantage of bad situations to cut a deal also alarms them,” said professor of diplomatic history Macharia Munene.

During an X Space engagement Wednesday evening, former Chief Justice Willy Mutunga dismissed dialogue as aimed to diffuse the current movement. He highlighted historical instances where talks and commissions, such as Justice Philip Waki’s that looked into the 2007/08 post-election violence, among others, he said have not achieved much.

“The common denominator of all those commissions, according to me, was to diffuse popular uprisings, to make sure that public anger is dissipated and that will be it,” said Mutunga.

Many have argued that the only beneficiaries have been politicians, who have earned favours from the ruling government.

Offering lessons from strife-torn South Sudan on Spice FM’s Situation Room, President Salva Kiir’s Special Envoy Albino Mathom said it was better for dialogue despite their bad rap.

“It is better to have a feast than to have war in the country... building nations takes time,” said Mathom, highlighting his nation’s inability to find an end to its forever war. 

The youths have pointed at Raila’s handshake with Uhuru, which, they argue, saw the former engage trappings of power, abandoning his push for electoral reform and justice for his supporters who paid the ultimate price.

The former premier’s partnership with Ruto also strikes them as fishy, given its proposals to create new political offices, such as that of the leader of the official opposition and that of the prime cabinet secretary.