Ruto’s policies may be contrary to the nation’s strategic interests – Standard Health

One of the unexpected outcomes of President William Ruto’s state visit to the United States is a serious discussion about the perception of Kenya’s national interests. Two questions arise. First, how are these interests to be designed, defended, and advanced, and who should do this? Citizens typically delegate these functions to a legitimate government, provided it does so with confidence and in accordance with the law. Because delegation is not absolute, citizens reserve the right to demand accountability and even reprimand those entrusted with the state. Ruto’s trip to the United States seemed to be one of those cases where citizens demand accountability and question whose interests are being served.

Leaders are generally expected to care about well-being and should not appear to be part of a threat, internal or external, to the “interests” of the state. Interests, divided into basic or primary and secondary or peripheral, have three important attributes of sovereignty – security, i.e. the survival of the state, and way of life, i.e. the identity and values ​​of the nation. Way of life is political and socioeconomic in nature, including form of government and cultural identity. The ability to secure interests, however, depends on the state’s ability to manage several attributes that shape human history, which include political economy, space or geography, resources, a quality education system, independence of mind, and a sense of pride and good reputation. The ability to defend the national image, as John Quincy Adams demonstrated in 1823, is a critical aspect of a country’s national interest. However, there are leaders who, due to real or imagined ignorance, have no sense of honor and the ability to recognize threats to the national image as threats to the national interest.

Ignorance perpetuates poverty, a tool of power, and can create artificial scarcity in the midst of abundance. Creating scarcity is the political process of deciding who will and will not receive a given strategic resource. This leads to a process of monopolization of resources. One of the factors that distinguishes strong from weak countries is the ability to gain access to resources and deny others, and then act on it. Doing something requires preparation, both intellectual and material and physical, and it can be brutal. Kenya is a victim of creating scarcity.

Unlike great powers, Kenya’s response to the forces that cause poverty requires the ability to play power games with the weapons of the weak. Among his various strategies in dealing with powerful states is the use of the power of reason and logic, which requires advanced critical thinking. The ability to outcompete the powerful is an important weapon of the weak when confronted with international oppressors. Being sure of the difference between its core and secondary values, it should anticipate trends and potential threats and then design appropriate responses that do not sacrifice core values ​​in exchange for the unnecessary interests of another state. Therefore, what is crucial for Kenya is its intellectual and moral capacity to resist the impositions of powerful countries.

Diplomatic “nyapara”

Post-colonial Kenya owes its existence to the competition of European powers for new empires in Africa, it faced many challenges to survive and had to face four realities on the world stage. First, he had to maintain a “revolutionary” anti-colonial reputation. He has lost this image and instead seems to play the diplomatic nyapara. Second, it is a maritime country and an economic gateway to its landlocked neighbors, but it initially tended to ignore its maritime obligations and suffered as a result. Third, it is in the geopolitical interests of its close neighbors, who often experience political instability. For them, stability in Kenya means comfort because it is a place to escape to when things go wrong elsewhere.

.

read on

Fourth, extracontinental powers are interested in its geostrategic position on the equator and compete for control of its politics. Some, like the UK, consider Kenya their backyard and have managed to create and reinforce a culture of psychological dependence and a sense of helplessness on the part of policymakers waiting for “advice” on what to do. These “advisors” can be harsh in promoting their own interests and Kenya has experienced this harshness several times. It is in Kenya’s interest to observe the long-term reality that continues to impact its well-being.

Questions have been raised about whether Kenyan officialdom promotes or sacrifices Kenya’s core interests in exchange for predetermined peripheral interests. They have intensified with Ruto’s expensive trips abroad, the presence of “advisors” in critical offices such as the Treasury, and the imposition of policies and taxes that create poverty. Since Ruto’s trips to different countries in quick succession did not seem to add value or ease the burden on citizens, questions were certainly mounting. Ruto was not happy that Kenyans, while questioning his motives and actions, could not believe him and demanded accountability.

Having an absolutist view of delegated powers, the demands incurred the president’s ire probably because Ruto did not expect it. By using such threatening language as Mambo ni matatu or that the sword of state he received on inauguration day was not intended for chopping cabbages, his threatening language spread throughout other state institutions such as the judiciary and the legislature, portraying them as obstacles to his mission . Because he disrespects his appointees, dismissing them as incompetent, he clearly does not consult them widely on key issues.

It was strange to hear the President blurt out during his annual breakfast prayer meeting, “I’m not crazy.” Like U.S. President Richard M. Nixon in 1973, who said, “I am not a fraud,” this gibberish left people wondering what prompted the president to make such a desperate declaration. While Nixon grappled with Watergate and Vietnam, Ruto tried to explain the phenomenon of foreign “friends” who have so much access to his thoughts and discussions that they can intervene by offering him luxury travel amenities. Is the country safe when foreigners have access to Ruto’s thoughts and discussions? These “friends” from the UAE are the same ones who finance Sudanese Dagalo who visited Ruto in February 2024 and Ruto later regretted it.

Ruto seemed to have missed the point of being president, which is to take care of national interests and defend them, rather than self-promotion and turning Kenya into a vassal state. Averse to history and the humanities, he does not understand global dynamics and even outsources his thinking to visiting Harvard students rather than accepting Kenyan students. His frustration was that the Kenyans were questioning him, so he chose the breakfast prayer to show his anger. Worse still, Ruto appears inconsistent and shifts political positions in ways that ridicule him and cast doubt on his understanding of national interests. This happens at both international and national levels. While his willingness to send Kenyan police on a U.S.-funded mission in Haiti pleases U.S. President Joe Biden, it also gives him the impression of an American proxy. He vowed never to attend “summits” organized for Africans by individual extracontinental powers, yet he still lined up for the Italy-Africa and South Korea-Africa summits. Although he became angry when the media asked him about this contradiction, the image of a man of doublespeak remained.

His absolutist stance as the Auditor-General continues to expose high-level misuse of public funds, leading to questions about Ruto’s judgment on national interests. For example, he allowed the construction of high-rise buildings in the security zone near Moi Air Base in Eastleigh because he is the commander-in-chief of the KDF. He changed his mind when he approached Kenya Air Force personnel.

High taxes

Despite the pledge never to demolish houses, slum demolitions took place. Instead of the promised jobs, new high taxes that force businesses and factories to close and investors to move to more investor-friendly neighboring countries are causing a sharp increase in unemployment.

With the collapse of his political house, UDA, complaints against “Zakayo” intensified. He and Vice President Rigathi Gachagua began to go in different directions when the latter complained about “equality” in search of political influence. Kimani Ichungwa, by dismissing the DP as having a rural mindset, inadvertently empowered Gachagua, whose supporters used the new term “redneck.” It increases Gachagua’s political chances of being accepted as the leader of the Mountain he desires.

Ruto’s policies and actions raise questions about ideas about how to protect Kenya’s national interests. The impression that the country is run by foreign “friends”, the World Bank and the IMF, and that it does not care about the misfortune of its citizens as long as the Hustler Grandees get what they want, is a loss of direction for the country. Praise from non-continental forces in the face of citizen suffering enhances Nyapar’s deputy image and causes loss of pride. Both are detrimental to Kenya’s national interests.