Kenya is aflame after a presidential election on Dec. 27 widely believed to have been rigged to secure the re-election of Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki. Kibaki's opponents took to the streets, the government issued shoot-to-kill orders, and hundreds have died at the hands of the police as well as from gang rampages and ethnic violence.
The US has led the international diplomatic response, but its approach has been deeply flawed.
Kenyans voted in vast numbers, waiting in the hot sun for several hours at crowded polling booths around the country. The first results to be counted were for Kenya's parliament, with Kibaki's government ministers roundly defeated in their local constituencies.
The main opposition alliance, led by Raila Odinga, won about 100 seats, compared to roughly 30 for Kibaki. It appeared overwhelmingly likely that the presidential vote count would similarly show Odinga beating Kibaki by a wide margin.
That, indeed, is how the early count transpired. As the tallies from polling stations from around the country came into Nairobi, Odinga built up a lead of several hundred thousand votes. Then the trouble began. Vote tallies from Kibaki's homeland in central Kenya were delayed. Independent observers from the EU and elsewhere began to report serious irregularities in the Kibaki strongholds, where opposition party representatives were denied access to polling sites.
Matters became even more dubious as the vote tallies were collected and recorded at the Electoral Commission of Kenya (ECK). According to detailed evidence submitted by the opposition, the tallies from the countryside, allegedly already padded for Kibaki, were again manipulated, with additional votes awarded to him. As a result, many more votes were recorded by the ECK for the presidential race than for the parliamentary race, even though voters were clearly instructed -- indeed required -- to cast a vote in both races.
When the opposition tried to challenge these inconsistencies, the ECK abruptly declared Kibaki the winner. Days later, the ECK's head publicly acknowledged that Kibaki supporters had pressured him to announce the "results" immediately, despite the clear evidence of vote rigging. Shockingly, he declared that he did not know who really won. The EU observers also announced that the election tally had not met basic international standards.
The election is a disaster for Kenya, but the response of the international community, led by the US, is no less distressing. US foreign policy in Africa is in the hands of Assistant Secretary of State Jendayi Frazer, a former student of US Secretary of State Condeleezza Rice. From the start of the post-election crisis, Frazer took three flawed positions.
First, she declared that the vote could not be re-assessed by an independent tally. In fact, most observers on the scene believed that there was a long paper trail, from the polling sites all the way to Nairobi, which could be re-assessed in detail.
Second, she claimed that there had been vote rigging "on both sides," and suggested that the true election results were very close and that perhaps Kibaki had won. Given the vast amount of direct and circumstantial evidence that the rigging was on behalf of Kibaki, Frazer's assignment of equal blame to each side was met with astonishment and dismay by the opposition. She also failed to acknowledge an exit poll carried out by a US foundation, which showed a clear Odinga victory.
Finally, Frazer argued that the two sides needed to compromise and share power. Instead, Kibaki disdainfully appointed 18 key Cabinet members even as "mediation" from abroad was about to begin. The opposition, of course, was perplexed by the US call for compromise without any serious call to review the vote itself.
In the end, only Kenya will decide its own fate. The US or other outside powers will not save Kenyan democracy. Threats, sanctions, or aid cutoffs would only cause further damage to an economy already in free fall, tragically punishing Kenya's poor while fomenting further violence.
Still, the international community can play a more constructive role than it has until now by pressing both sides to accept an independent recount. By standing up for democratic principles, the world would truly stand on the side of the Kenyan people.
In dismissing such a recount, Frazer told Kenyans that they shouldn't expect their vote to be tallied accurately, and that power can be seized or perhaps even negotiated in a backroom. She also sent an unmistakable signal to those who would steal votes: At worst, they might have to share a few Cabinet positions with the opposition.
Perhaps a recount would show that the election was too close to call. Perhaps, as the opposition insists, it would demonstrate a clear victory for Odinga. Either way, Kenyans and their votes would be taken seriously, and tempers could well subside. Only if both sides accept that there was no clear winner is it reasonable to call for power-sharing (or a new election).
There is still time to get this right. The international community should stop pushing for a backroom "compromise" that ignores the popular will. Let the world stand with neither Kibaki nor the opposition, nor for an arbitrary compromise, but with Kenya's voters.
If Kibaki rejects an independent recount, his refusal will reverberate around Kenya and the world. Those who ignore voters should quickly learn that they have no place to hide.
Jeffrey Sachs is professor of economics and director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
RSS