RSS

Prof. Makau Mutua Is Wrong Again; Musyoka Cannot Beat Raila In The Imaginary Match-Up With Him

06 Nov

No country has ever elected a traitor as its leader and neither has one ever succeeded to impose himself upon it. Once a thief, always a thief.  With this in mind, I am very confident in saying the following: If Kalonzo Musyoka is the best candidate the so-called G7 put forth as their candidate against Raila as Prof. Makau argues in his article in the Daily Nation, then Raila should start measuring the drapes at Harambee House and State House.

Before I address the specific arguments raised by Makau Mutua in his piece, let me first put all this in perspective:

First, I am on record and have repeatedly said there is no one more singly responsible for PEV than Kalonzo Musyoka and I say this because, but for Kalonzo Musyoka’s rush to legitimize the hastily and illegally formed government of Kibaki in early 2008, we would have had a different outcome, which, in my view, would have altogether avoided the eruption of violence that nearly brought us into a civil war.

Put differently, had Kalonzo Musyoka been, or acted as a patriot and joined Raila in demanding that Kibaki cease in his efforts to power grab and allow the will of the people to be honored, no one other than a few hardcore Kibaki supporters, would have stomached the idea of defying a whole nation against a united front of demand for justice and democracy.

Instead, Kalonzo for strictly personal reasons as he himself confirmed in Wikileaks, chose to hurriedly accept the pre-arranged and paid for vice-presidency and setting in motion conditions that would erupt in the violence we saw.

Ocampo has argued in his case against Ruto that the latter hijacked the political situation in the country to engage in crimes against humanity.

Whether that is true or not, we can all agree no such alleged crimes would have occurred (a) had Raila been sworn as president or (b) had Kalonzo at least joined in demanding for a recount at worst, or a new election at best.

The shamelessness with which Kalonzo acted in 2008, the selfishness in both hurriedly accepting the vice-presidency and his conduct in the lead-up to the election that he admitted was calculated to put him first, his ODM colleagues second and country last; the recklessness with which Kalonzo hastily accepted the presidency knowing fully well the potential consequences as he should have; the fact that this abhorrent conduct by Kalonzo significantly contributed in setting in motion or ripening the conditions that brought us to the brink of a civil war clearly disqualify Kalonzo Musyoka from running as president, let alone being elected as one and even he would agree with that, were he to be intellectually honest.

Any objective observer would certainly agree with that assessment and conclusion.

Second, Kalonzo’s conduct in office since barreling his way to it has been another stain in his previously illustrious and promising career. I need not detail here why and how but let me just say, his consistent and persistent elbowing the Prime Minister on matters protocol, especially in public events with the president goes to support the conclusion he himself has confirmed and that is, for him, it’s all about he, him and himself and no country should ever have someone like that as her president.

We all know what happened with the waste of public funds we hardly have left from theft in Kalonzo’s so called “shuttle diplomacy,” which in reality were luxury holidays paid by the taxpayer to accomplish nothing as Kalonzo, a lawyer, should have told Kibaki there was no need for such efforts, were he a person who cared about the country.

He is not and has not been since he terribly miscalculated back in 2007 that president he must become the country be damned.

Third, by his own words and conduct during the referendum, Kalonzo gave us another meaning of the word “watermelon,” and that is, one who supported passage of the constitution in the day time but was opposed to it at night.

Nothing surprised anyone there, given what we know about Kalonzo: an unprincipled man who would say or do anything to get or remain in power.

While this is true of many politicians as well, few ever rise to the level of Kalonzo and none has ever single handedly contributed to the extent Kalonzo did in bringing our country to the brink of a civil war and, conversely, none has ever thrown away the opportunity to save a country for such selfish reasons as simply be appointed as VP in a government many would persuasively and demonstrably argue was illegally constituted and would have remained so but for the Accord agreement between Kibaki and Raila.

For these reasons alone, I submit Kalonzo Musyoka is unqualified to run for president, let alone be elected as one.

Professor Makau Mutua takes a different view but, as I demonstrate below, the good professor is dead wrong, again.

Mutua advises Raila to “recycle the piece of paper on which the polls are printed” because, among other reasons, “the polls put Mr Odinga at below the 50 per cent + 1 mark, which means he would face a run-off.”

I disagree.

Unlike Mutua, I would not advise Raila to wholly dismiss the recent polls that show him still leading the other presidential contenders.

I will, however, advise him to dismiss that aspect of the poll which was clearly intended to prop up Uhuru Kenyatta as the man to beat as between and among the so-called G7.

In No Presidential Winner This Year, Says Ipsos-Synovate and Standard Online, I pointed out there was some mischief in this latest poll by Ipsos-Synovate and in response and support of another blogger who shares the same view, I posted the flowing:

Putting aside being privy to what you have said about this latest poll having nothing to do with Raila but more about telling the so-called G7 Uhuru is their man, and just so some people don’t think we are payukaring in saying this, let me expound on this purely as a matter of analysis of the poll and its reporting; I have done the same thing in my blog No Presidential Winner This Year, Says Ipsos-Synovate and Standard Online.

First, notice the following three paragraphs taken verbatim from the news story in the exact sequence they occur:

None of the eight presidential candidates who were sampled during the opinion poll that targeted 2, 000 respondents was able to garner 50 per cent plus of votes cast.

The poll indicated that 24 per cent of respondents would vote for Uhuru. Eldoret North MP William Ruto would get 10 per cent of the votes.

Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka will get nine per cent, Gichugu MP Martha Karua five percent and Saboti MP Eugene Wamalwa two per cent.

Who is missing in this part of the reporting?

Raila, of course. Do you know why? Because he is not the focus of the poll; the focus is on G7, which has been nicely broken down for you in the order of preference: UK/Ruto on upper deck, with UK preferred first; Musyoka/Karua on middle deck and Eugene at the lonely bottom.

In other words, among the G7, UK is the preferred man to beat at 24%, Ruto a distant second at 10% with the pollster basically saying the rest better stop dreaming.

Second, the paper really reveals what this is all about by declaring,

This [the poll results] must be good news for the G7 alliance that has been toying with the idea of either fielding a single presidential candidate against Raila or all the four presidential aspirants –Uhuru, Ruto, Kalonzo and Wamalwa go to 2012 polls then force a run off.

In other words, the message to G7 is, you can beat Raila but only if you rally behind UK and nobody else.

Having delivered the message very clearly, and consistent with good reporting, the paper cautions in the end this is all good but ICC may doom the prospects.

Good reporting and analysis but the underlying message is the most important to pass along.

The question is, would the G7 bite?

I doubt.

I doubt only because Ruto would be laughed right out of RV, if he agrees as this poll suggests to be UK’s running mate.

You will have to read my blog A Conversation With DPM and Minister for Finance Uhuru Kenyatta to know what UK thinks about being second fiddle to Ruto.

The rest really do not matter in this equation as the pollster and Standard correctly conclude.

Karua and Kenneth do matter in other equations, of course, but not in G7.

Third, please note the use of “Uhuru closes in on Raila” in the story’s headline.

My point is, even though theoretically possible, the run-off scenario is not likely as the poll suggests but it’s a scenario that accomplishes the pollster’s intention as analyzed above therefore if I were Raila, I would not put that much stock on the poll’s accuracy as regards a run-off scenario and specifically point to the statistically significant “undecided” 15% to say we are less likely to be in a run-off scenario, if the elections were held today and even more less so come 2012.

I agree with Makau Mutua that anything could happen before the election that could impact the outcome beyond what is known today, which is actually true in nearly all elections except those where the incumbents have other plans other than what voters intend or wish to do.

In this context, Makau says that one thing that could happen, is Kalonzo Musyoka giving Raila a run for his money.

“I have concluded the man from Tseikuru is the one to watch,” the professor says, adding, “My crystal ball tells me the election — take this to the bank — will be a two-horse race between Mr Odinga and Mr Musyoka.”

I say please don’t take this check from the professor to any bank.

It’s a bad check and will be dishonored on the spot.

Kalonzo will go down to Raila in a landslide were G7 or whatever tribal outfit Raila’s opponents come up with for the reasons I discuss above and more, if the outfit, in fact, nominates him and that is a big “if.”

The professor has not come up with any convincing argument or reasons why anyone would trust Kalonzo to nominate him, let alone elect him as president.

What I hear the professor offering by way of explaining how Kalonzo weasels his way to State House, is Kalonzo would be a nominee by accident as aided and abetted by tribalism.

Kenya would be a cursed country were that to be the case.

After eliminating all the contenders for reasons that are not all that plausible, Makau sets the stage for a dual between common sense and tribalism and declares tribalism victorious with Kalonzo in the end laughing all to way to State House, having topped himself with chicanery and deceit with an apparently sleeping or comatose nation that does not notice or does nothing to repel such an affront on their common sense.

That can only be possible in fiction, not reality.

The good professor, however, agrees with me that Kenyans need a break from yet another Agikuyu president and offers this as one of the reasons Kalonzo could emerge as Raila’s only opponent but I disagree as to the professor’s latter contention.

It does not mean an Uhuru non-candidacy automatically leads to Kalonzo as the only flag-bearer of the “everybody” in Raila v Everybody contest that is underway.

True, the power brokers in Central may as well choose to front Kalonzo as their man against Raila but the risk of losing with Kalonzo and its implication on their interests far more outweighs the benefit of even doing nothing and letting the chips fall where they may.

It is more plausible, and I will not be surprised, that many of these power brokers quietly want Raila to be president and many would even help him along the way, albeit not yet; the coast must be clear and by that I mean, Raila must continue to regain lost ground especially in the Rift Valley and to the extent he manages to convincingly come across as having crossed the threshold they, not the threshold of loudmouths in these fora and elsewhere, then the floodgates of support will open and you’ll see serious people openly calling for his election, which will seal the deal.

Were that not to happen, and were the scenario Makau contemplates instead to occur  and Kalonzo is fronted by Central and is pitted against Raila, Raila will at least walk to State House, if not outright flatten Kalonzo on the floor as he matches to the House, if anything because the country would be sending the message enough is enough with this mambo ya ukabila and other shenanigans.

Let me be clear about this as I can be: the one and only reason Kalonzo can be elected in Kenya at least in 2012 is tribalism and nothing but tribalism.

As I have said before and would repeat here, victory for tribalism, is defeat for Kenya and whatever hopes we have to unite and focus on rebuilding our nation.

Let me also be very clear: I am not saying that tribalism will not be a factor in 2012; it will be and shall be until it’s completely eradicated as a major or in some cases, the only factor in determining who we elect as president.

Tribalism will be the only factor and reason Kalonzo Musyoka can be elected as president, excluding outright theft of the presidency again, which I seriously doubt and therefore also disagree with Makau that Kalonzo gets an advantage of the state machinery in the purported match-up with Raila.

Makau Mutua argues that a Raila-Kalonzo match-up is also in the works because there is no one else who Central can support, assuming Uhuru is out for any number of reasons, including ICC.

Noting that “I know that PNU isn’t sold on Mr Musyoka as the flagbearer,” Makau argues that “PNU will have no choice but to embrace the VP in Mr Kenyatta’s absence.”

The good professor emphasizes this point, thus: “Mark my words — no other PNU nominee is capable of selling nationally. Mr Odinga would beat the lackadaisical Prof Saitoti like a drum.”

This is simply not true.

I am, of course, assuming the professor means to exclude a Kikuyu candidate in this scenario and that being the case, I can name several candidates who can do ten times a better job from the comfort of their bedrooms than Kalonzo and I am sure they are very offended by what Makau Mutua is saying in dismissing them all as lightweights compared to who? Kalonzo?

That’s not being serious.

The professor says, “Mind you — I predict that the next president will come from a community that hasn’t produced any in the past. Some contenders are simply “pretenders”.

I completely agree and have been saying the same thing.

Mutua says, “Once the dust clears, the bulls in the ring will be ODM’s Odinga and PNU’s Musyoka.”

I disagree for the reason analyzed above.

The professor adds, “This will be a bitter contest.”

I disagree; if there is such a match-up, it will not be a contest at all, let alone being a “bitter” one.

Mutua adds, “Most pundits would pick Mr Odinga to win.”

Count me as one of them.

The professor “sketches” a scenario that has Mr Musyoka coming out tops as follows:.

According to the professor, “Mr Odinga may have been cursed by The Hague” because “the Kikuyu and Kalenjin elites may blame Mr Odinga for Mr Kenyatta’s and Mr Ruto’s tribulations” and the professor adds that, even though “not true, they’ve sold the poison pill to most of their kinsmen that Mr Odinga connived with ICC Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo to “take out” their sons.”

Makau then concludes that “Mr Odinga will be hard pressed to overcome this emotive — but false — propaganda.”

I agree with the professor that, in the event either Uhuru or Ruto or both are nabbed at the Hague, their supporters will try and pin their troubles on Raila.

However, dishonest and false such a campaign could be, as Mutua rightly agrees, I, unlike the professor with whom I disagree on this, see several ways Raila can overcome the lies not the least of which is, he has done so in the past and therefore will do the same in the future, namely, successfully strategize against the lies and emerge victorious once again to the wide open mouths of his opponents, critics and enemies.

I would love to share that strategy but let me not.

The professor says that the “likely result [of the lies] is that Mr Musyoka will inherit large chunks of Kikuyu and Kalenjin votes. He’ll capitalise on this anger to emerge as the “prince of peace” who can bring Kikuyus and Kalenjins together.”

No, professor; a man whose single, selfish and reckless decision to legitimize a government many believe was illegitimate and nearly brought us to a civil war cannot be rewarded as a “prince of peace,” even by those who believe the government was legitimately elected for they are neither foolish nor naïve to believe or assume that thumbing the nose on Kenyans again is a good idea.

They will be rudely but pleasantly shocked otherwise, if they are.

In fact, what Musyoka did with his “shuttle diplomacy,” which was nothing but, is one of the many reasons I know none of the G7 characters would pick him as their flagbearer.

In A Conversation With Kalonzo Musyoka, the following conversation takes place:

Reporter: What is your other strategy:

Musyoka: This one is tricky. You see, the best scenario is for me to emerge as presidential candidate with the support of Ruto and Uhuru’s supporters but this strategy calls for me to have all of them to myself. The scenario I described above is the more direct and straightforward but it is designed to maximize tribalism for the three of us. The other strategy is to use tribalism but for my sole benefit. The way it would work is for me to support as I have the Ocampo Six in efforts to defer their cases but to quietly pray as I have that Uhuru and Ruto are both nailed by Ocampo. This way, I can go around the country telling their supporters this is Raila’s fault and that therefore they should elect me to secure their freedom.

I know this is truly Musyoka’s hope and prayer but I doubt God will grant it.

Makau Mutua finally takes off deep into the stratosphere with his wild suggestion that Musyoka could “add insult to Mr Odinga’s injury” by picking a running mate from among the Kalenjin…let’s say he picks Agriculture minister Sally Kosgei as his running mate. This “east-west” ticket could be viewed as national.”

Let me just say this: It is theoretically and practically possible to have the duo, Musyoka and Sally Kosgey, running as a team.

Some experiments are not worth testing on human beings and thus the reason rats don’t like us much.

In certain cases, humans do allow themselves to be used as guinea pigs.

I doubt very seriously, knowing what is known, that Dr. Sally Kosgey would allow herself to be used as a guinea pig in this political experimentation whose architects must be forced to have rats as pets, if the experiment is carried out and fails as miserably as it is likely to fail.

The analysis will be the same, if you replace Sally with Ruto, except Ruto will be more inclined to be used as a guinea pig because he has in the past and that experiment failed, just as this one is likely to fail.

Makau Mutua argues that, if “on the other hand, Mr Odinga is stuck with Local Government minister Musalia Mudavadi, ODM would be a “west-west” ticket. Mr Musyoka could exploit ODM’s ticket as parochial and “nationally imbalanced”.

The professor is wrong again for the reasons I laid out in Why Raila Cannot Drop Mudavadi and Word To Raila Supporters and Admirers In East And Central

The professor says, “Add to Mr Musyoka’s bag of Christian fundamentalists and evangelicals. In this scenario, Mr Musyoka could easily line up three of the top five communities – Kikuyu, Kamba and Kalenjin. Put in his column Meru, many Luhya, Maasai, “coastals,” and the Kisii. This ethnic math would be very formidable.”

First, one only gets one chance in pretending to be Godly or a Christian. Once exposed as being anything other than or for being so for convenience at best, then only like comrades in the Christian fundamental world would embrace you and your schemes but the rest of those who have seen you for who you are, namely, a fake Christian, will soundly reject you, except for the most gullible and blind who may still allow you to fool them.

Second, this tribal and ethnic computations must stop and I am surprised Prof. Makau Mutua is peddling this idea of a lining up of “three of the top five communities—Kikuyu, Kamba and Kalenjin” and adding to his potpourri the “Meru, many Luhya, Maasai, “coastals,” and the Kisii” as his preferred tribal grouping to be pitted against Raila and the rest of Kenya.

That kind of thinking is and must be a thing of the past.

If that’s the road the G7 wants to go, fine; the rest of the country is headed in a different direction, and that is one where tribalism and negative ethnicity does not play a determinative role in the outcome of presidential elections.

Raila has said he wants to run a 47-County campaign (call it 47C), meaning, he will seek and receive enough votes to send him to State House from all of our 47 counties.

I will pit that strategy against the tribal and ethnic grouping strategy Makau Mutua is peddling in his piece.

The professor thinks that Musyoka could “resuscitate the old Kanu machinery and loyalty networks” and this combined with the power of  “incumbency” that Mr Musyoka is “likely to enjoy” somehow will put him over the top in a “close election.”

There is not enough resuscitation of KANU that can make a difference in a Musyoka candidacy and if the party is resuscitated to make a difference, it would be one of progression and that stands to favor Raila, not G7 or Musyoka or anyone who would take us back to where KANU has been trying to run away from.

On the benefit of incumbency, that goes to Raila regardless of who he runs against, unless one is talking about rigging in which case the winner is whoever Kibaki blesses publicly or quietly but nothing of the like we saw in 2007–robbery; just ordinary, routine petty theft at worst—but let’s hope not.

Makau says, “President Kibaki — in spite of his aloofness — will be compelled to back Mr Musyoka. “Old money” in “Central Kenya”, which is conservative, would most likely bankroll Mr Musyoka. American religious conservatives — ala Tea Party — would rally to Mr Musyoka’s side.”

There is nothing that would “compel” Kibaki to support Musyoka; if anything, the closest Kibaki may feel compelled, is to return a favor to his friend Raila by saying “Raila Tosha” and I know some people go crazy when I say this, but I mean it in the sense if someone does you a favor, you better return one to him or her unless you are a Grinch.

I have actually offered a different and more nationalistic reason for Kibaki to do this and that is, to help in ending tribalism as I urge the president in Open Letter to H.E. Emilio Mwai Kibaki, C.G.H., M.P., President of the Republic of Kenya.

Finally, the professor concludes his piece by noting that “the 2012 election will be akin to an “immovable object” — Mr Musyoka — meeting an “irresistible force” — Mr Odinga.”

There is nothing “immovable” about Musyoka; even a baby blowing air in his direction will knock him down politically speaking.

The professor says “this [ostensibly the match-up between Raila and Musyoka] will be a battle royale of the titans.”

Not true; that will be the mismatch of our lifetime and Raila will easily defeat, if not crush Musyoka.

The professor says “my hypothesis doesn’t have good news for the man they call Agwambo. That’s why he shouldn’t believe the polls.”

Professor, your hypothesis is so off, but if true, it would be good news for Awambo.

Peace, Love and Unity

Omwenga

[Unedited]

Advertisements
 
Leave a comment

Posted by on November 6, 2011 in Politics

 

Tags: , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: