Guyana must not become another Kenya (Pt 1)

Dear Editor,
The history of electoral politics in Kenya before and after it won its independence from the British in 1963 has all the hallmarks of Guyanese electoral politics.
Moreover, the recent elections held on October 26 in the East African state is a blueprint for what can very well happen in Guyana’s 2020 elections.
Just as the British used the divide-and-rule policy in the then British Guiana to split the country and the national movement along racial lines, in the same way, similar practices were carried out in Kenya, save and except along tribal lines.
Before Kenya gained its independence, two major political leaders had emerged on the political landscape, Jomo Kenyatta and Oginga Odinga. They were the two foremost leaders of the national movement at the time.
After independence Kenyatta became first, Prime Minister and later, President of Kenya with Odinga Vice President.
Kenyatta emerged as Leader of the Kenyan African National Union (KANU) while Odinga led the Kenyan African Democratic Union (KADU).
Differences soon emerged between the two leaders on the ideological and the political fronts.
Odinga, a progressive democrat, wanted closer relations with China and the Soviet Union while Kenyatta, a conservative African nationalist, pushed for closer relations with the United States and the Western countries.
On the home front, Kenyatta quietly supported a wave of brutal repression and suppression against Opposition forces and individuals. Odinga was unsupportive.
Notice the close similarities as regards the ideological differences and political praxis between Burnham and Jagan in Guyana and between Kenyatta and Odinga in Kenya.
Odinga opposed publicly Kenyatta’s pro-Western foreign policy and his repressive actions on the domestic front.
He quit the Government after serving for just three years.
Since then the animosity between the two camps has never subsided. Through the annals of history Kenya’s politics, like Guyana’s, has been characterised by years of entrenched adversarial politics.
The significance of the break-up of the respective national movements in Guyana and Kenya, although under different conditions, marked a turning point in the political history of both countries.
Both history and time have demonstrated that the splits in the two countries’ national movements were to have a lasting and devastating impact on future electoral politics.
It is an undisputed fact that tribal politics in the case of Kenya and ethnic politics in the case of Guyana have been decisive factors in determining the outcome of elections in the two countries.
Kenya was a de facto one-party state for almost 22 years up until 1992 when, under national and international pressure, President Daniel Arap Moi, a mandarin of Kenyatta’s ruling KANU party, was forced to re-introduce multi-party democracy and elections, after an absence of almost 40 years and eight years after Kenyatta’s passing.
In Guyana’s case, free and fair elections were held once again seven years after Burnham died.
Of noteworthy coincidence was the year 1992, which saw dramatic changes in the Kenyan electoral process while in Guyana it saw an end to PNC dominance.

Sincerely,
Clement J Rohee