1

1.0 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY.

Before embarking on this intellectual journey, key concepts of great importance are to be

understood . The foundation and objective of the study topic also has a history which will be a

great “asset” in the topic of study. “Ethnicity and conflict in Kenya” is a topic with key concepts of

study in this paper. The key concepts that need wide understanding include : ethnicity, conflict,

ethnic conflict, and negative ethnicity.

CONCEPT OF ETHNICITY.

Ethnicity has been defined based on a number of approaches in the past twenty years.

Four major approaches and sub-approaches are : (1) ethnicity conceived as a primordial

phenomenon, (2) ethnicity conceived as an epiphenomenon, (3) ethnicity conceived as a situational

phenomenon, (4) ethnicity conceived as purely a subjective phenomenon (Wsevolod,1992).Based on

religion too as an aspect of life, the biblical approach on ethnicity also can give foundation on

the concept. This approaches elaborate how complex the concept of ethnicity is.

The primordial approach is the oldest paradigm in sociological literature. It amasses that ethnicity

is something given, ascribed by birth, deriving from the kin-and-clan structure of human society,

hence something more or less fixed and permanent ( Geertz, 1963; Isaacs, 1975; Stack, 1986 ). Many

scholars have views on primordial view as traditionally regards ethnicity as constituting a

fundamental feature of society and that ethnic identity is natural and unalienable.

The epiphenomenon, situational and subjective phenomenon approaches emerged in confutation

of the primordialist approach. The epiphenomenon approach is best represented

by Michael Hechter’s theory of internal colonialism and cultural division of labour, and, to a

lesser extent, by Edna Bonacich (1972). Hetcher (1978), divides the economic structure of society

into two sectors , the center and the periphery. The periphery consists of marginal jobs where

2

products are not unimportant to society, but which offer little in the form of compensation as

compared to the jobs in the centre. It is in the peripheral sector sector that immigrants

concentrate, develop their own solidarity and maintain their culture. Ethnicity thus is something

created and maintained by an uneven economy, or a product of economic exploitation ( also

Nagel and Ozlak, 1982 ).

The situational approach is based on rational choice theory. According to this approach, ethnicity

is something which is relevant in some situations but not in others. Individuals may choose to

be identified and regarded as members of an ethnic group if they find it to their advantage. The

scholars of this view and approach are Michael Banton (1983), Daniel Bell (1975) and Jeffrey Ross

(1982). Banton sees it as a rational choice option of an individual in any circumstance. On the

other hand, Bell and Ross emphasize the political advantage of ethnic membership choice. Thus,

the assumption that ethnicity is “a group option in which resources are mobilized for the

purpose of pressuring the political system to allocate public goods for the benefit of the 1

members of a self-differentiating collectivity” ( Ross, 1982). The situational approach was more

popular in the mid – seventies to mid – eighties period.

The subjective approach sees ethnicity as basically a social-psychological reality of “us” and

“them” in contradistinction to looking at it as something given, which exists objectively. This

approach tends to be same as the instrumentalist approach. Instrumentalists emphasize that

ethnicity of a group should be ultimately understood in terms of its relationship to other groups.

Another type of subjectivist approach to the study of ethnicity is constructionist. The basic notion

in this approach is that ethnicity is something that is being negotiated and constructed in

everyday living.

Done with the different approaches, what is ethnicity? First, the definition of the concept of

ethnicity depends on the meaning of two main concepts : ethnic group and ethnic

identity. Ethnic group as a concept it is the most basic concept in this study. Ethnic

3

group refers to ethnicity as the collective phenomenon. Ethnic identity on the other hand,

refers to ethnicity as an individually experienced phenomenon. Therefore, it is evident that

ethnicity is both a collective and individual phenomena. There are several dimensions

which ethnicity includes, on either the collective or individual level. Ethnicity also has

both an objective and subjective dimension. Objective aspects are those which can be

observed as facts in the existence of institutions, and in overt behavior patterns of

individuals. The subjective dimensions refer to attitudes, values and preconceptions whose

meaning has to be interpreted in the context of the process of communication.

Culture is a key contemporary approach for understanding the nature of ethnicity; this is

due to the idea of distinct or diverse culture. Culture refers to a unique historical group

experience. Culture is a system of encoding such experience into a set of symbolic

patterns. A distinct culture is a manifestation of a group’s distinct historical experience.

According to Worsely, cultural traits are are not absolute or simply intellectual categories,

but are invoked to provide ethnic identities which legitimize claims to rights ( Worsley,

1984). The emphasis on culture as a point of departure for our understanding of the

nature of ethnicity is not intended to mean that members of an ethnic group must

always share one and the same culture to the exclusion of any other.

Ethnic group is a concept referring to a community-type group of people who share the

same culture or to descendants of such people who may not share this culture but who

identify themselves with this ancestral group. The objective dimensions of ethnic groups

include presence of at least some community institutions or organizations, for instance ,

having descendants and ancestors, as focus of cultural transmission and identity formation

and the fact that there is a way for cultural behavior , in the form of customs, rituals

and preconceptions. The subjective dimension of ethnic groups refers to what, since F.

Barth’s work, has been known as ethnic boundaries. These ‘ethnic boundaries’ are social-

psychological boundaries and refers to the fact of group-inclusion and exclusion.

4

Ethnic identity is defined as a manner in which persons, on account of their ethnic

origin, locate themselves psychologically in relation to one or more social systems and in

which they perceive others as locating them in relation to those systems. By ethnic

origin is meant either that a person has been socialized in an ethnic group or that his or

her ancestors, real or symbolic, have been members of the group. The social systems may

be one’s ethnic community or society at large, or other ethnic communities and other

societies or groups , or a combination of all these ( Isajiw,1990).

Scholars too have defined ethnicity in various ways. Stuart Hall defines ethnicity as a

historical, cultural and political construction. In this sense, ethnicity can be seen as a

discursive construction of collective identity. The concept “ethnicity” then acknowledges

the place of history, language and culture in the construction on subjectivity and identity,

as well as the fact that all discourse is placed, positioned , situated and all knowledge is

contextual (Hall,1996a). Horowitz (1985) defines ethnicity as a term designated a sense of

collective belonging, which could be based on common descent, language , history , culture ,

race or religion ( or a combination of these). Barasa Kundu also in his paper “ Impacts of

past and potential ethnic conflicts” views ethnicity as an inclusive concept that defines

groupings on the basis of indicators such as color , appearance , language , race , religion ,

common ancestry , height , complexity , body structure , level of education and the like.

CONFLICT.

Conflict also is a concept in this intellectual study. Conflict has been researched on;

scholars try to find the basic foundation of conflicts among humans so as to build up a

more complex and uncontested definition of the term. Several theories have been used

but they are contested upon all the same. Conflict in society is inevitable and is a

natural necessary part of life. Conflict is present at home, work, or between states.

Conflict therefore is multi- leveled. The nature of conflict is dual ; in that it is both

constructive and destructive thus making it an important concept of study.

5

Scholarly , Wilmont and Hocker (2001.p.41) state that conflict is “ an expressed struggle

between at least two interdependent parties who perceive incompatible goals, scarce

resources and interference from others in achieving their goals”. As earlier stated, conflict

is multi-levled, regarding this fact at the individual level conflict begins “ when one party

perceives that the other has negatively affected or is about to negatively affect something

he or she cares about” (Thomas, 1992;p.653). At the cultural level, conflict occurs between

members of different cultures, and members of the same culture who feel that cultural

norms are being violated ( Wilmont and Hocker,2001.p.66). Although different researchers

have given different definitions to conflict, conflict can be generally defined as the

interaction of interdependent people who perceive opposition of goals, aims and values ,

and who see the other party as potentially interfering with the realization of this goals

( Putnam and Poole,1987).

ETHNIC CONFLICT.

Ethnic conflict is a term loaded with often legitimate negative associations and entirely

unnecessary confusions. The most important confusion is that ethnic conflicts are about

ethnicity. Ethnicity is not the ultimate , irreducible source of violent conflict in such

cases. From the understanding of the concept of conflict as a situation in which two or

more actors pursue incompatible. Ethnic conflicts are one particular form of such conflict;

that in which the goals of at least one conflict party are defined ultimately in ethnic

terms. The dissatisfaction of at least one of the conflict parties are in ethnic terms. Thus,

ethnic conflicts are a form of group conflict in which at least one of the parties

involved interprets the conflict, its causes, and potential remedies or solutions as such

along an actually existing or perceived discriminating ethnic divide.

The explanation clearly propagates that the parties involved in the ‘ethnic conflict’ are

purely ethnic groups which are seeking or defending their ethnic identities. The definition

is however contested due to the shallow explanation and assumption. Ethnic conflicts are

6

mostly dominant in multi-ethnic societies. According to Mc Onyango (1995:1) he argues

that inter-ethnic conflicts are not as a result of the mere fact that a continent and

national boundaries are brackets enclosing multi-ethnic groups but ethnicity and ethnic

conflicts are issues of ethnic grudges. He asserts that past ethnic-conflicts management

strategies have tended to concentrate on symptoms of the effects and not the root causes.

He further amasses that there are numerous socio-economic and political grudges between

or within multi-ethnic communities or societies. Based on Mc Onyango’s argument, one

can assert that ethnic conflicts are outcomes of many factors that are spread over the

aspects of life ; social, economic and political.

NEGATIVE ETHNICITY.

The concept of ethnicity has been experimented on intellectually by various approaches,

most of which do not explain the positive and negative aspects of the concept. Ethnicity

is one concept and reality that is often misunderstood academically and always generally

attributed as a negative aspect. Ethnicity well understood proves to be positive. These

comes with the diverse cultures, languages, life styles and also organizations that human

beings often spend to travel in pursuit to understand and learn them.

Publications in newspapers and other forms of media have given more weight on

negative ethnicity. Based on the situational approach of ethnicity negative ethnicity can be

basically the manner ethnic groups tend to situationally use their identities or superiority

or dominance to exploit or interfere with the other ethnic groups’ goals or interests for

their own benefit.

Locally I will give more attention to the writings of Koigi Wamwere on negative

ethnicity. He wrote the book titled “ Negative Ethnicity : From Bias to Genocide”. Koigi

Wamwere in a newspaper article in “The Star” welcomes the debate on negative ethnicity

and ethnic discrimination as crucial for our collective survival and well being. He argues

7

that negative ethnicity is an ideology which is a rat trap that is everybody’s problem. He

further opens up on the effects of negative ethnicity by arguing that it is the worst

hindrance to our good leadership, national unity, peace development, survival and success

against terrorism. He therefore concludes by defining negative ethnicity as “an ideology

of defining ourselves with stereotypes that claim more humanity, superiority, brain, beauty,

and entitlement for us”.

HISTORY OF ETHNIC CONFLICTS IN KENYA.

Kenya is a multi-ethnic society and has approximately forty-two ethnic communities or

groups that have lived together for a long time. The dominant ethnic groups in Kenya

are the Kikuyu, the Kalenjin, the Luo, the Luhya, the Kamba and the Kisii. However there

are many other ‘smaller’ ethnic communities in Kenya. Therefore these explains how

ethnic issues are so fundamental in the linguistic landscape of Kenya.

The history of ethnic conflicts in Kenya is long traced from the colonial era. One of the

long term causes of the clashes in Kenya is attributed to the colonial legacy. It is a

historical fact that the indirect rule administered by the British colonialists which applied

the divide and rule strategy polarized the various ethnic groups in Kenya. The strategy

led to creation of administrative structures such as districts and provinces without regard

for the wishes of Kenyan Communities. These structures were later inherited by the post-

colonial administration. This contributed to subsequent incompatibility of these ethnic

groups in Kenya. It is unfortunate that early independence or nationalist movements in

Kenya had regional and ethnic foundations and leadership even from an early stage. Their

names depicted ethnic interests. The early political parties had ethnic conglomerations: The

Kikuyu for instance, formed the Kikuyu Central Association (KCA), the Akamba :

Ukambani Members Association (UMA), the Luhya : The Luhya Union (LU), the Luo :

Young Kavirondo Association (YKA), the Kalenjin formed the Kalenjin Political Alliance

8

(KPA), the Coastal tribes formed the Mwambao Union Front (MUF), Taita formed the

Taita Hills Association (THA).

At independence, the local African leaders ascended to government structures which had

been intended to preserve the colonial administrative legacy. Like all other African

countries, Kenya inherited from the colonialists scarce national resources and all other

social facilities and also inadequate human resource capacity. The scramble for the scarce

national resources and facilities intensified and ethnicity became the main path through

which the dominance and preservation of power as well as resources could be achieved.

The European colonialists had factors that led them to invade Africa at large for

colonies. The main economic factor was to obtain the basic factors of production. Land

is a major factor in production and also a social tool for settlement. Land is yet another

source of ethnic conflict conflicts in Kenya since the colonial period. Christopher Leo

and Mwangi wa Githumo, local scholars, have attempted to provide explanations as to

why land has been a major source of ethnic conflicts. Colonialists established Kenya as a

suitable protectorate to settle and large tracts of land was alienated by the British

Colonial administration. As a result of land alienation in the early colonial period, many

cultivating populations were pushed into infertile native reserves that were not conducive

for farming. The process also extended to the pastoral ethnic groups like the Maasai,

Samburu, Nandi, Pokot and other Kalenjin communities.

The land question is one of the factors that stimulated the Mau Mau rebellion between

1952-1956 in Kenya and the subsequent declaration of the state of emergence by the

British. The British colonialists became conscious in dealing with the issue of transferring

power to Kenyans at independence, for they knew and were afraid that if the land issue

was not handled properly, it could degenerate to civil strife as numerous ethnic groups

engaged in the scramble to recover their alienated pieces of land.

9

At independence, the British administration worked out a formula of handing over land to

the indigenous ethnic group in Kenya. They established a special grant that was aimed at

facilitating the re-distribution of land. The obvious expectation during the struggle for

independence was that the land would be freely distributed to the people since it had in

the first place, been forcefully taken away from them. But in the independence agreement

with Britain, the Kenyan government was to buy it from the settlers. That in turn meant

that there was no free land for distribution. The price made land scarce. This is the

critical point at which; land tenure became a factor of ethnicity and hence ethnic

animosity intensified.

It is on record that the largest beneficiaries of this land distribution programme were the

Kikuyu and their allies the Embu and Meru through the alliance GEMA which was a

bargaining organ for these communities. The GEMA communities formed land buying

companies and cooperatives with the blessing of Mzee Jomo Kenyatta. The critics of

Gema Often stated that the membership of these land buying companies and cooperatives

was ethnical, contrary to constitutional and company law provisions against this form of

discrimination. Just as all other communities or ethnic groups in Kenya, the Kikuyu

community was also poor thus a question of where they got the money to buy the lands

was raised. A possible answer to the question is that the main source was banks and

non-financial institutions into which the first President of Kenya, Mzee Jomo Kenyatta

had appointed mostly Kikuyu management.

The Kikuyu therefore had far more than all other ethnic groups put together. They were

the main beneficiaries of the government settlement plan for the landless at no cost or at

minimal rates. This expanded their land ownership and settlement beyond their traditional

home. Unequal distribution of resources was also a potential source of instability in

Kenya. Economic success of the Kikuyu region in the first ten years of Kenya’s

independence was enviable by other ethnic groups. The Kikuyu also enjoyed good

10

modern roads, abundant school and education facilities, expanded health facilities, piped

water, electricity and other forms of infrastructure.

The same trend was also noted in the second regime in Kenya. Moi the Second president

also applied favored his ethnic community at large the Kalenjin Community. This also

ranged from social, economic and political development to public appointments.

Multipartism and Negative Ethnicity In Kenya.

December 1992, the first multiparty elections were held in Kenya. The existing regime

then by the KANU party was in opposition of the multiparty politics in Kenya. The

KANU government therefore went as far as instigating ethnic violence in the Rift

Valley region which spread to the other provinces. According to Osamba in 2001, the

motives for the violence were three fold: to prove the government’s always stated

assertion that political pluralism was synonymous with ethnic chaos, to terrorize ethnic

groups allegedly supporting the opposition, and to intimidate non-indigenous people to

vacate Rift Valley. The move to have multiparty politics was also politicized itself to

bring about ethnic animosity. Democracy was another issue on focus at the time after the

oppressions and inequalities across the state by the one-party system. This debate was

intrigued by external forces and the suppressing policies by the KANU government. The

external forces for instance the European countries forced and fostered for a democratic

type of government in Kenya. They also funded political parties for this purpose and also

some funds were used to create animosity between ethnic groups.

Multipartism was eventually mistakened and spread as ethnic polarization. However,

multiparty politics as years went by instigated for ethnic conflicts and negative ethnicity.

Politicians formed ethnic alliances to win elections aginst each other. This increased the

levels of negative ethnicity. Political campaigns became hate speech platforms for

ethnically identified leaders. Eventually the 1997 and 2007 faced hurdles and post-

election violence fought between ethnic groups. Multipartism was a good move towards

political equality in Kenya.

11

2.0 CAUSES OF ETHNIC CONFLICTS IN KENYA.

A study to understand the major causes of ethnic conflicts in Kenya is one that is

complex since the root causes are both contemporary and also colonial. There is no

single cause for ethnic conflict. Ethnic conflicts are always attributed as the result of

interplay of a number of factors. According to Suliman (1996), there is no single cause

of ethnic conflicts nor is there often any single pre-condition for sustainable peace.

Ethnicity has always been mistaken to be termed or crucified as the main cause of

ethnic conflicts. This is argued so by scholars : Alemayehu,2009; Asebe, 2007;

Varshney,2002 and Wolf,2006 that ‘ whilst the prevalence of diverse ethnic groups in a

state may not by itself lead to violent conflicts’. The causes of ethnic conflicts in Kenya

can be categorized to the specific political, social and economic contexts.

Political Causes.

According to Markakis (1994), though one of the major causes of ethnic conflict in the

Horn of Africa ( Kenya been part of the conflict system) is competition over resources or

the motive to secure access to resources, the struggle for power is the most important

cause of ethnic conflicts when government policies and institutions, which distribute

resources , are based on ethnicity. Similarly, Horowitz (1985) ,points out that “in divided

societies ,ethnic conflict is at the center of politics. Ethnic divisions pose challenges to

the cohesion of the states and sometimes to peaceful relations among states. Ethnic

conflict strains the bonds that sustain civility and is often at the root of violence that

results in rooting, death, homelessness, and the flight of large number of people. In divided

societies , ethnic affiliations are powerful, permeative, passionate, and pervasive”. Almost all

regimes in any ethnically diverse area politics are the causes and not solutions of the

historical contradictions in their respective countries.

Discriminatory government policies play a significant role in aggravating ethnic conflicts.

There is no big gap between the ‘politics of exclusion’ and violent ethnic conflicts. The

political leader in control of a nation-state favors their own ethnic group and

discriminate others. With this view is Vanhanen (1999:65) argues that “ ethnic nepotism,

12

measured by ethnic division, is a common casual factor behind ethnic conflict”. Such

ethnic divisive policies leads to the development of the feelings of being excluded ,

ignored, and discriminated against on the part of some ethnic communities. Therefore this

leads to an argument that prospects for violence in a country depend to a significant

degree on dynamics of domestic or inter-group politics.

Historically, Kenya’s regional geo-politics can be analyzed under the rubric of six factors.

This is according to John Oucho in his paper “ Undercurrents of Post-election Violence In

Kenya: Issues in the Long-term Agenda” These factors include : ethnic balkanization

whereby some area for bloc votes and some swing provinces in which three parties

scramble for votes, electorate’s consciousness of and sensitivity to the changing political

climate, reinvigoration of the revolution which began in 2002 but stalled midstream ,

political leaders’ mistrust and bigotry, and the spirited crave for devolution/regionalism

to educe centralized governance. Kenya politics are based on ethnic aspirations by

political parties and also the regime in power. Political alliances are made with regard to

gaining ethnic support. For instance; the Luo, the Luhya, the Akamba , the Coast

communities teaming up together to gain political power. Post independence political

bargaining and coalition formation has largely assumed regional or ethnic dimensions.

Access to political power has, by and large , determined the distribution of socio-economic

and political benefits. Studies have underlined the existence , and indeed the potential

dangers inherent in these regional variations. Rothschild (1969) and Nellis (1974) have

shown regional differences in cabinet and public service appointments in the immediate

post independence years, and that these differences were artificially determined by the

power holding political elite.

The Kenya constitution confered vast powers to the president this includes power to

allocate by nomination cabinet positions and make appointment to constitutionally

protected offices. Regimes therefore entrenched their rule, assigned strategic administrative

positions and directed political resources to support provinces or ethnic groups. For

instance, between 1963 and 1978 and 2003 to 2007 Central Province was

disproportionately represented in cabinet, military, diplomacy, and public service this was

because Jomo Kenyatta and Mwai Kibaki respectively were from the provinces. A

13

similar pattern was evident between 1979 and 2002, with Rift valley province the home

of former president Daniel Arap Moi was disproportionately represented. this shows how

the other areas or provinces as such were left out or their positions in public

appointments were reduced due to lack of the political voice or power. This often results

to formation of ethnically instigated opposition political parties to find ways and means

to access political power.

The misunderstanding of Majimboism and pluralism was an outcome of ‘political concept

understanding’. The federalism debate was to be fundamentally foster for equitable

distribution of resources, self-rule and trust that the opportunities are the same for

everyone. Pluralism was a call for democratic rule but political intervention of the

concept disregarded the concept and led to the misunderstandings.

Political inequalities also apply to the youth in Kenya and it is a factor for ethnic

violence in Kenya. The youth in Kenya age group 18-35 comprises about 60% of the

national population. This shows how the demographic factor also plays part in the ethnic

conflicts in Kenya. The youth is an important political constituency in its own right. In

Kenya, general elections are the highly lucratively rewarding season for the youth. This is

the most volatile cohort and politically salience because of three main factors : the group

is highly mobile, most educated and networked and also the most unemployed. Therefore

they become most vulnerable to be politically lured or ‘politically radicalized’. For

instance, the 2007/2008 post-election violence demonstrates how violently the youth

engaged in the conflict. The were funded and mobilized by the non-youth to be volatile.

A trend in Kenyan politics of is the rise of youth militia; which have sometimes been

identified to work for individual politicians.

In 2002 elections for instance the Mungiki militia openly identified itself with the

KANU presidential candidate and were active in post-election violence. The youth

involvement in violence and ethnic conflicts is purely instrumentalist and attributed to the

youth claiming political space after neglection. Political exclusion of the youth in Kenya

is rampant thus the violence either on the ethnic based conflicts or other forms of

14

demonstrations. The youth are used as political parties’ ‘foot soldiers’ instead of been

actively involved in political activities.

Ethnic identity in Kenya has pursued other factors other than the common and basic

ones of language, culture and ancestral origin or even ethnic boundaries. Different ethnic

groups identify themselves politically by the criteria of ‘political muscle’. The birth of the

nation created an immediate awareness of the ethnic identity of those who are in power,

which could easily turn hostile at the first suspicion of allowing ethnicity to affect

national politics. Ethnic identities of the leaders suppressed their intentions of nationhood.

Kenya leaders and political individuals have owed their power game more on ethnic

identities rather than nationhood. The ethnic and community identity dimensions have

resulted to ethnic conflicts due to the fighting for ethnic superiority.

Social Causes.

Social issues are also key in conflicts. Social issues are both cultural and historical

factors that cause ethnic conflicts. Cultural domination together with political suppression

is considered as another cause of conflict. Scholars have studied and argued to justify

this cause. Allen (1994) states that the development of ethnicity and ethnic conflict

couldn’t be examined narrowly from the economic or materialistic perspective alone. One

should also consider the fact that differences in tradition, values, and the possible fear of

suppression can lead to ethnic strife. Similarly, Harris and Reilly (1998) contend that

culture related conflict is the result of the quest for ‘cultural/group autonomy’ by the

minority groups who are suspicious of cultural assimilation or suppression by the

dominant group. This means that a politically dominant group may impose its traditions,

values, and beliefs on others. By doing so , it would suppress the language , values, and

institutions of other ethnic groups (Hussein, 2004). This comes with the fear of

assimilation by one group over the others.

Social inequalities which describes a condition in which members of a society have

different amounts of wealth, prestige and power. According to Davis and Moore, some

degree of social inequality is found in every society. This defines stratification in the

15

society. Social inequalities in Kenya is another cause of ethnic conflicts and negative

ethnicity.

Historical factors also matter a great deal and can be a source of ethnic conflict.

Colonial arrangements such as by the British, Dutch, Belgian , French and Germans went a

long way in inciting ethnic violence in areas where people of diverse ethnic nature live

in peace. For this purpose the British colonial government as earlier indicated used the

divide and rule system which divided Kenyan local communities totally. It was the

colonial, and the independent states succeeding them, which declared that each and every

person had an ‘ethnic identity’ that determined his or her place within the colony.

Assassinations of key leaders from one ethnic group also provided for the subsequent

ethnic conflicts in Kenya.

Economic Causes.

Economic aspects of life are so dear to all persons. Ethnic conflicts or any other level of

conflicts are mostly attributed to economic issues. Economic issues include : unequal

distribution of resources and scarcity of resources. Ethnic conflicts are also an outcome of

unequal economic opportunities. Ethnic groups tend to have perceptions of another ethnic

group been favored by the structures in place economically. Marginalization is also

another key concept in this context.

Kenya has faced a high rate of unequal distribution of resources across ethnic divides.

The political ethnic game plays too along economic activities. For example, since

independence in Kenya, the Kikuyu has always been granted a huge share of economic

infrastructures. Land has been in question ever since. The distribution of the colonial

settler land to the local communities in Kenya took an ethnic twist. Good roads, health

and education facilities are some of the important aspects which drive to economic

success. The distribution of this resources have always taken an ethnic line. The green

economy theory is applied in Kenya. The communities in the northern part of Kenya

have no equal development as all other areas. They lack good roads, schools, health

facilities and also national services. This lead them to the inter-ethnic clashes where they

always pursue cattle rustling since pastoralism is the only economic activity they do.

16

Every political regime tends to allocate more of the national cake to their ethnic group

or supporters at the expense of others. This according to Galtung is ‘Structural Violence’

which grows frustrations and the latter is violent conflicts. When one group is endowed

with its interests the other groups feel marginalized and left out thus the urge to speak

out by violence upon the explosion of the frustrations from within. The frustration-

aggression and relative deprivation theories well explain this fact.

Economic causes also revolve around appointments into public positions in government.

This applies in both age and ethnic grounds. The youth in Kenya feel left out as all key

positions are given to ‘older people’. This leaves the youths to be used by interested

parties in violent conflicts. They also engage in the this violent conflicts to obtain

identity and let out there frustrations. Job opportunities are a way to economic welfare.

Ethnic based appointments are also a cause of ethnic conflicts in Kenya. The ethnic

group in power favors the ethnic community from which the leading individuals hail

from. This leaves all the other individuals from the other ethnic groups who qualify for

the same appointment deprived and feeling left out.

Conclusively, all the three aspects of life; political, social and economic cause ethnic

conflicts or negative ethnicity in Kenya. The political factors that cause ethnic conflicts

are far more considered than all the other factors in the form of economic and social.

This is because the political class in Kenya influences all the other aspects. The

politicians formulate, make, implement and amend laws. Distribution of wealth or resources

follows the directives of the leaders. This is always the argument behind ethnic conflicts

in Kenya whereby the politics play an integral role in driving the nation away from

nationhood to negative ethnicity. However all the categorized factors inclusively lead to

the conflicts between ethnic groups as explained above.

17

EFFECTS OF NEGATIVE ETHNICITY IN KENYA.

Ethnic conflicts in Kenya always take a violent or physical nature but also structural. The

effects of such conflicts are many. Generally, conflicts are of a dual nature. They have

both constructive and destructive effects. In multi-ethnic societies, ethnicity is an additional

variable in socio-economic development over and above those normally present in more

homogeneous societies. Ethnicity can be negative in development but can also be positive;

it can be a problem or a potentially rewarding challenge. Ultimately the effects of ethnic

conflicts in Kenya are categorized into social, political and economic effects:

Political Effects.

Ethnicity is also a convenient political resource in the negative sense. It can be readily

exploited to serve the selfish purpose of an individual politician, a political party or a

government. It is not unusual for an unknown politician to exploit ethnic issues to gain

support and prominence. In this case, ethnicity can provide a shortcut to political success.

This has been very clearly played out in the political landscape in Kenya and was

visible in the events that led to post election violence (PEV) 2007/2008. Certainly,

political inequality is one of the effects of ethnic conflicts in Kenya. Politically a multi-

ethnic society will be a system that does not satisfy all people inclusively but

satisfaction is arrived at when one’s ethnic group is in political power.

Political instability is rampant in such societies with other ethnic groups trying to get

power though unconstitutional ways to escape political inequalities. Political dominance

through ethnic lines is exploitative of the ethnicity. Politics has used ethnicity as a

selling tool in campaigns and as a result preaching animosity against ethnic communities

all together. A state without political stability is prone to both economic and social crisis.

The environment becomes unsuitable for any activity that is developmental to take place.

18

Political mistrust too is another political effect of ethnic conflicts in Kenya. A web of

ethnic thinking has been weaved in peoples minds such that good leaders are not chosen

to run the state affairs simply because of the ethnic identity of the individual. This

leaves a state led by all kinds of leaders who in turn create animosity rather than build

nationhood, leaders who seek power for personal interests and not for the better interests

of the people. As much as politics plays a role in causing negative ethnicity or conflicts

in Kenya, politics also face effects holistically. Healthy politics bring about democracy.

Politics played along ethnic lines are not healthy. This leads to political malpractices as

assassinations, secessions, electoral rigging in the pursuit of ethnic power or dominance.

Therefore resulting to a polluted political environment.

Social Effects.

Negative ethnicity has led social effects in Kenya. This is the sense of identity, culture,

loss of lives, displacement and traumatization. The society has faced far more

diconnectivity in negative ethnicity. Psycho-social effects were experienced most at

personal and family level. Social effects also include victims of the conflict left homeless,

injured, destitute, dead, abused, and even lacked trust of each other. Traumatization was

felt more among victims. For instance in the post election violence 2007/08; Insecurity

was a rampant word used everywhere . Loss of life among the Kikuyu, Kalenjin, Luhya,

Luo, Iteso , Kisii and others. Loss of lives has always been the main effect to families

and the society at large in violent ethnic conflicts due to negative ethnicity.

Social effects also generally include; ethnic conflicts damage relationships, causes divisions

and polarization, undermines positive attitudes, creates opposition between groups, deepens

differences between people and also social amenities and lives of the people are affected

at large.

Economic Effects.

It is always difficult to quantify the total economic impact of ethnic conflicts in Kenya.

Ethnic conflicts just as all other conflicts lead to gigantic waste of human and economic

resources. For instance, during the PEV 2007/08 clashes in Kenya land ownership patterns

were altered with. Economic production declines for instance, farming activities stale.

19

Ethnic conflicts also lead to the problem of over-valuing or under-valuing of property

since individuals seek to run away the conflict hit areas and thus sell their vast

properties at prices that are not normal.

Other subsequent economic problems related to negative/ ethnic conflicts are such as food

insecurity, destruction of property, land grabbing, mis-allocation and unexpected

expenditure, infrastructural disruption, resource diversion, inflation and fluctuation of prices

and environmental destruction among others.

Economic instability may occur at such conflicts. Local and international investors fear to

invest due to the conflicts. Tourism a major backbone of the Kenya economy also is

derailed by the level of insecurity faced during such conflicts. Conflicts take energy away

from important work or other issues. The local currency value also may decline and

delays the objective of having a stable, flexible and strong currency.

As a state in the international system, globalization or economic integration is key for

economic well being. Conflicts lead to the recalling of diplomatic missions or even delays

in foreign aids and partnerships for economic development. Economic sanctions also may

face the nation.

Ethnicity should be a back borne in economic development. The various abilities or

economic activities by the different ethnic groups simply acknowledges the concept of

‘division of labour’ as per se. Every ethnic community in one way or another involve in

an economic activity that they do perfectly this fact can be used to improve economic

well being of the state. Mutual benefiting from each other will lead to nationhood. A

good example is the pre- colonial period trade where communities exchanged goods thus

nationhood. This is the positive effect of ethnic diversity to the economic aspect of a

state.

20

3.0 STRATEGIES TAKEN TO CURB ETHNIC CONFLICTS IN KENYA.

Negative ethnicity has always been fought against in Kenya. Various strategies have been

applied to transform the situation from negative ethnicity to nationhood. Ethnic diversity

is a blessing but also bane to the development of a nation. A state’s government applies

all mechanisms possible to bring about nationhood and to fight negative ethnicity. There

no single solution for the issue of ethnic conflicts and the challenge of nationhood.

Policy strategies and many other methods have been applied to this respect. These

among others include the following :

• Political socialization and dialogue:

This is a process of acquiring social learning . It is through this

process of socialization that individuals or groups acquire knowledge,

skills, and dispositions that enable them to participate as responsible

members of ethnic groups or the entire society. The socialization

process has created social order and has empowered citizens for

political participation and national integration which are essential

indicators of stability and nationhood. Dialogue between people has

resulted to the opening up, clarifying and solving of important

issues. This in turn tends to do away with the unfounded perceptions

or misperceptions between the ethnic communities of Kenya.

• Media:

Various forms of the media have been used to campaign for

nationhood. This follows the electronic media, television stations, radio

stations, bill boards, newspapers and also books. Vernacular radio

stations have spread or taught the people of the basic civil

information and advantages that come about with nationhood. The

media with facts has played an integral part in sensitizing the public

on the issues at hand regarding ethnicity and the ways forward.

21

The media also acts as an ‘ eagle’s eye’ it highlights the possibilities

of conflicts and relevant strategies are put in place to conceal the

situation before it erupts into violent conflicts.

Media campaigns for nationhood and activities to curb or manage

inter- ethnic conflicts have also proved important in Kenya.

• The Constitution and Ethnicity :

The Kenyan constitution appreciates the reality of ethnicity,

but also attempts to minimize negative ethnicity. This a policy

strategy for managing or attempting to curb negative ethnicity

in Kenya. This is done so by the constitutional provisions.

Some of such include:

Language: Article 7 (3) of the constitution of Kenya acknowledges

that while the official and national languages are

English and Kiswahili respectively, there is recognition

,promotion and development of ethnic languages. The

state’s business should however be restricted to

promoting the national and official languages.

The foundation and ideology of political parties: Article 91,( 1-2)

provides that political parties must be kept away from

having an ethnic basis. This provides for leaders to

encourage the formation of national parties based on

ideologies and policies that transcend the ethnic

conglomeration. Political parties should be instruments

of public education as opposed to being instruments of

political propaganda and arena of accusations and

counter-accusations.

22

Freedom of movement and residence: Article 39 (1-3), provides the

right for individuals to reside anywhere in Kenya.

Futher their are established laws on the political,

economic and social rights of the people.

Fair distribution of resources :

The constitution further has created strategies for equity in

distribution of resources through devolution. However how criticized

devolution is the advantages have been far more better since

resources are equitably shared. National ideology that is common

also is provided for in the constitution. In the constitution too their

is the establishment of a National Cohesion and Integration

Commission which play a key role in cohesive measures of solving

issues between communities either ethnic conflicts or economic. The

commissions investigates and recommends on the measures to be

taken in such situations. Also can implement the recommendations

within the provisions of the constitution.

The establishment of the Trust, Justice, and Reconciliation

Commission (TJRC) also is another strategy to address historical

injustices and the culture of impunity in Kenya.

• Education:

The national school system was a deliberate and positive policy

towards national unity without attempting to dismantle ethnic groups.

education of young people through sensitization also is key in

curbing negative ethnicity. Civic education also has been used to

avert the potential danger of inter- ethnic animosity by addressing

the issues of inter-ethnic harmony and peaceful co-existence among

Kenya’s plural ethnic society. This has led to the development of

positive attitudes and concepts such as interdependence, social justice,

equitable distribution, informed decision making, conflicts and conflict

resolution, ethnicity, democracy, human rights and many other basic

issues of importance.

23

• National Sports and Cultural events : Sporting activities such as football,

rugby and athletics have an ultimate unifying factor among the Kenyan

people. Sporting activities that Kenyans shine in always attract people from

all ethnic groups to enjoy the game and participate actively. This is one of

the strategies Kenya has used to bring different people across the state.

Cultural events tend to connect different cultural practices and norms as

one. Through learning each other’s culture perceptions and misperceptions

which result to conflict are suppressed. Ethnic groups in Kenya have the

right to practice own culture in the move to curb social inequalities.

24

CONCLUSION.

In conclusion, ethnic conflicts in Kenya are triggered by the political,

social and economic factors. The politicization of ethnic identities and

ethnicity in Kenya has the most weight in this study. Political leaders or

individuals have always used ethnic diversity and affiliations for political

interests thus turning the people against each other.

Negative ethnicity in Kenya has been historically attributed to the post-

independence regimes which were ethnically based. Economic equality

should be fostered for to curb negative ethnicity. Misunderstanding of

developmental concepts or policies too have been a factor for negative

ethnicity. Therefore civil education rather politically created information by

individuals should be used. Ethnicity itself is misunderstood by many

Kenyans who know that it is a bane and not a blessing. A State like

Malaysia has a multi-ethnic nature and it went far ahead of Kenya because

of their policies and understanding of ethnic diversity. Thus with the correct

understanding and political sobriety which determines the socio-economic

aspects will ultimately curb negative ethnicity in Kenya.

Relevant steps have been taken but still political reforms are to be

implemented. Since the election period in Kenya is always a tense stage of

the country to the level that citizens fear to even participate in their right

to vote. Executive powers have been reduced by the 2010 Constitution of

Kenya which as a policy has played a good role in reducing ethnic based

inequalities to some level. The defining of the type of government that

Kenya is should be implemented. Democracy with the multi-party concept

alone has not been achieved. Ethnicity and political democracy are hand in

hand too.

25

RECOMMENDATIONS.

Many strategies have been applied in the advent to transform negative

ethnicity to nationhood. The depth to which negative ethnicity has grown

overtime among the ethnic groups in Kenya is always perceived to be so

deep that to transform the situation is difficult. However , based on several

studies and events of ethnic conflicts in Kenya it has been revealed that a

healing process is possible and can work to curb negative ethnicity in

Kenya. This can be policies or other activities. Some of the

recommendations one can derive from this paper are:

1. The need to develop policies around the constitution towards the

formation of a nation.

2. Economically, the state should diversify methods of survival; by

finding alternative sources of economic wealth in areas where

economic activities lead to ethnic conflicts.

3. Fostering for the construction of new ethnic identities.

4. Educating the citizens on personal social responsibility, mutual

empathy and respect.

5. Enhancing the use of cultural linkages through national festivalas

continuously and inter-cultural nights.

6. Better distribution of resources further in the county governments

and the avoidance of the ‘green economy’ development.

7. Abolition of direct population census since the political class take

political interest in such exercises.

8. Empowering the marginalized ethnic groups socially, economically and

politically.

9. Encourage proactive response to upcoming issues between ethnic

groups to deal with the perceptions and misperceptions.

26

10. Civil education on the concept of ethnicity and factors to be

considered when choosing or electing leaders in Kenya.

11. Foster for national identity rather than ethnic identities i.e abolishing

the inclusion of ethnic backgrounds of individuals in national and

professional document; which will eventually lead to nationalism and

patriotism.

12. Having clear internal policies that protect local or state politics from

external intervention in its structure and monitoring the political

parties to avoid external interplay within the parties. This is due to

the external factors that led to the misunderstanding and funding for

malpractices in the advent of introducing multipartism in Kenya.

13. Socially, the reduction of social exclusion and the development of an

inclusive civil society; and other actors or entities which play a key

role in curbing negative ethnicity such as religious institutions and

Non- Governmental Organizations.

27

REFERENCES.

Asebe R. D. (2010). Ethnicity and Inter-ethnic Relations. Ethiopia. VDM Publishing.

Banton, Michael (1983). Racial and ethnicity competition. Cambridge.

New York. Cambridge University press.

Bell, Daniel (1975). “Ethnicity and Social Change” in Ethnicity, N. Glazea and D.P Moynihan;

eds., Cambidge, MA. Havard University Press.

Copley R.D. (June 2008). Thesis on Conflict Management styles. A predictor of Likability and

perceived effectiveness among subordinates. Indiana University.

Durant; Allessandro (1997). Linguistic Anthropology. Cambridge University.

Gachanga Timothy (April 2012). Kenya. Ethnic Agendas and Patronage Impede the formation of

a Coherent Kenyan Identity. Africa file at issue Ezine Vol. 14

Geertz, Clifford. (1963). “The Integrative Revolution: Primordial Sentiments and Civil Polities

in the New Studies, in old societies and New Studies, C. Geertz, Ed., New York

Hall, Stuart (1996). New Ethnicities. “In Stuart Hall: Critical Dialogues in Cultural Studies;

Edited by David Morley and Kuan – Hsing Chen, New York, London: Routledge.

Hall, Stuart (1996). “Ethnicities: Identity and Different.” In Becoming National. A Reader .

Edited by Geoff Eley and Ronald Grigor. New York. Oxford University Press.

28

Hechter, Michael (1978). “Group Formation and the Cultural Division of Labour.” American

Journal of Socialogy.

Horowitz, D.L (1985). Ethnic Groups in Conflict. Berkely and Los Angeles. University of

California Press.

Isajiw, Wsevolod W. (1990). “Ethnic-identity Relations,” in Ethnic identity and Equality:

Variety of Experiences in a Canadian City, R. Breton, et al,. Toronto. University of Toronto

Press.

Karl Cordell and Stefan Wolff. Ethic Conflicts: Causes, Consequences and Responses.

Cambridge.

Kenya Constitution 2010.

Koigi Wamwere (Jan 24/24th 2015). All Kenyans Are Ensnared in the Cobweb of Negative

Ethnicity. Nairobi. The Star NewsPaper.

Koigi Wamwere (2003). Negative Ethnicity: From Bias to Genocide. New York. Seven Stories

Press.

Lars Erik C., Kristian S. & Halvard B. (2013). Inequality, Grievances and Civil War. Cambridge.

Cambridge University Press.

Leo, C. (1981). “Who Benefited from the Million – Acre scheme? Towards a class Analysis of

Kenya’s Transition to Independence. Canadian Journal of African Studies.

Leo, C. (1984). Land and Class in Kenya. Toronto. Toronto University Press.

Markakis John & Katsuyoshi Fukui (1994). Ethnicity and Conflict in the Horn of Africa. Oxford.

James Currey Publishers.

29

Mac Giolla & Chriost Diarmait (2003). Language, Identity & Conflict: A Comparative Study of

Language in Ethinic Conflict in Europe & Eurasia. London. Routledge.

Mazrui Ali. “Development in a Multicultural context: Trends and Tension.” In culture and

Development. Edited by Ismail Serageldin & June Taboraff. Washington DC: World Bank.

Muhula, Raymond (2009). Horizontal Inequalities and Ethnic-regional Politics in Kenya. Kenya

Studies Review. I, I, 85-105.

Nagel, Jane and S. Olzak (1982). Ethnic Mobilization in New and Old States : An Extension Of

the Competitive Model. Social Problems.

Nellis J. (1974). The Ethnic Composition of Heading Kenyan Government Positions. Research

Report No.24. Uppsala. The Scandinavian Institute for African Studies.

Nyukuri Barasa(1997). “The Impacts of Past and Potential Ethnic Conflicts On Kenya’s Stability

and Developments”.Nairobi. University of Nairobi.

Oino P. G. $ Felix Ngunzo (2013). Ethnicity and Social Inequality: A Source of Under-

Development in Kenya. International Journal of Science and Research (IJRS).

Ogot, Bethuel (1996). “Ethnicity, Nationalism and Democracy. A Kind of Historiography.” In

Ethnicity, Nationalism and Democracy in Africa. Edited by Bethuel Ogot, 16-26. Maseno, Kenya

: Institute of Research and Postgraduate Studies, Maseno University College.

Osamba J. (2001). Violence and Dynamics of Transformation: State, Ethnicity and Governance

in Kenya. Africa Development.

Oucho J O. (2002). Undercurrents of Ethnic Conflicts in Kenya. Leiden; Boston; Koln; Brill.

African Social Studies Series.

30

Oucho J O (2010). “Undercurrents of Post-Election Violence in Kenya : Issues in the Long-Term

Agenda”. In : Tensions and Reversals in Democratic Transitions: The Kenya 2007 General

Elections. Nairobi. Society for International Development and Institute for Development Studies.

University of Nairobi..

Putnam L. & Poole, M.S (1987). Conflict and Negotiation. In F.M Jablin & L.L Putnam (Eds),

Handbook of Organizational Communication: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. Newbury Park,

CA. Sagen.

Ross, Jeffrey A. (1982). “Urban Development and the Politics of Ethnicity: A Conceptual

Approach.” Ethnic and Racial Studies.

Rothschild, D. (1969). “Ethnic Inequalities in Kenya”. Journal of Modern African

Studies,7,4:689-711.

Suliman, Osman (2011). The Darfur Conflict: Geography or Institutions?. New York.

Routledge.

Wilmont, W. W & Hocker J. (2001). Interpersonal Conflict. New York. McGraw Hill.

Worsley P. (1984). The Three Worlds : Culture and World Development. London : Weidenfeld

and Nicolson.

Yieke , F. (2007). “The Discursive Construction of Ethnicity: The Case Study of the 2007

General Election”. Dakar. CODESRIA.

Yieke , F. (2010). Ethnicity and Development in Kenya : Lessons from 2007 General Elections.

Kenya Studies Review. 3,3,5-16.

31