While there are chances that Kenya may experience a repeat of the 2007/08 post-election violence, this article paints an excessively gloomy and dark picture of Kenya's future.
Given the aftermath of the 2007 elections, it was imperative that Kenya's electoral system be radically restructured. This was necessarily a time-bound exercise as the next elections were only within five years. On this basis, the focus on implementing the constitutional provisions pertaining to elections is understandable and indeed should be applauded.
Nevertheless, several other provisions of the new Constititution not directly linked to elections have also been implemented and continue to be implemented.
It also sounds incredibly disingenous to state that the underlying motivation for devolution of power to the local government "is the creation of more legislative positions", supposedly for the political class. It is worth recalling that one of the main causes of the post-election violence was the centralization of the political system, which, in Kenya's patron-client framework of politics, meant a winner-take-all, almost zero-sum game of political contest. The Constitution sought to address this through devolution.
However, it is agreeable that much still needs to be done to address inequality in the country as well as the root causes of ethnic tensions, such as land marginalization and internally displaced persons.
The starting point for addressing climate change, economists agree, is a tax on carbon. But while the resulting reduction in emissions would benefit virtually everyone on the planet, those who bear a disproportionate share of the costs will mobilize in opposition – that is, unless they are given a reason not to.
argues that the best way to overcome organized resistance to a carbon tax is to buy it off.