Commentary (Jaindi Kisero) - Can Annan rescue Raila and Kibaki from the clutches of hardliners?

Ref: http://www.nationmedia.com/eastafrican/current/News/news280120081.htm

Can Annan rescue Raila and Kibaki from the clutches of hardliners?

By JAINDI KISERO
The EastAfrican

A day before the face-to-face meeting between President Mwai Kibaki and the leader of the Orange Democratic Movement, Raila Odinga, the hardliners on Odinga’s side had insisted that there was no need for such a meeting, their argument being that a pre-mediation agreement needed to be signed by both parties first.

That was the position spelt out during the first meeting Odinga and his team held with former secretary general of the United Nations Kofi Annan on Thursday last week.

Indeed, even before Annan arrived in the country, former president Joaquim Chissano of Mozambique, who has been conducting behind-the-scenes negotiations in Kenya under the auspices of the African Peace Forum, had unsuccessfully tried to get the ODM to agree to a face-to-face meeting between the two leaders.

On Thursday last week, there were loud murmurs within sections of the ODM leadership when news spread that Annan had actually managed to persuade Odinga to agree to the face-to-face meeting with Kibaki.

According to our sources, Annan had argued that a meeting between Kibaki and Odinga would not only be an important signal to the country but would also symbolise hope.

Consequently, Annan’s team quickly worked out the terms of engagement for the meeting between Raila and Kibaki.

First, it was agreed that the meeting, which was scheduled to be held at Harambee House in Nairobi’s city centre, would have very few people.

Second, that during the face-to-face meeting, Kibaki and Raila would show each other and agree — in advance — on the contents of the public statements that they would make after the meeting, after having shaken hands before the cameras.

Apparently, things did not go according to Annan’s plans. As the parties prepared to meet, the staff supporting his team were surprised to learn that almost the whole of the Cabinet had been invited to the meeting at Harambee House.

On the ODM side, Odinga turned up accompanied by Pentagon member William Ruto and personal aide Salim Lone.

Our sources told us that neither the Cabinet ministers who flocked to Harambee House nor Ruto were allowed to attend the one-on-one parley. Only Annan joined the duo in the discussions.

What transpired during the one-on-one discussions is still a closely kept secret.

But apparently, Annan’s staffers and the ODM side say that the statement that Kibaki read during the photo opportunity was not the same as the one that had been approved by the mediation team.

Did somebody alter the president’s speech between the short time of the one-on-one meeting with Odinga and Annan and the time they emerged from Harambee House for the photo opportunity?

This remains an open-ended question.

As it is, this mundane issue almost spoilt the party. Hardly an hour after the handshakes between Kibaki and Raila, ODM called a press conference to criticise Kibaki’s assertion that he was the duly elected head of state.

Led by secretary general Anyang Nyong’o, the ODM leaders said Kibaki’s statement had negated the whole rationale for international mediation.

"Mr Mwai Kibaki abused the occasion by attempting to legitimise his usurpation of the presidency. His demeaning and unacceptable behaviour was meant to undermine the mediation and prolong the suffering of the people of Kenya,” said the statement.

Our sources from Annan’s team also told us that he lodged a quiet protest note to Kibaki against his “having been duly elected” remark.

“All issues are on the table including the issue of leadership,” he said in the note.

The lesson for Annan came out loud and clear:

Getting Kibaki and Raila to meet face-to-face was only the easy part. What is emerging is that a very influential constituency on President Kibaki’s side consider the mediation process a mere tactic to buy time — providing the breathing space for a return to the business-as-usual game.

The stakes are very high indeed for them, because they fear that the mediation process will reveal the sins the Electoral Commission of Kenya may have committed and — therefore — expose their culpability in the fiasco.

The standard refrain from this group is that elections can only be challenged in a court of law.

Odinga’s side is not easy to please, either. First, there are hardliners on his side who do not even believe that a power sharing deal is a realistic option. They want Kibaki to step down. Period.

But an even more intractable problem for this group is fear of revenge. In the middle of the post-election violence, criminal elements have taken advantage, burnt people’s houses and displaced hundreds of thousands of members of President Kibaki’s Kikuyu tribe.

Their fear is that if Kibaki is allowed to entrench himself in power, they will face retribution from the administration.

Thus, the more the widespread insecurity environment persists, the better for these merchants of terror.

Thus, the road ahead for Mr Annan will be rough because the two main protagonists are, in a sense, prisoners of two sets of hardliners — making it difficult for them to grant concessions.

What next for Annan? With Kibaki and Odinga having shaken hands in public, next on the Annan team’s agenda will be how to get the parties to sign a pre-mediation agreement defining the terms of engagement.

As we went to press, ODM had sent their version of the agreement to Annan’s team. Our sources within Annan’s team told us that Kibaki’s side were also expected to come through with their terms.

If an agreement is reached on the terms of engagement, the parties will then go directly into
power-sharing negotiations proper.

Our sources told us the ODM document has made several suggestions including a neutral location for the mediation talks, a stop to police killing of demonstrators, a commitment on both sides that the mediation process will be witnessed by several people and a commitment by President Kibaki that he will attend the mediation proceedings either personally or through his representatives.

Is there a middle ground in the conflict and what is either party willing to concede?

On Kibaki’s side, the moderates — especially the business community — have suggested that Odinga’s side be persuaded to take up positions in Kibaki’s Cabinet in a government of national unity.

This is what emerged in discussions with most business lobby groups who have been shuttling between Kibaki and Raila to plead for peace.

And, on Raila’s side, there have emerged groups who are beginning to accept that Kibaki does not have to step down as president.

Their meeting point is a coalition government in which Odinga shares executive powers with the head of state — a compromise between what was stipulated in the Bomas Draft and the Kilifi Drafts during the Constitutional reform debate of 2005.

In public, the players prefer to engage in grandstanding and will not accept that they are ready to share power lest they offend hardliners.

But in reality, several proposals have been presented, with lawyers mandated to come out with schedules of Constitutional changes that may have to be fast-tracked to accommodate any political settlement reached during the mediation process.

When Annan held a meeting with newly elected Speaker of the National Assembly Kenneth Marende, it was to discuss possible scenarios.

How events will unfold in the coming weeks is still difficult to tell. The fear is that if the mediation process drags on for too long, violence especially in the flashpoints in the Rift Valley and elsewhere, may escalate with peasants setting upon one another in retributive slaughter that authorities will find difficult to control.