Unpacking the Mystery of Mediation in African Peace ... - Swisspeace

Unpacking the Mystery of Mediation in African Peace Processes
only had the choice of compromise or isolation.
His room for maneuvering was continuously restricted
by implicit pressure. For example, Graça
Machel told the negotiating teams in one of the
sessions that her husband Nelson Mandela had
“sent his best wishes and sought to remind them
that all of Africa was watching the process”. 135
During the direct talks between Kibaki and Odinga,
Annan told Kibaki that his choice was simple:
he could either divide or reconcile Kenyans.
136 He thus put pressure on Kibaki and made
it difficult for him to avoid the decision. Given
the status of the personalities who were confronting
Kibaki with the decision, coupled with the extensive
regional and international backing they
had, it was difficult for him to refuse to make
concessions any longer.
Implementation
On 17 April 2008, Raila Odinga was sworn in as
prime minister. On 26 May, the parties agreed to
work towards reforming the land legislation in
Kenya. They furthermore committed themselves
to fighting poverty, inequity, unemployment, and
impunity, and to promoting national cohesion,
transparency, and accountability. The implementation
of the reform agenda is to be led by the
coalition government. The Kenya National Dialogue
and Reconciliation process continues.
Agenda item four, comprising long-term issues
and the root causes of the conflict, is currently being
addressed. On 4 March, representatives of
both parties agreed on a constitutional review.
The Kenyan Constitution would be reviewed in a
process of five stages, in each of which the people
of Kenya would be consulted. At the end of the
process, the people would vote on the new constitution
in a referendum. 137
Assessment
Process
The negotiation process was a success. In particular,
the tactical move of suspending the negotiat-
135 Cohen (2008): op. cit., p. 5.
136 Ibid., p. 9.
137 Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation: “Longer-term issues
and solutions: constitutional review” (4 March 2008),
(http://www.dialoguekenya.org/agreements.aspx).
52
ing teams in favor of face-to-face talks between
Kibaki and Odinga was an essential step towards
an agreement. The panel used its leverage wisely
by applying subtle but firm pressure rather than
openly threatening to impose sanctions. The
process was comprehensive in terms of agenda
topics, and although it took place exclusively on
track 1, the civil society and business community
played a major role in parallel grassroots efforts
for peace and in supporting the official process.
Agreement
The National Accord and Reconciliation Act
2008 addresses the immediate cause of the violence
in Kenya in early 2008, namely the struggle
for political power between two rival political
parties, by establishing a power-sharing government.
However, this alone is not enough to bring
lasting stability to Kenya. It must therefore be
noted that the agreement is only part of a more
extensive agenda that addresses the root causes of
the conflict.
Context
The context was favorable to finding a solution.
The great regional and international backing for
the process enabled the panel to corner Kibaki
and make it impossible for him to refuse to make
concessions. Odinga agreed to the concession of
accepting Kibaki’s presidency as he realized it was
the most he could reasonably expect, given the
circumstances: “Better half the loaf than no
bread.” 138 Moreover, the process was supported
by a strong civil society and business community.
Both worked towards finding peace both at the
grassroots level and at the track 1 level.
Outlook
The National Accord and Reconciliation Act is a
milestone in the efforts to achieve renewed peace
and stability in Kenya. Today, Kenya has a functioning
government in which Kibaki and Odinga
share power as president and prime minister, respectively.
The long-term stability of Kenya will
depend on the implementation of agenda item 4,
which deals with the root causes of the conflict.
One critical issue in this future process will be the
138 Raila Odinga, quoted in: Cohen (2008), op. cit., p. 9.