The international media is now awash with reports of massive
killings in the South Eastern region of Kenya following clashes between the
Pokomo and Orma communities. Earlier
yesterday the Kenyan media reported that about 30 people including 8 security
personnel had been killed and scores wounded in the conflict that is now
threatening the stability of the country’s Tana River County. Some media
reports put the death toll since last month at about 100.
Just to put the current conflict into perspective, Kenya is
not new to conflicts let alone ones of this nature. There are instances of
conflicts that occurred in Kenya before 1992; however for the purposes of
writing this article I have restricted myself to conflicts that have taken
place between 1992 and now. And I have purposefully picked on the election
years to highlight the role of retrogressive politics in resource based conflicts in the developing world, specifically Kenya.
In 1992 Kenya witnessed country wide bloody conflict
popularly referred to as “1992 tribal clashes” which is widely believed to have
been politically instigated and revolved around access to and ownership of land.
It was widely witnessed in the Provinces of Nyanza, Rift Valley, Western and
Coastal. Thousands of lives were lost.
In 1997 and 2002 there was more less a resurgence of the
same kind of conflict with pockets of it scattered across the country. For some
reason the intensity was not anywhere near the 1992, probably a few lessons had
been learnt. However, the coastal region was hit badly one more time in 1997.
2007 was probably the mother of them all since 1992.
Following an election that was believed to have been widely rigged, Kenya was
plunged into what has now been widely referred to as post election violence (PEV). This was the first time such a conflict had taken on a national outlook.
What has continued to miss most eyes is the fact that all these conflicts
revolve around access to natural resources and predominantly land which stems
from the fact that Kenya is by and large an agricultural economy. Another key
thing that keeps missing most eyes is the role played by retrogressive politics
in either instigating or exacerbating such conflicts. In 2007 for example
instead of the conflict staying on the course of its primary cause – stolen elections – it quickly degenerated into
a resource based conflict with various communities fighting each other over
access to land. In Kenya, like most parts of the developing world, access to
land is equivalent to livelihood for a majority of the populace. The following
examples will show how the politically instigated conflict degenerated into a
resource conflict: One, the case in 2007 PEV where the Kalenjin community in
the modern day Uasin Gishu County drove their Kikuyu neighbours away from what
they perceived to have been their land that was taken away from them by the
Kikuyu during the periods when one of their own, President Kenyatta, was at the
helm. Two, still in the 2007 PEV, the Kikuyu drove away the Kalenjin, Luo and
Luhya communities from what is now Nakuru County primarily based on the
perception that the region belonged to them and had been infiltrated by these
communities during President Moi’s tenure and to a lesser extent President
Kibaki’s tenure. These examples are important because they emphasize the fact
that tribal conflicts are not only a preserve of poor small tribes in Kenya,
but is also alive and kicking among the larger less poor tribes of Kenya namely
the Kikuyu, Luhya and Luo.
Back to the Pokomo and Orma conflict, it will do us a lot of
justice if we first look at their way of life and geographical location in
Kenya. And also what makes them more susceptible to conflict with each other. The Pokomo are predominantly agriculturalist and fishermen living along River Tana
in Tana River District, Tana River County of Kenya. They are divided into two
groups based on their geographical location with respect to River Tana’s
geomorphology i.e. Upper and Lower Pokomo. As agriculturalists they are
sedentary and have over the years cultivated the land along the banks of River
Tana and fished its waters as their primary source of livelihood.
The Orma on the other hand are nomadic pastoralists who live
on the lower banks of River Tana. Being nomadic pastoralists they are given to
moving from one place to another as nature dictates usually in search of
pasture and water for their livestock which is their primary source of
livelihood. But living in the Tana River region it goes without saying that
River Tana acts as the primary source of water for their livestock.
In the wake of rampant environmental change and changes in both
global and local climatic conditions, most agricultural economies are faced
with hard times as phenomena such as El Nino and La Nina are not only becoming
more common place but the resultant droughts and/or floods are lasting longer
whenever they come around with very devastating effects. The
effect of the foregoing scenario to South Eastern Kenya’s economy where the
Pokomo and Orma live is twofold: One, in light of rampant droughts and flooding the Pokomo,
over the years, have suffered enormous losses in terms of their crop harvests
and are being forced to cushion such effects through maximization of the utility
of their land through increased production during better days and also
diversification into other sources of livelihood like entrepreneurial ventures.
This has led to among other things their gradual spread into areas that they
originally didn’t occupy. Two, increased drought leads to scarcity of vital resources
such as pasture and water for the Orma community. In their quest to cope with
such impacts they have over the years moved close to the banks of river Tana
where they usually find lush growth of pasture and water and then return when
conditions are favorable in the regions they moved out of.
However, considering the negative effect that global climate
change is having on the Pokomo’s way of life, more than once the Orma do find
themselves in a tight fix; faced with a situation where most land that they
previously grazed during dry seasons in the years gone by have now been turned
into cultivated farmlands by the Pokomo farmers. The Orma blind to the fact
that the Pokomo may have acquired legal custody of the land, drive their
animals into Pokomo farmlands destroying crops which is the single most
important source of livelihood to the Pokomo. In response, the Pokomo find
means of getting redress which in most cases involve police interventions. With
porous borders and the situation in Somali, the Orma have found it easy to
acquire fire arms and when confronted by police in most cases they retreat only
to retaliate later, leading to a bloody conflict and unnecessary loss of lives
and properties like is now witnessed in the region.
From the foregoing, the conflict between the Pokomo and Orma
communities seems to be such a simple thing that only requires a dose of land
laws and regulations and voila the problem is fixed. Nay! It is actually a very
complex problem and in my view its solution lies largely in changing people’s
way of life. Not a small feat I reckon. To find a lasting solution, either the
Orma have to be somehow converted to agriculturalists or the Pokomo made to
adopt modern agricultural techniques like green house farming which require
high capital, less space but guarantees high yields. Turning the Orma into
agriculturalist will make them sedentary and as such there will be less
interaction between them and the Pokomo. But in case such interactions occur it
will be a positive one mostly involving exchange of goods and services between
the two communities. On the other hand, having the Pokomo adopt modern farming
methods like the green house farming will mean that they use less land to
produce more. This has a net effect of providing the Orma with the much needed
land to graze on during dry seasons like they have done since time immemorial.
These are practical solutions that are very radical but at
the same time achievable. They guarantee lasting solution to the conflict only
if one last key component is brought on board. The missing component is
progressive leadership which Kenya so much needs.
