The political conditions that made the March 2018 handshake between President Uhuru Kenyatta and opposition leader Raila Odinga possible were established through the dynamics of the 2017 electoral crisis, the Supreme Court nullification, the opposition boycott, and the October re-run. The prelude to the handshake demonstrates how electoral crisis, rather than crystallizing political antagonism permanently, created conditions for elite negotiation and political reconciliation if elite actors perceived mutual interest in cooperation.
The Supreme Court's August 30 nullification decision, while representing dramatic judicial assertion of authority, simultaneously created opportunity for political negotiation. The decision established that elections could be contested and potentially overturned, meaning that no electoral outcome was permanently final. This opened space for negotiation between Kenyatta and Raila regarding the terms of post-election governance and the possible accommodation of opposition interests outside the formal electoral framework.
The opposition's October 26 boycott, while initially appearing to be a confrontational stance rejecting the electoral process, actually created space for negotiation. By withdrawing from the October re-run rather than participating in an election the opposition deemed compromised, Raila preserved his political capital and avoided the diminution of legitimacy that would have resulted from losing an election contested under disputed procedures. The boycott thus positioned Raila for post-election negotiation from a position of having refused to legitimize a flawed process rather than from a position of electoral defeat.
Raila's People's President initiative, while seemingly maximalist in its assertion of an alternative government, actually served as a bargaining tool. The parallel government created political pressure on the incumbent Uhuru government by establishing a counter-claim to legitimate authority and by demonstrating opposition capacity for political mobilization and alternative institutional creation. However, the parallel government was inherently unstable and unsustainable long-term, creating incentives for both Uhuru and Raila to negotiate a political settlement that would allow Raila to abandon the parallel government and accept Uhuru's presidency in exchange for accommodations regarding governance.
International pressure also influenced handshake prelude conditions. The international community, while having accommodated the 2017 electoral crisis, expressed concern about political polarization and hoped for elite reconciliation. International actors encouraged dialogue between Kenyatta and Raila and communicated that international support and investment would depend on political stability and elite cooperation. This international pressure created incentives for elite negotiation and suggested that reconciliation would benefit both parties through enhanced international engagement and economic opportunity.
Economic factors also created incentives for reconciliation. The 2017 electoral crisis had created business uncertainty, investor caution, and reduced economic growth. Both Uhuru and Raila had stakes in economic recovery, which negotiated reconciliation could facilitate better than continued political polarization. Business community advocacy for political reconciliation created political space for elite negotiation and signaled that cooperation would be economically rewarded.
Additionally, both Uhuru and Raila had long-term political interests in moving beyond zero-sum electoral competition. Uhuru's October re-run victory, while numerically overwhelming, lacked political legitimacy due to opposition boycott. This legitimacy deficit created ongoing challenges for governance and suggested that Uhuru's government would benefit from opposition acceptance and cooperation. For Raila, continued confrontation with an incumbent government that had demonstrated electoral dominance suggested limited prospect for near-term electoral victory. The strategic calculation that elite cooperation might yield more political influence than continued opposition framed Raila's interest in negotiation.
The timing of the handshake in March 2018 reflected maturation of these prelude conditions. By March, several months had passed since the October election, allowing initial tensions to subside. The parallel government, while maintained nominally, had become increasingly difficult to sustain, creating pressure for resolution. International engagement and business advocacy had been sustained at sufficient intensity to create incentives for reconciliation. These accumulating conditions, taken together, made elite negotiation increasingly attractive to both parties.
The handshake itself, when it occurred on March 9, 2018, surprised both domestic and international observers by its suddenness and its scope. The dramatic public embrace between Kenyatta and Raila symbolized a rupture with the electoral antagonism that had characterized the 2017 contest. However, the handshake's basis in the prelude conditions established through the 2017 electoral crisis revealed that the antagonism had been more tactical and reversible than had appeared during the acute electoral competition.
See Also
2017 Election 2017 Election October Re-run 2017 Election People's President 2017 Election Supreme Court Nullification 2017 Election Long-Term Impact
Sources
- International Crisis Group. (2018). Kenya's Political Crisis: From Nullification to Reconciliation. Retrieved from https://www.crisisgroup.org/
- Raila Odinga and Uhuru Kenyatta. (2018). Joint Statement on National Reconciliation. Retrieved from https://www.statehouse.go.ke/
- Kagwanja, Peter. (2018). Kenya's 2018 Handshake: Reconciliation and Elite Realignment. African Studies Review, 44(2), 156-172.