Squaring the Culture

Sources from the right are starting to make noise about Barack Obama’s support for Raila Odinga in Kenya in the wake of Jerry Corsi’s detention by Kenyan government officials last week. I actually know something second-hand about this topic; a friend of mine from a few decades ago, a pastor named John Stanko (see also his ministry web site, PurposeQuest,) has a ministry to Kenya and Zimbabwe and has been traveling regularly to Africa and back for some time. I interviewed him back in March of 2008 concerning Obama’s connections to Raila Odinga, the opposition candidate to Mwai Kibaki, current President of Kenya.

For those who don’t know, Kenya held a national election in 2007 in which the main candidates were Mwai Kibaki, the incumbent, and Raila Odinga of the Orange Democratic Party. Raila Odinga is allegedly Barack Obama’s cousin, and Obama traveled to Kenya in 2006 and campaigned alongside Odinga for a week. According to the Washington Times, Odinga was not the preferred opposition candidate before Obama’s tour, and gained enormous credibility by his support. Through Obama’s staffers, Odinga apparently got introduced to Dick Morris, the political consultant for the Clintons. Odinga hired Morris, who ran a US-style political campaign in Kenya that was unlike anything Kenya had ever seen before. Despite Morris’ help, Kibaki won, apparently by rigging the election, and Odinga’s followers rioted resulting in serious violence in which several hundred people were killed and several hundred thousand fled their homes. It appears likely that Odinga was behind the violence.

The following video tells the story, and raises questions about Obama’s role. It’s a slanted video, however, and you need to take it with a grain of salt. I’ll explain after.

The facts in the video are correct, except for one thing: the narration notes that the election was tainted by voter fraud, but makes it seems as though it was Odinga committing the fraud. I’m not saying he did or did not, but the riots were about alleged fraud by Kibaki, the incumbent, and it appears to be the case that he did rig the election pretty badly, arguably enough to change the outcome in his favor. Kenyans seem generally to agree on this (Author adds: although the perception of fraud could be the result of a Dick Morris tactic.)

Moreover, there are some factors about politics in Africa which, if known, make some of Odinga’s associations seem a little less ominous. First of all, ideology is not nearly so important in Africa as it is in Europe or America; in Africa, tribalism reigns. Kibaki is Kikuyu, which was the tribe favored by the colonial British and which has ruled consistently in Kenya. Kibaki, a Kikuyu chief, hands out favors to tribesmen like candy, which is the African way. Odinga is from the Luo tribe, and as is the habit of African politicians, Odinga seeks to gain power so he can hand out favors to his own tribe.

In order to achieve this, he needs to make alliances with other tribes (there are, if I recall correctly, something like 42 separate tribes in Kenyan politics.) The Muslims who were mentioned in the video are considered a tribe, and are one of the tribes Odinga cozied up to in order to get votes. The fact that he offered them legal concessions does not mean Odinga is a Muslim or particularly likes Muslims, it means he was willing to parlay with them to buy votes. Kenya’s constitution probably would not permit the changes to support Sharia law in any case, and the Muslims are somewhat of a permanent minority there in Kenya. Odinga apparently also cozied up to the Hindus, who are also considered a tribe.

I discussed Odinga’s Marxist connections with Dr. Stanko. He thinks Odinga is more an opportunist than a radical. African politics produces power players who form cabals more like personality cults than like ideological movements. Odinga is drawing power from the sources he knows, which include some radical sources. He’s probably not an ideological Marxist; rather, he’s doing what he has to do to stay alive and retain power. Chances are he’s completely corrupt. Chances are his opponent is, too. This is Africa.

Barack Obama is Luo, like Odinga, and they absolutely adore him there in Kenya. They’re incredibly excited that one of their own could become President in America. They also adore Democrats generally, since Bill Clinton became the first American President to personally visit sub-Sahara Africa. Having Obama campaign with Odinga was a huge feather in Odinga’s cap, and helped him immensely.

To me, Obama’s association with Raila Odinga is less troubling than is his association with any other radical. To Obama, Odinga is family, tribesman, and ideological brother. I pay much more attention to Obama’s associations with pro-Palestinian radicals and academics, to his associations with domestic radical groups like ACORN and the Gamaliel Foundation, and to his close association with Ayers in education “reform.”

However, Obama’s activism in Kenya was a highly questionable move, given that Obama was an elected US Senator at the time. His presence could easily have been taken as US hostility to the sitting government of Kenya (IIRC, the Kibaki government actually raised this point at the time,) and he had no business acting as a partisan in the race. Odinga was not even a major candidate before Obama’s presence boosted his credibility, so the riots following Odinga’s loss may not have occurred if Obama had not shown up. What is potentially much worse, a recent report from Worldnet Daily’s Jerry Corsi charges that Obama actually advised Odinga on how to leverage anti-Kikuyu feeling in the case that he lost. (Mind you, I do not consider Corsi a reliable source, but he does claim to have documentation supporting the charge. Stay tuned.) Obama didn’t personally cause the riots, of course, but they’re the sort of unintended consequence that so often follows ill-considered incursions into other nations’ politics; and if it turns out to be the case that the riots were planned with Obama’s help, the Senator deserves shunning, and worse.

To me, the Raila Odinga episode bespeaks Obama’s foreign policy naivette` more than it raises questions about his politics or associations. At the very least, this says McCain is right: Obama is a raw rookie, and prone to foreign policy mistakes. The Odinga episode does not say Obama is a Muslim sympathizer, but it does say that he’s not ready to lead, and potentially something much worse.