President Obama arrives in Kenya. Demotix/Boniface Muthoni. All rights reserved.During President Barack Obama’s landmark visit to Kenya, internal and regional security has been high on the agenda (albeit behind closed doors). The United States delegation announced that it was ready to work more closely in the fight against Somali Islamist group Al Shabaab, which has been responsible for a number of high-profile attacks in the east African country in recent years. The announcement is hugely significant for President Uhuru Kenyatta, given the damage done by terrorism not only to important sections of Kenya’s economy such as tourism, but also to the credibility of the government itself. In a joint news conference with Obama, Kenyatta underlined the need for robust security policies in Kenya, describing the threat of Al Shabaab to the country as “existential”.
The strength of the government’s language around security belies the heavy criticism showered on Kenyatta for the inadequate and delayed security responses to attacks in Garissa and Mandera earlier this year. But at the same time, Kenya’s administration has also been castigated for the severity of its crackdown on Kenya’s Somali community, which has been subject to arbitrary arrest, harassment, extortion and expulsion by police and counter-terrorism forces. In light of the US visit, can Kenya develop a watertight security that avoids heavy-handed and reactive (rather than proactive) responses by security services?
Maybe so. Last month, Kenyatta announced a new direction in national security policy that aims to focus on ‘counter-radicalisation’, couched in terms of community engagement, working with civil society and faith leaders. But with details on the programme still scant, how might such an approach work in practice? And what might be the effects on groups that have had to bear the brunt of counter-terrorism tactics thus far?
