Leaders of governments, whether national or counties, are often confronted by difficult choices which shape trajectories of the people whom they lead.
The first difficult choice lies in appointments of persons to serve in key posts of government. For example the Cabinet. Does one choose political loyalists or apolitical experts? Should cabinet appointments be more of rewarding loyalists or leaning to expertise? Should one retain those that served previous regimes?
These choices all have merits and demerits.
Loyalists have a moral case to be appointed, having braved political battlefield on one’s behalf. And they tend to defend one’s government better, as they have vested interests in its survival. But at times loyalists have a heightened sense of self-importance which can incentivise them to wrong the people.
Experts are more competent technically and can deliver economic goods. But governments are political objects and experts often lack skills of selling government achievements.
Old regime loyalists that one finds in a government upon winning often have split loyalty, and are too ingrained in the ‘bad’ ways of the departing government. But they tend to be the most loyal to your boss as they have the greatest motivation to prove something to the new boss since their positions are most perilous.
Niccolo Machiaveli in The Prince holds the view that this choice depends on how one came into power.
Did one win the presidency because of support of nobles (nobles means great men, like it happened for Mwai Kibaki in 2002 when the Pentagon, led by Raila Odinga and Kijana Wamalwa, supported him successfully)? Or did one win presidency because of the support of the common people?
He argues a leader “who obtained power through the support of the nobles has a harder time staying in power than someone propelled by the people; since the former finds himself surrounded by people who consider themselves as equals. He has to resort to wicked ways to satisfy nobles.”
He states, “One cannot by fair dealing and without injury to others satisfy the nobles. But you can satisfy the people, for their object is more righteous than that of the nobles, the latter wishing to oppress and the former only desire is not to be oppressed.”
The second difficult choice leaders of governments have to make is what reigns supreme, between politics and economics.
Of course, the first correct and moral impulse is to give primacy to economics, particularly in a poor country like Kenya. Kenya’s income per person is about $2,000 whereas top economies like Singapore incomes per person range at $70,000. That means, to reach Singaporean living standards, the Kenyan government must uplift its economy 35 times. Norway and Qatar incomes per persons are $100,000. K
Kenyan economy grows at an annual rate of 6 per cent . Mathematically, under the rule of 70 as explained by Investopedia, if an economy grows at an annual rate of 7 per cent, it will take 10 years for its economy to double. If this is the case, to reach Norway’s level, how many years will it take Kenya? Decades and decades.
It is Bill Clinton strategists in his race to win the US presidency who said, “It is Economics, stupid.” The economy was going on a recession and the phrase was intended to alert every one of the need to focus Clinton’s messaging on matters economy.
Jesus said a very important point in Mathew 4: 1. After fasting for 40 days and 40 nights, he was hungry. The devil said to him, “If you are the son of God, command these stones to become bread .” Jesus answered, “It is written, Man does not live on bread alone…”.
Leaders who deliver on matters economics only to the exclusion of political management tend to bring ruin to their governments, the best example being Mwai Kibaki.
Between 2003 and 2007, he uplifted the Kenyan economy to great heights. But his re-election bid caused this country to descend into great chaos almost irretrievably.
Kibaki should have endeavoured to fight more the perception his government was too regional.
Leaders of governments have an important duty of uniting a country politically on and above matters economy. Every citizen, irrespective of his ethnicity or tribe, must feel included in project Kenya. There are several ways of achieving this. For example, public appointments and development should adhere to the principle of regional balance.
The third important but difficult choice leaders of governments make involve decisions on futuristic trajectories of their nations. The future is never clear but leaders have the singular duty to take their people there. So which way is it? A single miscalculation can cause major damage including deaths.
In the 1960s, leaders had to make economic choices as to whether their countries should adopt socialism or capitalism. Both camps had powerful masters with the US championing capitalism and USSR socialism.
Ethnic Chinese are the majority in China and Singapore. But the Singaporean leader at the time, Lee Kuan Yew, explains in his book From Third World to First: The story of Singapore, that he deliberately chose capitalism. His co-ethnic Mao Zedong in China chose communism.
Decades later, China was poor and millions starved to death and it took Deng Xiaoping to learn and change course. Singapore was rich and prosperous. Jomo Kenyatta of Kenya chose capitalism. Julius Nyerere of Tanzania’s choice was socialism. Decades later, his country incomes per person is now half of Kenya’s.
Currently, geopolitical choices involve choosing between China and America. Of course one can play both parties as some countries did during the cold war era, seeking to reap maximum gain out of the superpower struggles.
Those countries formed the nonaligned movement, purportedly seeking to be neutral while in actual fact they sided with either camp. So Kenyan leaders must make a very educated geo-political choice as China and US tussle internationally.
The best way to know where the world is headed to is to analyse technological progress.
I guess it is the Marxists who said historically, social struggles are not only between the rich and the poor but also between those that make the best use of advancing technology and those that do not.
Countries that are best in Fourth industrial revolution which entails Internet of things and Artificial Intelligence will win the race into the future. Hence Kenyan leaders should choose to ally with them.
