Category: Government

In recent weeks, the world has witnessed the most tense situations in international relations since the end of the Cold War with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. These tensions were noticeable during the deliberations and during the vote of the members of the United Nations on the resolutions calling on Russia to end its invasion and withdraw its forces from Ukraine. These events also served to test the resilience of military and political alliances.
The 54 African countries (or 27.97% of the total vote) considerably influenced the vote.
First, a meeting with the 12 members of the Security Council was held on February 25, 2021. The three countries representing Africa, namely: Gabon, Ghana and Kenya, along with eight other countries have voted for the resolution . However, Russia used its veto power to block it. This veto prompted the United States and 94 countries to call an emergency meeting of the United Nations General Assembly on February 27, 2022, at which a similar, but non-binding, motion was introduced. This is the first emergency meeting of this Assembly in 40 years.
The resolution providing, among other things, for the condemnation of the Russian decision “to raise the level of alert of its nuclear forces was adopted by the two-thirds majority required by all the Member States.
The African votes were less unanimous in the General Assembly than in the Security Council where the allocation of non-permanent seats, even if they obey a certain geographical distribution, does not oblige the representative countries to be the bearers. words from their region.
The majority of African countries clearly sided with Ukraine – 28 out of 54 (or 51.85%). Only Eritrea voted against this resolution. But almost a third of them abstained from taking sides (or 17 out of 54) – assuming that abstention is halfway between yes and no. Eight countries were absent.
My research has focused on the similarities and differences in how countries respond to crises. As an example, I looked at the 2015 refugee crisis in Europe and the contradictory reactions of Western and Eastern European countries, which I explained by their different identities, i.e. by “Who are we? “.
I also reviewed the Valletta Joint Action Plan, an immigration pact signed by the European Union and the African Union in response to the refugee crisis. I demonstrated that the plan, which helped to relaunch relations between the AU and the EU , was based on the interdependence which allows the parties to preserve their interests (territorial integrity for Europeans and economic development for Africans), while acknowledging (especially the more powerful Europeans) that they need each other to advance these interests.
Research by authors such as the Dutch political scientist Erik Voeten further proves that voting in the General Assembly is – in general – driven by interests . But, as American political scientist Alexander Wendt has revealed, what constitutes an interest depends on the perception of each government , so much so that two rival countries can sometimes vote for the same resolution.
As Voeten pointed out, historically speaking, electoral trends have been influenced by the big issues of the moment. In the 1950s, colonialism pitted European countries against Asian and African countries; from the 1960s to the 1980s, it was the Cold War and the division between the Eastern and Western blocs. More recently, these electoral tendencies have been structured by the desire of developing countries to obtain or retain aid from developed countries and, increasingly, between the liberal, illiberal divide of democratic and authoritarian regimes.
This divide trumps other possible explanations for the electoral trends of the General Assembly’s emergency meeting on the invasion of Ukraine. A country’s degree of proximity to the West or Russia can also serve as an additional explanation.
The line of demarcation
The group of 28 African countries in favor of the resolution was mainly made up of Western-aligned democracies such as: Benin, Botswana, Cape Verde, Comoros, Democratic Republic of Congo, Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Malawi, Mauritius, Niger, Nigeria, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Tunisia and Zambia.
But a few undemocratic or hybrid regimes made the list, such as Côte d’Ivoire, Gabon, Libya, Chad, Egypt, Mauritania, Rwanda and Somalia. They had, however, one thing in common: being allies of the West, with close military ties (military bases and joint military operations against the jihadists).
Conversely, most of the 17 African countries which abstained or which, like Eritrea, voted against the resolution, are authoritarian or hybrid regimes; these include, among others, Algeria, Angola, Burundi, Central African Republic, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Madagascar, Mali, Mozambique, South Sudan, Sudan , Tanzania and Zimbabwe.
Some of these countries have close military and ideological ties with Russia, sometimes dating back to the Cold War, such as Algeria, Angola, Congo, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Mali and the Central African Republic.
A few exceptions to the rule were also noteworthy.
A number of functioning democracies – Namibia, South Africa and Senegal – also abstained. All have strong affinities with the West. However, in the case of Namibia and South Africa, their ruling parties (the People’s Organization of South West Africa respectively) received support from the Soviet Union during their struggles for independence.
The case of Senegal is more puzzling, this country being the darling of the West due to its long democratic tradition. The Senegalese government said its abstention was in line with “principles of non-alignment and peaceful settlement of disputes”. However, the official statement of its President, as current President of the African Union, like that of the President of the AU Commission, could be interpreted as support for the territorial integrity of Ukraine.
This liberal and illiberal divide conveys points of view of three kinds.
First, the world is being turned upside down by the kind of clash of civilizations predicted by American political scientist Samuel P. Huntington, who claimed that cultural identity would be the fault line in global conflict. This would prepare the ground for world civilizations: Western, Chinese, Islamic, Latin, Slavic and perhaps African. If the idea that he had of a confrontation – and of identity as a driving force – seems to materialize, this identity is based on ideology and not on culture, illiberalism having replaced communism.
Simply, we had not yet reached the stage of the triumph of democracy proclaimed by the American political scientist Francis Fukuyama, in his book entitled The End of History, published in 1992 after the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Second, authoritarian regimes find comfort and support for their survival in proximity to similar regimes, and it serves as their insurance policy. Since Russia has shown its determination to rescue authoritarian regimes, such as Syria, these countries do not want to rule out the possibility of resorting to its assistance, in the event of a threat to their survival.
Third, if the war in Ukraine escalates globally and a China-encompassing Cold War 2.0 takes hold, African countries would split into several blocs instead of presenting a common front.
Placed in the context of the renewed partnership between the EU and the AU, this divide makes even more sense now than at their summit in Brussels, a week before the outbreak of the conflict, during which they proclaimed a common vision for 2030 and sought to form a strategic alliance.
In terms of democracy and alignment, the EU could probably make more demands and will naturally seek to deepen its relations with like-minded African countries.

Source: The Conversation Media Group Ltd

Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta’s ringing endorsement of his long-time opponent Raila Odinga on Saturday for the country’s August 2022 presidential elections draws a line under decades of bitter public rivalry.
Both men were born to fathers who played a key role in Kenya’s struggle for independence.
Jomo Kenyatta and Jaramogi Oginga Odinga joined hands to fight against British rule but developed a fierce rivalry after Kenya became independent in 1963.
Odinga served as the country’s first vice-president between 1964 and 1966 under Kenyatta who was president.
But they diverged on the question of foreign policy, with Kenyatta building alliances with the West while Odinga found himself drawn to the socialist ideas espoused by the former Soviet Union.
Raila, his second child, even went to East Germany to study engineering before entering politics and campaigning against the autocratic rule of Daniel arap Moi, who succeeded Jomo Kenyatta as president.
Jailed for eight years under Moi’s regime, Raila Odinga finally entered parliament in 1992, aged 47, when Kenya held its first-ever multi-party elections.
Uhuru Kenyatta, who is 16 years younger than Odinga, followed suit in 2001 but with Moi’s backing, after completing his studies in the United States and running an agricultural business.
The two men, who in private refer to each other as “my brother” and whose children grew up playing together, have always been on opposing sides during elections and have been quick to lash out at each other in public.
“He has no plan for Kenyans, he only seeks to make Kenyans angry and thrives in division and poverty,” Kenyatta said about Odinga in 2016.
Their rivalry kicked off in earnest in 2002 when Odinga campaigned for Mwai Kibaki, who emerged as the clear winner against the inexperienced Kenyatta, then making his first bid for the presidency.
In 2007, it was Odinga’s turn to stand against Kibaki, while Kenyatta supported the incumbent president.
The result, which saw Odinga cry fraud over Kibaki’s re-election, triggered the worst post-poll violence to ever hit Kenya, leaving more than 1,100 dead.
To stop the killings, international mediators forced a deal that saw Kibaki stay on as president while Odinga took the specially created position of prime minister in a power-sharing government.
Kenyatta served as deputy prime minister in charge of trade, followed by finance.
In 2013, the two men faced off against each other at the ballot box, carrying the support of their communities with them — the Kikuyu and the Luo, who are among Kenya’s largest tribes.
Odinga lost to Kenyatta, who was re-elected four years later in another controversial poll, prompting the opposition leader to petition the Supreme Court.
The court annulled the vote due to “irregularities and illegalities” — a first for the continent.
Dozens of people lost their lives due to protests and political violence.
A fresh vote was held, vaulting Kenyatta to victory as Odinga boycotted the ballot, holding an alternative presidential inauguration before his supporters in January 2018, three months after the re-run.
But barely two months later, the arch-rivals stunned the country by shaking hands and announcing a rapprochement.
The pact — known universally as “the handshake” — paved the way for the duo to push electoral reforms via the so-called Building Bridges Initiative (BBI) which aimed to expand the executive by creating the new position of prime minister.
According to Kenyatta, this would overturn the winner-takes-all electoral system blamed for frequent explosions of political violence in the East African nation.
But his detractors see it as little more than a power-sharing deal allowing Odinga to be president and Kenyatta, who cannot run for a third term, to serve as prime minister.
Odinga dismissed such speculation as “propaganda peddled by busybodies” in an interview last year.
Nevertheless the project is currently on hold, with the Supreme Court due to rule on its legality, and has little chance of being put into practice before the Aug 9 elections, analysts say.
Yet the pair’s journey from electoral rivals to political partners is unlikely to see a reversal anytime soon.
“We shall walk together,” Kenyatta told a cheering crowd in Nairobi on Saturday, as he announced his backing for “our team captain”.
Kenyatta in his speech at Odinga’s coronation ceremony held in the Kenyan capital, Nairobi said he had faith in his former rival after a vicious contest, setting the stage for an era of peace and tranquility in the country.
“I have faith in Odinga’s ability to transform this country and ensure it remained peaceful, united and a key player in regional affairs,” said Kenyatta, adding that Odinga had sacrificed personal interests to promote peace and stability in the country.
Odinga’s endorsement to run for presidency under the Azimio La Umoja (Resolution for Unity) coalition of more than 20 political parties set the stage for intensive campaigns ahead of Aug 9 national polls.
Other political heavy weights who announced they will back Odinga’s presidential race included Kalonzo Musyoka, a one-time foreign minister and vice president who is the leader of opposition Wiper Party.
In his acceptance speech, Odinga pledged to transform the country’s economy, promote unity, cohesion and Kenya’s relations with neighboring countries if he clinches presidency.
Odinga promised to create a stand-alone ministry for the youth, roll-out tax holidays to spur growth of youth led enterprises and promote use of technology to transform agriculture in the country.
He at the same time vowed to fight graft in the public service, allocate adequate resources to devolved units, create a civil service that is efficient and accountable and manage public debt.
Odinga said that under his administration, Kenya would become a manufacturing powerhouse unrivalled in the African continent.

Source: Nam News Network

President Uhuru Kenyatta has sent a message of condolence to President Hakainde Hichilema, the Government and the people of the Republic of Zambia following the death of the country’s fourth president Rupiah Bwezani Banda.
In the message of comfort, also addressed to the family of Mr Banda, the President described the former Head of State as a pan-Africanist who dedicated his long political career to the wellbeing, progress and unity of Zambians and the entire African continent.
“It is unfortunate that death has robbed us of President Banda, a gallant son of Africa and independence hero who dedicated most of his life to the freedom, wellbeing and progress not only of the Zambian nation but the entire Africa.
“Having emerged from the brutal independence struggle in early 1960’s, President Banda served Zambia with distinction in different public service roles before rising to become the country’s fourth president in 2008.
“To my brother President Hichilema, the Government and the people of Zambia, please receive my deepest sympathies and those of Kenyans during this difficult period of mourning your nation’s hero.
“To the family of President Banda, I pray that God the Almighty comforts all of you as you come to terms with your beloved’s demise,” President Kenyatta condoled.
Mr Banda succumbed to colon cancer on Friday in Lusaka at the age of 85 years.

Source: President Republic of Kenya

KENYA President, Uhuru Kenyatta, has called on Western nations to lift illegal sanctions against Zimbabwe.
Kenyatta argued the restrictions were illegal and hurting the Southern Africa nation.
“And this we consider to be unfair for these hardships were artificially created and we continue to call on the international community to remove these illegal sanctions,” the Kenyan president said.
He was speaking at the State House in Nairobi during a joint press briefing with his visiting Zimbabwe counterpart, President Emmerson Mnangagwa.
The two presidents led their respective delegations in bilateral talks.
Kenyatta assured Zimbabwe of Kenya’s continued advocacy to ensure that the restrictions are lifted.
During the talks, Kenya and Zimbabwe signed seven bilateral agreements, all memoranda of understanding (MOU) on political and diplomatic consultations; tourism and wildlife conservation; and civil aircraft accidents and serious incidents investigations.
Others were on women empowerment and community development; youth affairs; cooperatives; and sports and recreation activities.
Kenyatta said the agreements would enable Kenya and Zimbabwe to cooperate in addressing challenges facing them particularly youth unemployment.
Mnangagwa reiterated his Kenyan counterpart’s call on the international community to lift sanctions placed upon his country, terming the restrictions as unilateral.
He said his visit to Kenya was aimed at deepening the bilateral relations between Nairobi and Harare.
“My visit to Kenya is aimed at consolidating our relations by refocusing our cooperation to increase bilateral trade, investment, tourism, transport, science and technology and innovation among other aspects such as defense and security matters,” Mnangagwa said.
Western nations slapped sanctions on Zimbabwe at the turn of the millennium.
The Western nations, led by United Kingdom and United States termed these illegal sanctions as targeted restrictions on individuals accused of human rights violations and corruption.
However, Zimbabwe argued these illegal sanctions were imposed on them upon embarking on land redistribution programme aimed at correcting colonial imbalances that only favoured whites.

Source: CAJ News Agency

It is agreed that the objective of Russian President Vladimir Putin in his invasion of Ukraine is to install a puppet regime there, malleable to the interests of Moscow. If so, it is part of the same approach Russia has taken in its forays into Africa in recent years.
Building on the model used in Syria, Russia supports its “proxies” (intermediaries) in Libya, the Central African Republic, Mali and Sudan. Moscow is also eyeing half a dozen African leaders who are, to varying degrees, vulnerable.
In doing so, the interests and sovereignty of African citizens gave way to Russian priorities.
This strategy of elite co-optation mirrors Russia’s strategic goals in Africa . This initially consists of establishing a foothold in the southern Mediterranean and the Red Sea, potentially allowing Russia to threaten NATO’s southern flank and create bottlenecks in international maritime trade. .
Second, this approach would demonstrate Russia’s status as a great power whose interests must be taken into account throughout the world.
Third, it aims to displace Western influence in Africa, while undermining any support for democracy.
Russia has always used illegal means to achieve its goals on the continent. In particular, it has deployed mercenaries, conducted disinformation campaigns, interfered in elections and bartered arms for resources. This cost-effective approach, which is yielding very good results, has allowed Moscow to further expand its influence in Africa arguably faster than any other external actor since 2018, when Moscow stepped up its engagements in Africa. .
Unfortunately for African citizens, these tactics are all inherently destabilizing. Moreover, they end up depriving Africans of their rights while weakening their sovereignty.
Russia’s growing influence portends a bleak outlook for Africa’s future. Indeed, Russia is trying to export its model of governance— authoritarian, kleptocratic and transactional —to Africa.
Given that at least a handful of African leaders want to follow his path, this commitment is particularly problematic. Never mind the democratic aspirations of the vast majority of African citizens .
The UN vote on the Russian invasion of Ukraine provides a relevant prism for understanding relations between Moscow and certain African countries. It reveals a wide spectrum of governance norms and visions in Africa. It is through these goals and interests that interest groups from African countries can be expected to engage with Russia in the future, which will have far-reaching implications for democracy, continental security and sovereignty.
Puppets, sponsors and opposition
The vote on the UN General Assembly resolution condemning Russian aggression was opposed by only one African voice, that of Eritrea. The African Union and ECOWAS have joined in strong condemnations of the Russian attack on Ukraine. The current AU chairperson, Senegalese President Macky Sall, as well as AU Commission Chairperson Moussa Faki Mahamat, have also criticized Russia’s unprovoked war.
In all, 28 of the 54 African countries voted to condemn the Russian invasion, 16 countries abstained and 9 did not vote. Ultimately, the vote proved a remarkable condemnation from Moscow of a continent where the worldview of many leaders is shaped by a posture of non-alignment, the result of a still-living legacy of the Cold War, African diplomatic politeness and a desire to remain neutral in the face of great power rivalries.
The vote also brought to light a growing segmentation of governance norms in Africa and demonstrated that Africa’s relationship with Russia will henceforth be neither uniform nor abruptly challenged**.
African countries that abstained or did not vote did so for different reasons. The category of countries refusing to condemn Russia is the most obvious: that of the leaders who have been co-opted by Moscow, including Fustain-Archange Touadéra of the Central African Republic, Lieutenant General Abdel Fattah al-Bourhane of Sudan, and Malian Colonel Assimi Goita.
These leaders do not enjoy legitimacy in their countries and depend on the political support of Moscow and its mercenaries to cling to power.
The second category of countries that abstained or did not vote includes countries with which Russia has paternalistic ties with their leaders. These are the leaders of countries such as Algeria, Angola, Burundi, Guinea, Equatorial Guinea, Madagascar, Mozambique, South Sudan, Uganda, or even Zimbabwe, all of whom benefit from armaments, disinformation campaigns or political support. These leaders also have no interest in democratic processes that could undermine their grip on power.
Some countries—such as Morocco, Namibia, Senegal, and South Africa—that abstained or did not vote are likely motivated by ideological reasons rooted in their traditions of non-alignment. But while they maintain relations with Moscow, they are nonetheless bewildered by its imperialist actions and, in general, support respect for international law to maintain peace and security.
The countries that voted to condemn the invasion are large democracies or in the process of democratization such as Botswana, Cape Verde, Ghana, Malawi, Mauritius, Niger, Nigeria, Kenya, Seychelles, Sierra Leone and Zambia. Again, their motivations are diverse, but their average score on Freedom House’s Freedom in the World Index is 20 points higher than those of countries that did not vote for condemnation.
The eloquent speech of Kenya’s Ambassador to the United Nations , Martin Kimani, in which he championed respect for sovereignty, territorial integrity and the peaceful resolution of disputes, defines the vision of this group and its support for a rules-based international system. Many of these countries have also taken the lead in condemning the wave of coups and third terms in the continent .
Priority actions
If the past can serve as an example, one can expect that, in reaction to its international isolation after the invasion of Ukraine, Russia will intensify its campaign of influence in Africa.
In order to mitigate the bad Russian influence, African and international actors who wish to promote a democratic rules-based international system must take decisive action.
First, invest in institutions and partners for democracy. A system of democratic checks and balances remains the best protection against harmful external influences.
Second, the coups and third terms must be strongly condemned.
Third, building the capacity and scope of African journalists is crucial. Without free and informed discourse it is difficult to conduct a national dialogue on national priorities and preferences, and also to hold their actions accountable.
Fourth, the Convention for the Elimination of Mercenarism in Africa , which entered into force in 1985, must be strengthened. The latter prohibits African states from allowing the deployment of mercenaries on their territory and should be used to ban Wagner from the continent.
Fifthly, to strengthen democracy, we must invest in the professionalization of African armies . A growing number of African armies have become politicized, contributing to an increase in coups and instrumentalizing armies to suppress political opponents.
Strengthening the civic action of Africans is also very important. It is possible to counter the bad Russian influence by strengthening civil society in Africa to ensure that independent voices are not silenced. Society must redouble its vigilance to demand transparency on the opaque contracts that underlie this paternalism that reinforces these co-opted regimes.
Another way to strengthen African self-reliance is to support the efforts of regional organizations like the African Union. Indeed, the AU and regional economic communities have adopted charters that promote democratic norms and processes. These institutions can support democratic norms when they are flouted and can reduce the scope for outside influence.
At the international level, democratic governments need to nurture enduring partnerships with their African counterparts. The resulting stability will have a beneficial effect on all partners, particularly in terms of security, governance and investments. Such enduring engagements are at odds with the purely transactional and targeted relations of Russia’s elites in Africa.
African countries whose leaders are legitimately elected should not, however, be forced to choose between international partners. African governments naturally want to have multiple partnerships, depending on their own context and interests. This is quite normal, given the legacy of colonialism and the struggles for independence that were at the origin of the creation of many African states. Rather, the priority of such partnerships should be to focus on how to find and put into practice, with the widest possible consensus, a shared vision that is underpinned by an international rules-based system.
There exists today in Libya, a microcosm which is revealing of these competing visions. The UN-backed government voted to condemn the Russian invasion of Ukraine. He is also trying to organize elections in which 2.7 million Libyans have registered. But Russia is sabotaging these efforts in an attempt to install its own “proxy”, Khalifa Haftar by using its mercenaries, misinformation and political expediency. The consequences for all of Africa are obvious.
In the end, Russia only offers African leaders coercive tools. If these are weakened, so too will Russia’s destabilizing influence on the continent.

Source: The Conversation Media Group Ltd

US officials said in a scathing critique that poor command, inadequate security and a “climate of complacency” prevented US forces from adequately repulsing a 2020 attack by militants in Kenya that killed three Americans.
Multiple US military commanders, speaking after the release of an independent review on findings about the attack on Manda Bay airfield and the attached Camp Simba US base, cited deficiencies and flaws including the negligence of several personnel whose inaction contributed to the vulnerability of the facility in East Africa.
Shortly before dawn on Jan 5, 2020, a disciplined, heavily armed band of 30 to 40 fighters of the Al Shabaab extremist group stormed Camp Simba and attacked the airfield at Manda Bay, firing rocket propelled grenades at a vehicle killing its driver, and attacking a taxiing plane and killing two pilots.
They fired at least 10 mortars, destroyed seven aircraft, and engaged US forces in an hours-long firefight before they were driven off, US officials said.
“We were not as prepared at Manda Bay as we needed to be,” US Army General Stephen Townsend, commander of US Africa Command (AFRICOM), told reporters at the Pentagon.
“Poor unity of command” plagued the base, there was “inadequate understanding of the true threat” in the region and to the facility, security at key base locations was lacking, and forces were “insufficiently prepared for their mission,” Townsend said.
US Air Force Major General Tom Wilcox, who helped lead the investigation of AFRICOM’s findings of the attack, said his probe found that some senior officers “allowed a climate of complacency at the facility,” intelligence sharing was insufficient, and some senior officers were negligent in their duties.
But “while some individuals could and should have done better, the negligence of the individuals identified in the review was not the cause of the losses suffered in the attack,” Wilcox added.
“For mission command, it was found that flawed operational processes, and inadequate command and control at the tactical level, contributed to the outcome of the attack,” he said.
The officials said the deadly incident prompted an AFRICOM-wide review and suggested multiple improvements such as expanding training, bolstering physical defenses, improving communications and increasing Kenyan or other local participation in security operations.

Source: Nam News Network

Kenya’s President Uhuru Kenyatta has called on the international community to lift sanctions against Zimbabwe saying the restrictions were damaging the Southern African nation.

Speaking at the State House in Nairobi during a joint press briefing with Zimbabwe counterpart Emmerson Mnangagwa, Kenyatta termed the sanctions as illegal, assuring Zimbabwe of Kenya’s continued advocacy to ensure that the restrictions are lifted.

“We consider this to be unfair for these hardships were artificially created and we continue to call on the international community to remove these illegal sanctions,” the President said.

The two countries signed seven bilateral agreements, all memoranda of understanding (MOU) on political and diplomatic consultations, tourism and wildlife conservation, and civil aircraft accidents and serious incidents investigations.

Among the signed bilateral agreements were on women empowerment and community development, youth affairs, cooperatives, a sports and recreation activities.

The President said the agreements would enable Kenya and Zimbabwe to cooperate in addressing challenges facing them, particularly youth unemployment.

In 2019, data by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) estimated the youth unemployment rate in Zimbabwe was at 8.13 per cent.

Kenyatta, however, pointed out that the signing of the agreement on women empowerment was particularly important since it was entered into, a day after International Women’s Day national celebrations during which Kenya re-dedicated herself to the attainment of her ambitions gender, and goals.

“This MoU will go a long way in realizing this important development agenda. It seeks to promote a closer working relationship between our two countries in achieving the shared vision of women empowerment and community development, and also facilitate the sharing of knowledge, strategies, and technology for our women,” Kenyatta said.

The two heads of state noted that the Zimbabwe visit to Kenya was aimed at deepening the strong and historical bilateral relations between Nairobi and Harare.

“My visit to Kenya is aimed at consolidating our relations by refocusing our cooperation to increase bilateral trade, investment, tourism, transport, science and technology, and innovation among other aspects such as defense and security matters,” President Mnangagwa said.

“The friendship between our two countries and peoples goes back to the days before independence, with many people from the Shona community who are now recognized and regularised as Kenyan citizens, settled in our country in 1960,” Kenyatta said.

Mnangagwa said the unity of purpose would help Kenya and Zimbabwe to effectively deal with emerging challenges such as terrorism and the Covid-19 pandemic.

“We affirmed the need for cooperation with bilateral commitment at global levels to deal with pandemics of this nature now and in the future. Both Zimbabwe and Kenya are committed to enhancing cooperation towards mitigating the adverse effects of climate change and other environmental issues,” the Zimbabwean leader said.

On multilateral cooperation, Kenyatta congratulated Zimbabwe on its recent election into the African Union Peace and Security Council and assured Mnangagwa of Kenya’s strong backing during his country’s two-year tenure.

Mnangagwa reiterated his Kenyan counterparts’ call on the international community to lift sanctions placed upon his country terming the restrictions as unilateral.

At the bilateral meeting, Zimbabwe donated to Kenya 100 metric tonnes of medical oxygen to boost the fight against Covid-19.

Source: Nam News Network

Kisumu Governor, Prof Peter Anyang’ Nyong’o won the United Cities and Local Governments of Africa (UCLG-Africa) East Africa Regional Caucus vice-presidency seat.
Some 70 delegates drawn from the 15 members states of UCLGA East African Region unanimously elected the Kisumu County boss after having received an endorsement from his predecessor, Innocent Umiwana, who said that the governor was the best fit to even be the African President.
“Governor Nyong’o has what it takes to clinch the African Presidency,” said Uwimana.
Uwimana who is the current chairperson of Rwanda Associations of Local Governments Authorities (RAGLA), opted not to be re-elected to support Kenya’s bid for the position.
He vowed to lobby colleagues from other regions to ensure that East Africa wins the presidency at the General Assembly that will be convened in Kisumu during the Africities Summit.
Nyong’o expressed optimism that after Kisumu hosts the summit, other intermediary cities will have the doors open to also play host to such international event.
Also present in the caucus were chairpersons of the country chapters of Network of Locally Elected Women of Africa (REFELA), a representative of young elected officials of 35 years and below for the network of Young Elected Leaders Officials of Africa (YELO).
Kenya also won the REFELA chairperson of the Election Commission which was taken by Hilda Kwamboka, an MCA from Mombasa County as June Ndegwa from Nairobi County became YELO’s executive committee member. Kirui Chepkwony from Nandi County became a Pan African Council member which is affiliated to Council of Governors (COG) and County Assemblies Forum(CAF).
Kenya’s Defense Cabinet Secretary Eugene Wamalwa said Kenya joins other member states to urge their delegates to turn up for the first summit to be held in an intermediary city.
“As a country, we join UCLGA in urging delegates from all the member states from the East African region to join us in Kisumu, as UCLGA holds its first summit in an intermediary city,” noted the CS.
The 15 East African Region member states include Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda, Kenya, Uganda, Seychelles, Mauritius, Ethiopia, Somalia, South Sudan, Djibouti, Madagascar, Sudan, Eritrea, and Comoros.
The caucus was held in Nairobi in preparation for the May 9th Africities Summit which is to be held in Kisumu County.

Source: Kenya News Agency

Mr Emile Nguza Arao has been appointed the new Director General of Kenya Civil Aviation Authority with effect from 22nd April this year.
Arao who is currently the Executive Director at the East African Community’s Civil Aviation Safety and Security Oversight Agency takes over from the current Director General Capt Gilbert M. Kibe.
Announcing the appointment, the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, Mr James Macharia, said the appointment follows a successful recruitment process by the Board of Directors at Kenya Civil Aviation Authority.
In a press statement to newsrooms, the CS said the new Director General is recognized for steering the East African Community’s Civil Aviation Safety and Security Oversight Agency to become the number two regional safety oversight organization globally as ranked by the International Civil Aviation Organization.
Emile is talented and an accomplished Aviation professional holding a Bachelor’s of Science Degree in Aircraft Engineering technology, has a Master’s Degree in Business Administration in Aviation with a specialization in Aviation Systems Management both obtained from Embry Riddle Aeronautical University in United States of America.

Source: Kenya News Agency

A section of leaders from Garissa County have urged area residents to desist from any acts of violence during and after the August 9 polls.
Addressing the press after the launch of the Garissa multi-sectoral coordination and collaboration committee at the government guest house, Area County Commissioner, Mr Boaz Cherutich, said that the committee has been mandated to ensure a peaceful election.
The committee members are key election stakeholders drawn from the security sector, County Government, IEBC, NGOs, religious organizations, civil societies, business community Boda Boda association, women and youth representatives.
Cherutich said that the committee will also sensitize the residents on the importance of peaceful elections campaigns devoid of violence among other key issues. He said security agencies will work together with other stakeholders in information sharing on possible violence hotspot areas.
Kenya Livestock Marketing Council Chair Dubat Amey, observed that it is the responsibility of every Kenyan to maintain peace during and after the General Elections.
“As elders, we will make sure that there is no violence of any kind in Garissa. We will share all relevant information with the relevant security agencies so that action can be taken on would-be perpetrators,” Dubat said.
“We need to continue with our normal lives after elections and be able to go back to our business, farms, jobs or livestock without worrying of being attacked or that our houses will be burnt,” he added.
Rukia Mohamed, a women leader, said that women and children are the biggest victims of violence.
“Sexual and gender based violence tend to increase when there is no peace. As women, this year we are at the forefront advocating for cohesion and peaceful elections,” Rukia said.
Abdillahi Salat, representing the SUPKEM, said that they will not allow any politician to incite the citizens especially the youth and boda boda operators to cause chaos.

Source: Kenya News Agency