Prof. Mazrui must have called Prof Ochiengs bluff

Time for Mazrui to think of coming back to work in his motherland

The one Kenyan thinker who has never inspired me is Professor Ali Mazrui. Let me however state right away that I have completely nothing against him, as a person. True, he has published immensely. I cannot claim to have read even half of what he has written. What puzzles me, however, is that I cannot remember a single important thing from his material.
I know he will respond by claiming that it is not his fault. If I am too dense to understand his writing then what has that got to do with him?
But apparently his American hosts also have a problem with him. Despite his many lectures and literature in the United States they do not seem to understand what he says, or wants. Are they also as dense as I am? What exactly has professor Mazrui been trotting around the world telling his listeners?
Late last August the itinerant Kenyan professor was detained at the Miami International Airport, in the United States, for more than six hours, as he jetted into his adopted homeland from Trinidad. And why? " Because of a breakdown in communication" between him and the US immigration and customs officials. The officials questioned Mazrui separately, to explain, among other things, his Islamic views. Their questions included: " What is Jihad? " Do you believe in it? "
Then they wanted to know what sect of Islam he believed in. When he told them Sunni, they asked why he was not Shia. According to Mazrui "That was definitely a first. That is like asking a Catholic why he isn't a Protestant." They then asked him whether he had met with a radical Islamist leader in Trinidad. He told them no, but added it was his business to know about Muslims because that is what he taught.
Professor Mazrui has lived and worked in the United States since early nineteen seventies, when he defected from Uganda due to Presidents Idi Amin's murderous brutality. Aged seventy, and professor at the State University of New York at Binghamton, Mazrui is also the Albert Schweitzer Professor in humanities, Director of the Institute of Global Cultural Studies at SUNY- Binghamton, as well as Professor at Cornell University.
With that kind of Vitae, and given that America would stock special data on such an important luminary, was it a mistake that the American Immigration and Customs officers pounced on him on what appears to be minor details?
After this interrogation the officials apologised for keeping him so long, and gave him 25 dollars for dinner, paid for a hotel room and booked him on a flight the next morning.
But what was Ali thinking about that night? That his detention was a mistake? That these were ignorant officials? Are his American hosts already bored with him? Has he misused the wide American democratic space by discussing Western heresies? Or is America changing into a vast anti-democratic conspiracy?
Despite my known attitude to Mazrui I have a sneaking love for his audacity, as well as respect for the fact that he has always carried a Kenyan passport. But is it not time he came home and spent his remaining years on some tangible research activity on Kenyan society?
One area where he could help is to initiate an institute on Kenyan political bio-data. We need to know who James Gichuru, Jomo Kenyatta, Tom Mboya, Gikonyo Kiano, Oginga Odinga, Okik Amayo- and all the founding pioneers were. True, the lazy Kenyan historians and political scientist should have embarked on this project. Biographies help younger generations of thinkers and leaders to understand the inputs that went into the evolution of their society. Would that not be something worthwhile for the great professor to do at home, as he moulds the growth of Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, of which he is the Chancellor?
I cannot promise that when he begins to work here, at home, I will be able to understand him. But, at least, he will have made some memorable contribution to his motherland. Ali Mazrui has spent his life educating the world. Why not come home and summarise all that effort, as he sips his gin and tonic, sitting on one of the benches in Fort Jesus!
Ali, home will always be home.
Prof Ochieng is a former permanent secretary in the Office of the President

Tribe Must Be Paramount

TRIBE MUST BE PARAMOUNT

There are many in Kenya who are of the opinion that tribalism is the germ, which is contaminating and hindering development. This is because we have not effectively used tribe and tribalism for our own good. For both have a potential of promoting our well being beyond imagination. We still love to blame it colonialist. Colonialists did what they and took off, full stop. It is now upon us to do everything in our power to turn what was supposed to be our fall to look like a mere slip. I hereby submit that turning to tribe will be the only solution to our political differences.

Kenyans have since independence been unable to forsake tribal allegiance for the benefit of the country. We all remember how it all started. Jaramogi insisted that Kenyatta be released from prison before any talk of independence could be considered. From there we all know what Kenyatta and the Kiambu Mafia did to Jaramogi and by extension the luos and non Mt. Kenya tribes when he assumed power. The same thing happened with Kibaki. They both used tribe and tribalism very negatively.

However, lets for a second assume that Kenyatta and co had channelled the energy used to alienate other tribes into the national development agenda. Would it not be great? I guess so, but only half way, for tribal affiliation and feeling cannot be easily channelled into the national agenda. Tribes are a contradiction in Kenya; they are an evil if your tribe is not in power and a benefit if your tribe is in power. The tribe in power always looks inwards i.e. to those around, who are usually people from of same tribe. In a situation where checks and balances are unheard of, it becomes time for harvesting from the government coffers.

Why have Kenyan disregarded tribal institutions? Why have we not accepted the fact that we are tribalists by nature? Is tribe not the only legitimate structure, which we had before wazungu brought their system? Why have we distanced ourselves from tribal structures, to extent that we think that they are evil. For one to have allegiance to the nation (Kenya), the benefits must outweigh those of belonging to a tribe. As Kenyans we are defined as citizens only on our IDs but our base is still tribe, in which we have our permanent roots. It as if Kenya has been forced upon us. Its as if all other tribes are intruders. At the same time we are do not want to be identified tribalists. Yes tribalism is what we practice everyday. We do not understand why other tribes should share with us “our country and our resources”. This schizophrenic national mind set permeates Kenyans and its denial only compounds the problem.It is therefore of great importance to have a constitution which rests its power on tribal institutions. It is from tribal structures which real power lies and not in governmental institutions which are for most part seen as intruding and eager to take away from or hinder development. It is for these very reasons most Kenyans supported the aborted BOMAS draft constitution and rejected the WAKO mongrel a.k.a known as the MKM constitution. The Bomas draft constitution attempts albeit obliquely to tackle the above problem. I don’t think that it would be far fetched, for the sake of unity to have all issues in the government decided by both tribal and national standards. It would not be out of this world if a parliament with two chambers had a chamber consisting of public officials who command the most reverence and support from each tribe. While the other would be more or less like the one we have today. This would balance negative tribalism. (Please do not tell me that this has not been tested anywhere in the world and for that reason should not be practiced in Kenya. When will Kenyans come up with original ideas if we only practice reverse engineering of the same?) It would therefore not matter if you came from a minority of majority tribe. In most western countries, the parliament has given equal power to different region, provinces, states as far as decision making is concerned. For they understand that there is a unique relationship between the region one hails from and the need to see it grow. In Kenya, we have adopted a constitution which lets the winner take it all.

The cause of our disunity is therefore the rejection of tribal structures. It is the reason why politicians cannot sit down and talk without wrangling, for everyone wants a piece of the cake. Na ukizuba tu hivi, wenzako watameza ule ugali pamoja na sufuria. It is for the same reason that every tribe wants to produce a president. Tribe must be paramount if we have to succeed. Lets go back to the drawing board. Na usiseme ati mimi ni mshamba ama mkabili.

Now Mazrui tells Prof. Ochieng, let’s debate or shut up

I was intrigued by Prof William Ochieng’ Opondo’s article about Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni and Professor Ali Mazrui in the Saturday Standard on March 18.
Ochieng’ seems to have decided to be as uncritical about Museveni as he once was about former President Daniel arap Moi, throughout his elaborate tenure.
Contrary to Ochieng’s style of "speaking flattery to power", I have done my best to "speak truth to power" in Africa and in the Western world.
As it happens, I am an admirer of Museveni. He restored stability to most of Uganda faster than most of us expected.
He also restored transparency and relative openness to Ugandan politics and has sustained stability in that country for about two decades now.
I also support Museveni’s policy of empowering women. But just as I said to Moi in 1992 that 15 years was too long a tenure for a Head of State to remain in office, so I say to Museveni that his 20 years in power were already too long without adding another half-decade.
Ochieng’ should not pretend that he knows Uganda or the Baganda better than I do.
I lived in Uganda for 10 years, partly among the Baganda. It is a sign that Ochieng’ knows very little about the Baganda if he is not aware about their nationalistic defensiveness towards Luganda.
I have never wanted Kiswahili imposed upon the Baganda, but former President, the late Idi Amin’s soldiers sometimes attempted to do just that.
Although Kiswahili is my mother tongue, I have never wanted it promoted by military force.
Most Ugandans would regard it as absurd to hear that Ochieng’ cares more about Makerere University than I do. I have repeatedly acknowledged Makerere as the cradle of my professorial career and have continued to have many friends on that campus.
In Kenya I once challenged Ochieng’ to a public debate on academic freedom at either Maseno or the University of Nairobi.
He did not have the self-confidence to take me on face-to-face. And he has never bothered to take the initiative or own up to the invitation to an intellectual discourse.
Would he now be prepared to take me on at Makerere University if Makerere’s Vice-Chancellor and President Museveni would permit two Kenyans to debate Ugandan issues on Ugandan soil?
I am available if such a debate can be arranged, but what about Ochieng’? Will he pick up the gauntlet?
Ochieng’ claims that he does not suffer form "Mazruiphobia". He claims: "I neither hate, love, fear, nor admire Mazrui." Yet no East African has written more anti-Mazrui newspaper articles than Prof Ochieng’.
Even when the United States’ Anti-Terrorism Task Force detained and interrogated me at Miami Airport in 2003, the only writer who celebrated my ordeal was Prof William Ochieng’.
I received many international messages of concern, sympathy or outrage about the Miami Airport interrogation.
But Ochieng’ gloated in the Kenya press over my discomfiture. If that was not an example of "Mazruiphobia", I am not sure what is.
Incidentally, the terms Mazruiphobia (strong anti-Mazruism) and Mazruiphilia (strong pro-Mazruism) were not coined by me.
They were developed and analysed by the late Southern Sudanese scholar, Dr Dunstan M Wai, who died last year after many years of service as a scholar and as a distinguished official of the World Bank.
He published a major paper in 1998 entitled, ‘Mazruiphilia, Mazruiphobia: Democracy, Governance and Development’.
Wai tried to explain how certain African intellectuals became magnets for either admiration or hostility in the vortex of clash of ideas. I deeply regret that Ochieng’ qualifies as a "Mazruiphobe". His handling of issues about me point to that.
I share Ochieng’s scepticism about my being included by Foreign Policy journal (Washington, DC) among the 100 top public intellectuals in the world today.
But Ochieng’ is wrong in assuming that the list of the top public intellectuals did not include Chinese, Indian, Singaporean and diverse major thinkers from Africa, Latin America and elsewhere.
The list of Foreign Policy and Prospect (Canada) was wide-ranging, but I agree that it was not wide-ranging enough.
I have no chance of converting Prof Ochieng’ from Mazruiphobia into Mazruiphilia, and I do not intend to. But instead of advising me to leave President Museveni alone, should he not advise himself to leave Mazrui alone from now on?