William Ruto’s Dance with the West: A Puppet in Pan-Africanist Clothing
In the ever-evolving world of international politics, Kenya’s President William Ruto finds himself in a precarious position, walking a tightrope between his professed Pan-African ideals and his actions as a puppet manipulated by Western powers. Ruto’s ascent to power in the 2022 General Election may have been facilitated by Western support, but the implications of his decisions are beginning to paint a troubling picture for Kenya’s future.
From the outset, it’s clear that the West, including the USA, UK, and the European Union, played a pivotal role in Ruto’s election victory. While the details of their involvement remain shrouded in secrecy, the policies Ruto has embraced since taking office tell a tale of potential suffering for Kenyans. IMF and World Bank policies appear deeply ingrained in the country, raising concerns about their influence over Kenya’s economic and political landscape.
One striking example of Ruto’s apparent subservience to Western interests is the transformation of the USA Ambassador to Kenya into what seems like the “Kenyan Foreign Affairs Minister.” Her newfound prominence and involvement in Kenyan affairs send a clear message that Ruto may not be fully in charge of his administration.
Furthermore, Ruto’s recent visit to the United States, during which former HP CEO Meg Whitman actively marketed Kenya to American investors, is a testament to his willingness to serve as a conduit for Western economic interests. It’s perplexing how Ruto can present himself as a Pan-Africanist at home while acting as a Western stooge abroad.
Ruto’s double standards are evident in his approach to the issue of dollarization. On one hand, he advocates for de-dollarization at home, ostensibly championing African financial autonomy. On the other hand, he readily embraces IMF and World Bank policies that maintain Kenya’s economic ties to Western institutions. This contradiction raises questions about his true allegiance.
The most alarming indication of Ruto’s allegiance to Western powers is Kenya’s potential involvement in the Multinational Security Support mission in Haiti. If approved by the UN Security Council, Kenya could deploy troops as early as November, purportedly at the behest of the United States. This raises serious questions about whether Kenya has sufficient security personnel to address its domestic issues, such as the ongoing threat from Al-Shabaab while pledging troops overseas.
This scenario underscores a broader issue in Africa, where Western-style democracy often appears to undermine the will of the people. The interference of Western nations in African politics and governance has led to the rise of leaders who prioritize their relationships with the West over the needs and desires of their citizens. Ruto’s trajectory is merely a microcosm of this disturbing trend.
In essence, Western democracy, as implemented in Africa, often serves as a convenient tool for foreign powers to install puppet leaders who further their agendas. As long as African nations continue to rely on the West for support and guidance, the true aspirations of their people will be stifled. The likes of Ruto, who claim to be Pan-Africanists while succumbing to Western influence, are emblematic of a larger issue that threatens the continent’s sovereignty and self-determination.
In conclusion, William Ruto’s evolving role as a puppet of the West, combined with the broader implications of Western-style democracy in Africa, paints a troubling picture for Kenya and the continent as a whole. Africans must reevaluate their relationship with Western powers and strive for a more genuine form of democracy that truly represents the will of the people and safeguards their interests. Otherwise, Africa risks continuing down a path where foreign interests take precedence over its progress and development.