By Since gaining independence in 1963, Kenya’s political landscape has been deeply influenced by
tribal affiliations. Ethnic identities have often shaped voter behavior, political alliances, and even
policy direction. The “big tribes” have historically dominated, with political coalitions and rivalries
largely built around ethnic blocs. However, in recent years, a more nuanced term-“cousin
politics”-has started to emerge, particularly in the context of Kamba-GEMA (Gikuyu, Embu, Meru
Association) relations, signaling a shift in how tribalism manifests in the Kenyan political theatre.
Historical Context: From Tribalism to Strategic Alliances
Post-independence Kenya saw the institutionalization of tribalism in politics, with leaders rallying
their ethnic communities for support. The formation of political parties like KANU and KADU
reflected ethnic cleavages more than ideological differences. Over time, ethnicity became a reliable
predictor of political allegiance.
Among the dominant political players have been the GEMA communities-particularly the Kikuyu,
who have produced three of Kenya’s five presidents. Meanwhile, the Kamba community, although
sizable, has often played a kingmaker role, aligning with either government or opposition forces
depending on prevailing circumstances.
Emergence of ‘Cousin Politics’
The term ‘cousin politics’ is a relatively new descriptor in Kenya’s political vocabulary. It implies a
form of political kinship or affinity between different ethnic communities based on historical, cultural,
or strategic connections. Within the Kamba-GEMA context, it reflects the growing collaboration and
mutual recognition of shared interests between the two blocs.
This concept has gained traction due to:
– Regional proximity and intermarriage between Kamba and GEMA communities, especially in
regions like Machakos, Kitui, and Makueni.
– Shared economic interests, such as trade networks and business collaborations, that cut across
ethnic lines.
– A growing class of youthful, educated leaders from both communities pushing for issue-based
rather than ethnicity-based politics.
Political Significance
The adoption of “cousin politics” offers several political advantages:
– Softens the ethnic rhetoric that has historically caused tension.
– Enables coalition-building without overtly invoking tribal loyalties.
– Promotes regional unity, especially in areas prone to political polarization.
– Allows leaders from these blocs to market themselves as national figures with cross-ethnic appeal.
Prominent politicians, especially from the lower Eastern and Mt. Kenya regions, have begun
invoking this cousin narrative to foster goodwill and trust, subtly appealing to tribal sentiments
without openly inflaming them.
Implications for Kenyan Democracy
While cousin politics may appear to offer a more palatable version of tribalism, it still relies on ethnic
identity at its core. The danger lies in:
– Perpetuating ethnic bloc voting, merely under a different label.
– Marginalizing smaller communities that do not fall under the “cousin” umbrella.
– Delaying the evolution of issue-based politics, which Kenya desperately needs.
However, if managed well, it could be a transitional phase toward a more inclusive and cohesive
political culture, where relationships between communities are emphasized over rigid tribal
boundaries.
Conclusion
Kenya’s political journey is complex and still heavily tethered to ethnicity. While tribalism has long
defined the country’s politics, the emergence of cousin politics within the Kamba-GEMA dynamic
represents a subtle shift-one that rebrands ethnic alliances under a more cooperative, familial
narrative. Whether this will lead to true national unity or simply entrench old patterns in new ways
depends on how political leaders and the electorate choose to interpret and engage with this
evolving concept.
