Last week we asked why Kenya’s recent general election was peaceful, in contrast to the post-election violence that followed the country’s divisive December 2007 vote. At first glance this peaceful nature is puzzling: the election was close, like in 2007, and observers were concerned that violence would once again ensue. So why did little violence occur? Commenter hearabout suggests that in the years following the traumatic 2007-8 unrest Kenyans have worked to prevent tribal and political violence, and election media coverage has been comparatively milder. “Further,” hearabout writes, “the main actors of the 2008 violence, Kenyatta and Ruto and such, have also demonstrated restraint and called for peace.”
You May Also Like
Authoritarian Resilience: Why Bouteflika and Bashir Fell, but Ortega Remains
- April 30, 2019
By Kai Thaler for Denver Dialogues. April saw protestors—with an assist from the military—oust longtime authoritarian leaders Abdelaziz…
How Religious Competition is Fueling Electoral Violence in Sri Lanka
- January 7, 2015
Guest post by Matthew Isaacs This Thursday Sri Lanka’s voters will go to the polls to determine the…
Can Democracy Assistance Be Effective in the Age of Authoritarianism?
- February 6, 2023
Guest post by Oren Samet and Susan Hyde Western governments today spend billions on international democracy promotion programming,…
What Happened in Bolivia is a Postmodern Coup. Here’s Why.
- November 19, 2019
Guest post by Abdullah Aydogan Bolivian President Evo Morales resigned a week ago after widespread street protests and…
Between Authoritarianism and Democracy
- July 31, 2018
By Alexander Beresford, Marie E. Berry, and Laura Mann for Denver Dialogues. For decades, political scientists have debated…
The International Community, Coups, and Electoral ‘Attaboys
- February 9, 2022
Guest post by Jonathan Powell and Salah Ben Hammou Coups in Africa have reached crisis proportions. Since Niger’s…