Abstract
Despite Kenya’s elevation to the status of an “anchor” state in the Global War on Terror (GWOT), the number of terrorist attacks in the country continues to escalate, raising questions about the effectiveness of Kenya’s counterterrorism approach. However, Kenya cannot be said to have its own unique counterterrorism approach because what exists is an amalgamation of approaches adopted from the Western state-centric, military-based, problem-solving approach. Apart from being embedded in colonial narratives, Kenya’s current counterterrorism approach is framed largely by Islamophobic discourses that construct Muslims and Kenyan Somalis as the terrorist “other”. The narrative of otherness or othering, which is sometimes a by-product of Western thinking that promotes exploitation and victimisation, contrasts sharply with the African philosophy of Ubuntu/Utu, which promotes the togetherness of all people under one umbrella: shared humanity. In this thesis, the narrative of otherness is therefore challenged as a flawed ideology that was adopted by Kenya during colonisation and continues to be reproduced in Kenya’s counterterrorism landscape, hence making Kenya’s current approach not only Eurocentric but also potentially counterproductive. Kenya’s counterterrorism approach can thus be said to be a product of dominant, universalistic knowledge that lacks the local specificity required, given the country’s African heritage.
This study employs, among other approaches, Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) to analyse how language is used to produce, control, maintain and legitimise power. An Afrocentric decolonial research design is also employed to debunk the misconception that there is no such thing as an Indigenous understanding of counterterrorism and that Indigenous people are incapable of scientific inquiry. The design thus seeks to open up pluriversal dialogues by providing counternarratives to dominant GWOT strategies that continue to marginalise and exclude alternative ways of dealing with terrorism in Kenya. Consequently, this study relied on qualitative research to collect data in the form of interviews and Focus Groups Discussions (FGDs). A total of 30 participants were interviewed. They included five academic scholars in the field of peacebuilding and counterterrorism, four security and military personnel, two youth leaders in the field of
peacebuilding, two religious leaders, four civil society actors working with faith-based and community-based organisations, four experts in the field of Countering Violent Extremism (CVE), two victims of terrorism and violent extremism, and seven local village elders heading conflict resolution committees. Secondary data was also captured through document analysis. Empirical findings demonstrate that Kenya has adopted the concept of otherness in its counterterrorism approach, primarily as a product of colonialism reproduced in the GWOT.
As such, based on the findings, Ubuntu/Utu appears to be a potential interlocutor in shaping and transforming dominant counterterrorism discourses which bridge the gap between Western Knowledge and Indigenous Knowledge. Accordingly, while this study challenges the wholesale dependency on Western counterterrorism strategies, it also emphasises the need for pluriversality and vibrancy of knowledges in the field of counterterrorism. Accordingly, the Usalamautu framework is proposed as a reconstitutive framework that acts as an incubator for programme development in counterterrorism. This framework designed as a tapestry, seeks to weave in multiple voices in the counterterrorism space while maintaining the Indigenous voices at its nucleus. Accordingly, it offers a pathway that is not only in line with Kenya’s history but is also alive to the global realities of terrorism.