To end banditry, address cultural and economic roots 

 The banditry crisis in northern Kenya has exposed the potential impact of climate change on a nation’s security, social cohesion  and economic stability. 

Cattle rustling and banditry are retrogressive cultures that have threatened growth, development and modernisation of North-Western Kenya. Policy shapers attribute the challenge to neglect and exclusion of some areas in development.

The promoters and think tanks behind the design of the Constitution were cognisant of the threat of development concentration in select areas and the threat to national cohesion, equality and economic empowerment. 

The expected economic, political, and economic outcomes of devolution are yet to be realised 10 years later. Although significant milestones have been achieved in the last decade, devolution is still in its infancy and will take some time to redress the historical injustices and economic neglect of these areas. 

The strategies adopted by the previous administrations have proven ineffective as banditry continues to thrive. The use of militarised approaches to address societal challenges rooted in culture has proven ineffective, expensive and futile. 

The development and implementation of reactive policies and solutions have suffered colossal failure because of inability to address the root cause of the problem. Banditry is  deeply rooted in the culture of many northern communities.

This begs the question: Should bandits be regarded as violent extremist groups? Violent extremism can be described as a form of hate and intolerance that encourages violence with deliberate intentions, such as political and religious violence and economic sabotage.

Bandits can be categorised as violent extremist groups because their goal is to destabilise the region, stifle development, and curtail government influence. Securitisation and militarisation have been used as the primary approaches to tackle violent extremist groups. 

However, evidence from conflict-prone regions reveal that securitisation and militarisation intervention approaches are unlikely to succeed and provide a long-term solution to the conflict. 

Peter Drucker, one of the influential management thinkers of the 20th century, opined that “culture eats strategy for breakfast.” Although Drucker’s statement was influenced by corporate management practice, the findings can be extrapolated to the social and political spheres. 

The claim by Drucker revealed that the failure to modify the culture of individuals renders other innovative approaches useless. Indeed, the northern communities are radicalised and believe that cattle rustling and banditry is the “man’s way of life” and the only way to eke out a living and gain honour, respect and societal acceptance. 

Radicalisation of some of the communities begins at a very young age as the bandits are respected societal figures and role models. Consequently, this has neutered the effectiveness of government interventions because the practice is culturally embedded. 

The government must integrate proactive solutions that address the root cause of the problem. Securitisation will only provide temporary solutions until the next disaster. The government must address the cultural, political, social and economic challenges that have escalated the conflict. 

Policymakers have called for alternative solutions, including infrastructure investment, to open up the region for development and investment. 

Education is one of the best de-radicalisation tools that can help reprogram the cultural connection with banditry. The government must utilise the resources allocated to marginalised areas to provide free education programmes as a form of de-radicalisation. Exposure to modern education will shift the banditry ideology and provide them with alternative knowledge, competence, and skills needed in modern society. 

Leaders must acknowledge that failure to address the cultural connection with banditry will only provide temporary solutions. The government must further integrate economic empowerment activities with de-radicalisation approaches. 

—The writer is the Director, BEWA Research