“Being Misunderstood” Is Not Enough — Pauline Njoroge Questions Government Over Burundi Remarks
Political commentator Pauline Njoroge has criticized the government’s handling of recent statements concerning Burundian nationals living in Kenya, warning that poorly worded public communication can have serious diplomatic and security consequences.
Njoroge questioned whether officials had fully considered the possible impact of their remarks, arguing that the statements could expose Burundian communities in Kenya to hostility while potentially affecting Kenyans living in Burundi and other African countries.
She expressed particular concern for ordinary Burundians, including hawkers, who could face hostility despite not being responsible for any wrongdoing. She noted that authorities later increased police patrols in areas where members of the Burundian community live.
Njoroge also questioned why the initial statement was not issued directly by the Foreign Affairs Cabinet Secretary or Principal Secretary. She said Foreign Affairs PS Korir Sing’oei’s subsequent explanation that the government had been “misunderstood” demonstrated the need for greater caution when addressing sensitive diplomatic issues.
She further raised concerns about comments involving Indian nationals working at Magadi Soda. While acknowledging Mining Cabinet Secretary Ali Hassan Joho’s clarification, Njoroge questioned why the announcement had not come directly from his office.
According to Njoroge, remarks suggesting foreign investors could be asked to leave Kenya may create uncertainty and discourage potential investors. She argued that major statements from the presidency should be thoroughly prepared, verified and assessed for possible diplomatic consequences before being made publicly.
She emphasized that presidential statements carry significant weight because they represent Kenya and can influence the country's image both locally and internationally.
Njoroge concluded that Kenya was fortunate that the Burundi controversy did not lead to loss of life, describing the incident as a warning about the potential consequences of careless government communication.