This framing is striking because Haji and Kahariri operate within a government apparatus accountable to Ruto. Kahariri’s pledge to defend “the government of the day” reflects constitutional duty, not political bias, but casting security as an external challenge subtly deflects from the administration’s shortcomings. Effective governance, tackling corruption, stabilizing the economy, meeting citizens’ needs, underpins security, yet their focus on distant threats distances the government from responsibility
By Mdadisi Mmoja
Amid growing public criticism of the Kenya Kwanza government led by President William Ruto, recent remarks by National Intelligence Service (NIS) Director General Noordin Haji and Chief of Defence Forces General Charles Muriu Kahariri have raised eyebrows. Delivered during a public lecture at the National Intelligence and Research University (NIRU) on March 27, 2025, their comments focused on Kenya’s security challenges and subtly addressed the “Ruto Must Go” slogan gaining traction amid political unrest. The timing and framing of their narrative invite scrutiny within the current political climate.
Haji outlined pressing security concerns, ranging from regional instability in Ethiopia, Sudan, and South Sudan to internal threats like corruption, climate-driven resource conflicts, and the expanding reach of terrorist organizations. He indirectly tackled the “Ruto Must Go” chants within a broader warning about divisive politics, stating, “Divisive politics has found a new breeding ground on our social media platforms. This is polarizing our people and undermining national cohesion, yet national cohesion goes hand-in-hand with national security and national interest.” He added, “Political competition has morphed into a persistent state of national instability, fueling public anger, with media platforms eager to sensationalize divisions.”
Similarly, General Kahariri emphasized the military’s readiness to counter these threats while addressing the “Ruto Must Go” slogan in the context of constitutional order. He said, “Even as people exercise their rights, we must stay within limits and bounds so we don’t tear our country apart. As the military, our core value is that we are apolitical. We don’t support any political camp. We defend the Constitution and the government of the day.” His remarks underscored that while dissent is a right, calls like “Ruto Must Go” must align with legal processes, not anarchy.
The timing of these statements, coming months after nationwide protests over rising fuel prices and stalled tax reforms in June 2024, feels significant. Kenya’s political landscape has been rocked by discontent with Ruto’s administration, which faces backlash over soaring living costs, controversial tax proposals, and perceived failures to curb insecurity. With inflation spiralling and economic recovery elusive, frustrations have boiled over. Opposition figures have seized on these struggles, while many Kenyans feel disillusioned with the unfulfilled promises of the 2022 campaign.
So why now? Are Haji and Kahariri genuinely tackling national security, or is this a strategic move to shift focus from the government’s domestic woes? Their narrative reminds Kenyans of external and internal threats, terrorism, cyberattacks, regional instability, where leadership action is critical. Haji’s warnings about digital radicalization and corruption’s role in enabling crime are sobering, yet both leaders emphasize external dangers over governance failures like unchecked corruption, which exacerbate these issues.
This framing is striking because Haji and Kahariri operate within a government apparatus accountable to Ruto. Kahariri’s pledge to defend “the government of the day” reflects constitutional duty, not political bias, but casting security as an external challenge subtly deflects from the administration’s shortcomings. Effective governance, tackling corruption, stabilizing the economy, meeting citizens’ needs, underpins security, yet their focus on distant threats distances the government from responsibility.
With Ruto’s team struggling to address everyday concerns, like the rising cost of unga (maize flour) and broken campaign promises, this security focus might aim to recast the administration as a protector against looming dangers. Historically, such issues rally public support and stoke nationalism. But this carries risks: when Kenyans grapple with empty wallets and eroded trust, prioritizing security, however legitimate, could seem tone-deaf, further alienating a populace desperate for economic relief.
In conclusion, while the security challenges Haji and Kahariri highlight are real, their timing amid Kenya Kwanza’s struggles invites questions. Are these sincere efforts to safeguard the nation, or part of a broader narrative to deflect criticism? The public, analysts, and opposition wonder if Ruto’s team can balance addressing security threats with the economic and social woes dominating daily life. How they navigate this tightrope may shape their fate in the months ahead.
