Kenya's journey towards securing the coveted status of a major United States non-NATO ally is likely to hit a legislative roadblock in the form of a bill seeking to empower the National Assembly in treaty approval processes.
Last month, the US administration unveiled plans to bestow this prestigious designation upon Kenya, a move that could significantly bolster the country's military capabilities and cement its position as a key strategic partner for the US in sub-Saharan Africa.
In Kenya, any bilateral agreements or treaties necessitate approval from the National Assembly, traditionally a formality. However, a proposed bill could complicate matters, potentially challenging the government's ability to swiftly secure such agreements.
Should the deal receive parliamentary approval, Kenya would join the exclusive ranks of just four African nations bestowed with major non-NATO ally status.
As a major non-NATO ally, Kenya stands to gain privileged access to advanced military equipment, training, and financial assistance to bolster its defence capabilities.
However, it's crucial to note that while the designation offers benefits, the US is not obligated to provide direct military assistance, nor is Kenya mandated to contribute troops to NATO operations.
Similar designations have significantly enhanced the military capacities of Tunisia, Morocco, and Egypt. Tunisia witnessed notable military advancements since earning the status in 2015, coinciding with substantial budgetary and operational reforms.
Egypt, boasting one of the world's most formidable armies, has held the designation since 1989, playing a pivotal role in US diplomatic efforts across North Africa and the Middle East.
Morocco, meanwhile, has leveraged its status to combat terrorism effectively, hosting the continent's largest military exercise, "African Lion," since 2007. This year's edition, involving 7,000 military personnel from 20 African and NATO states, underscores the significance of such partnerships.
Despite the potential benefits, the road to formalising the agreement faces a legislative bottleneck. A proposed bill seeks to empower Members of Parliament (MPs) with increased oversight in treaty ratification, presenting a potential stumbling block for President William Ruto's administration.
Changes in Law
The proposed Treaty Making and Ratification (Amendment) Bill of 2024, spearheaded by Gilgil MP Martha Wangari, stands as a potential roadblock to President William Ruto's aspirations for Kenya's major non-NATO ally status.
This legislative endeavour seeks to recalibrate the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches, amplifying parliamentary oversight over treaty negotiations and ratifications.
Under the envisioned amendments, the executive branch would be constrained to merely drafting treaties, with the final authority resting with Members of Parliament (MPs) before implementation. This significant shift in protocol points to a broader effort to democratise the treaty-making process, affording elected representatives a more substantive role in shaping Kenya's international commitments.
President Ruto's negotiations with US counterpart Joe Biden face a pivotal juncture, with the proposed bill injecting a layer of procedural complexity into the diplomatic equation. While the executive branch traditionally wields considerable autonomy in foreign affairs, the burgeoning influence of parliamentary oversight signals a paradigm shift in Kenya's approach to international relations.
Despite the absence of formal documentation solidifying the US-Kenya agreement, President Biden's overture to Congress indicating the strategic imperative of elevating Kenya to major non-NATO ally status. In a letter dated May 23, President Biden lauded Kenya's invaluable contributions to regional security efforts, positioning the country as a lynchpin in US counterterrorism initiatives across sub-Saharan Africa.
By bestowing major non-NATO ally status upon Kenya, the US reaffirms its commitment to fostering robust partnerships with African allies, mirroring its engagements with counterparts in other regions.
Within the parliamentary sphere, MPs wield significant influence over the fate of treaties, with three possible courses of action: rejection, unconditional approval, or approval with specific reservations. Each decision holds weighty implications, dictating the subsequent course of action for treaty implementation and ratification.
In the event of rejection, the government is precluded from ratifying the treaty, as mandated by parliamentary resolution. Conversely, unconditional approval triggers expedited steps towards ratification, while approval with reservations introduces nuanced considerations that become integral components of the treaty itself.
