Shared interests of Kenya, Uganda must be protected 

Observers can be forgiven for viewing last week’s torching of Uganda House in the Kenyan capital, Nairobi, amid the so-called bread riots finding another gear, as a metaphor for what once was. 

While Kampala, in a statement, offered support to the Ruto administration that had been forced into a defensive crouch by disgruntled Gen Zers, it is evident that in recent times both Uganda and Kenya have laboured mightily to remain on the same page.

This week Uganda will receive a little over 120,000 metric tonnes of petroleum products (petrol and diesel) aboard two vessels docked at the Kenyan seaport of Mombasa. In a bid to lower pump prices, the Uganda National Oil Company (Unoc) in tandem with Vitol Bahrain went to great lengths to secure a licence from Nairobi. It even sought redress from the East Africa Court of Justice (EACJ) once a licence was not granted.

While that impasse was eventually resolved through diplomatic channels, suspicious glances have continued to be exchanged by the two neighbouring countries. 

The revelation this week that Unoc will not invoice Kenyan oil marketing companies will be seen as testament to a protectionist shift. This, of course, is the same accusation that was levied against Nairobi when it came to light that Brookside Limited, despite or in fact because it is owned by parent company Brookside Dairy of Kenya, has had up to 114 export permits turned down by the Kenya Dairy Board since last March.

It is foolhardy to expect such inwardness not to represent a clear and present danger to trade opportunities between two countries that claim to have shared interests. For one, Uganda stands to lose billions of shillings thanks to the milk war. Specifically, provisional figures from Kenya indicate that imports from Uganda declined 9.09 percent year-on-year in the three months to March 2024 (i.e. the first quarter of the year). 

While it would be a stretch to say that relations are on a downward spiral without any possibility of recovery, there is sufficient evidence to force a face that betrays a mixture of annoyance and concern. In May, after piling one bilateral agreement on the back of another, it seemed as if the historical ties between Uganda and Kenya had received a much-needed tonic. Yet two steps have since been taken back for the one majestically mustered in front. Cloak-and-dagger intrigues speak to frosty receptions on either side of the aisle.

Evidently, the Foreign Affairs and East African Affairs ministries in both countries have their work cut out. Both Kampala and Nairobi have got to get back in the business of ensuring that shared interests do not take root in barren soil. While either country has every right to prioritise the interests of its citizens, the bigger picture should ensure that the door is at least left ajar not to ensure that a zero-sum game is not fashioned.

If, in all of this, what once was a delicate balance continues to be upset, options will be limited and rarely in ways that make both countries financially stronger. Like Uganda House and its charred remains in Nairobi, things will go up in smoke in more ways than one.