APCJ_1528_Win2010_00i_122_4 12/30/10 3:22 PM Page 87 Violence as a Bargaining Tool: The Role of Youths in the 2007 Kenyan Elections 87 As active participants on the frontlines, women propagated acts of revenge, betrayed victims to their assailants, mobilized youth, protested in the streets, helped barricade roads, threw stones, and generated false alarms by wailing, to provoke strong feelings for revenge among their male counterparts. They were also caregivers to family victims, children, and the elderly and provided food to fighters and those affected by the violence. A number of women actively participated in peace efforts. In the opinion of 33 percent of respondents’, women were thought to be assets for initiating dialogue, as they were viewed as forgiving easily and having influence over men, especially regarding their involvement in violence. ELECTORAL POLITICS AND CONFLICT It is important to consider the environment before, during, and after the 2007 elections in trying to understand what guided youths’ participation in violence across the country after the balloting. Laurie Nathan argues that failing to adequately address historical injustices and exclusion within the framework of state formation and nation building can lead to dire consequences in the form of conflict that leaves society deeply divided.42 The electoral process the world over can be viewed as a vehicle to legitimate power by presenting to the citizenry a case against one’s political opponents. In nominal democracies, such as those found in many countries in Africa, it is often more than an opportunity to settle political scores; it is also a way to address inequalities and offer hope to those marginalized by the exclusive nature of governing regimes. Given these perspectives, one can begin to grasp why violence erupted in Kenya: A change in government raised fears of possible reprisals among the ruling class and beneficiaries of the system while offering to others the chance to escape from poverty and marginalization after years of exclusion. Electoral politics play a significant role in conflict management in divided societies. The design and structure of an electoral system are key variables in creating conditions conducive or unfavorable to violence. Kenya’s winner-take-all system raises the stakes, turning the electoral process into vicious campaigns that deeply divide the society. John Oucho asserts that in instances where KANU won a general election, it often punished areas with a strong opposition by denying them government resources. Kenya is diverse in class structure, ethno-regional differences, and economic well-being and ripe with inequality.43 Its socio-economic character has been shaped by public policy choices made and pursued by government and incentives provided to individuals, institutions, and groups based on their political affiliation. Politicians promoted a multiparty facade in the 1990s, but continued to use denial of government resources as a political instrument. For privileged youths in leadership positions, the system was a means to quick wealth acquisition. For instance, Youth for KANU in the 1990s produced a notable crop of young politicians who were handsomely rewarded by the Moi regime for their efforts during the campaign that helped KANU clinch victory. Youth for KANU 1992, commonly known as YK’92, was headed by William Ruto, a prominent politician, and Cyrus Jirongo, a successful businessman 42. Nathan, ‘The four horsemen of the Apocalypse’. 43. Oucho, Undercurrents of Ethnic Conflicts in Kenya.