Raila calls Uhuru over Miguna issue

 Details have emerged about the phone conversations between Ringa and Uhuru Kenyatta regarding the Miguna issue, and they offer an intriguing look into the situation. According to two separate insider sources, the first call occurred before Ringa had arrived at the airport, and he hadn't yet planned to come there. This call was made in the afternoon, shortly after Miguna's arrival, and it was clear that a crisis was unfolding because Miguna was unable to get through immigration. The president’s response was that he would look into the matter.

The second call, made later when Ringa had already arrived at the airport, suggests that he wanted to assess the situation before reaching out again. When he did, however, Uhuru was reportedly unreachable. It is unclear whether his phone was switched off or if it simply wasn't being picked up, but eventually, Ringa managed to connect with the president via an aide. The president’s response again was that he would look into it. However, the source found this response troubling, as shortly after the second call, a group of individuals began moving toward Miguna, forcibly dragging him toward the tarmac and the Emirates flight. While this situation is still unclear, the source speculated that it escalated after the phone call.

The situation highlights one key takeaway: despite positive responses from Uhuru, no real action was taken, and the situation worsened. It suggests that the president may have been stalling. If the president had truly been interested in resolving the issue, a call from State House would have expedited things. This is evident from past instances like when Johnson Saka intervened to free Babu, demonstrating that calls to State House often lead to swift actions. However, when it came to Miguna, no such magic happened.

There’s a complex dynamic at play, particularly regarding the perception of Miguna as a potential threat to state security. While it’s speculated that powerful factions within State House have influence over decisions, including potentially ignoring court orders, the handling of Miguna’s case shows a clear disregard for constitutional law. The Constitution of 2010 promised a more accountable government, but many argue that the state machinery has failed to adjust, continuing to operate as it did before the new law was passed.

The ongoing political situation is rooted in the failure of the state to adapt to constitutional changes, leading to crises like the one at the airport. This misalignment with the rule of law and the ongoing political maneuvering is a source of national embarrassment.

In another development, the situation in Ukraine is intensifying, with Ukraine's recent missile strikes into Russian territory confirmed by both Moscow and Washington. The change in U.S. policy, allowing Ukraine to strike deeper into Russian territory, has escalated tensions. Moscow responded by lowering the nuclear threshold, signaling a willingness to use nuclear weapons if the country's sovereignty is threatened. As the 1000-day mark of the invasion approaches, leaders around the world are closely monitoring the situation, especially as the G20 summit in Brazil discusses potential solutions. The Kremlin’s growing nuclear rhetoric is a clear warning, and world leaders must now navigate the uncertain future of this conflict.

In Ukraine, Russia's territorial gains have been significant, with nearly 2,000 square kilometers seized in 2024 alone. While the cost of this advance is high, Moscow appears determined to continue, with President Trump’s potential return to power adding another layer of unpredictability. His statements about ending the war could shift the balance of power in negotiations, with territory being a crucial bargaining chip. The escalating tensions, both on the battlefield and in political rhetoric, suggest that the conflict is far from over, and the world is watching closely as these unpredictable developments unfold.