Title: Behind the Curtain: Why Kenya Was Sent to South Sudan

In early 2025, Kenya sent former Prime Minister Raila Odinga as a mediator to South Sudan. The international headlines called it “an African-led peace effort,” but the real question is: why Kenya? Why now? And who truly benefits from Kenya’s involvement?

To understand Kenya’s mission in South Sudan, one must start by acknowledging a simple truth: Kenya no longer acts independently on regional matters—it acts on behalf of its Western sponsors. This is not diplomacy born from Pan-African values; this is geopolitics scripted in Washington, London, and Brussels.

Kenya is a long-standing strategic ally of the United States and the United Kingdom. Its capital is crawling with foreign embassies, intelligence personnel, and NGO liaisons. Its military receives U.S. training and funding. Most significantly, AFRICOM’s East Africa regional operations are headquartered in Kenya, making it a nerve center for surveillance, drone activity, and command-and-control operations in the Horn of Africa.

When Raila Odinga was tapped to “mediate” in South Sudan, it was not Kenya asserting leadership—it was the West repositioning its loyal proxy to contain a region that threatens to veer off script.

South Sudan is no ordinary conflict zone. It is a country with vast oil reserves, situated near the Nile, and bordering regions that are highly contested by global superpowers. Since gaining independence in 2011, South Sudan has struggled with internal instability. But that instability has never been without foreign fingerprints.

The United States was one of the loudest cheerleaders for South Sudan’s independence. But soon after, it became clear that the new nation was not meant to function as a sovereign power. It was meant to be managed—like a mining outpost, not a country.

Kenya’s role in this management plan has been growing steadily. Kenyan banks hold South Sudanese oil revenue. Kenyan troops patrol buffer zones under regional missions. And now, with Odinga at the helm of negotiations, Kenya has officially been handed the task of ensuring South Sudan’s leadership remains aligned with Western-approved agendas.

What South Sudan actually needs—healing, reconciliation, and grassroots governance—is being replaced with elite negotiations brokered by outsiders. Kenya, in this context, is not bringing peace. It’s bringing containment.

This isn’t new. The West has always used “friendly” African states to manage the fallout of its own imperial designs. During the Cold War, the U.S. used Zaire (now DRC) to disrupt Angola and Mozambique. Today, it uses Kenya and Rwanda to police the Great Lakes and Horn regions.

In both cases, the outcomes are predictable:

• Sovereign countries are destabilized.

• Resources are secured for foreign investors.

• Narratives are managed through media spin.

• 
  

Kenya’s intervention in South Sudan follows this pattern precisely. It’s not about building peace—it’s about preserving Western dominance over oil, trade corridors, and regional alignment.

Meanwhile, African leaders who dare step out of line are vilified, sanctioned, or replaced. The West does not want peace in South Sudan. It wants predictable chaos, controlled through Kenya—a nation whose loyalty is purchased through military aid, debt relief, and diplomatic prestige.

Until we call it what it is, we will remain trapped. Kenya’s mission in South Sudan is not Pan-African. It is Western-approved mediation disguised as diplomacy. And South Sudanese sovereignty is the price.

African unity cannot be brokered by proxies. It must rise from truth, from memory, and from the refusal to let our nations be used as tools in someone else’s war.