President William Ruto’s recent declaration, “Mtu ningeshindana na yeye ni Raila Odinga. Lakini sasa hawa (United Opposition) nitawamalizia asubuhi na mapema,” has sparked widespread debate across the country. The statement, which translates to “The only person I could compete with is Raila Odinga. But these others (United Opposition), I will finish them early in the morning,” reveals much about the current state of Kenya’s political opposition and Ruto’s growing confidence as head of state.
Ruto’s message carries both political weight and strategic undertones. For years, Raila Odinga has stood as the face of opposition politics in Kenya, often seen as the only figure capable of mobilizing mass support against the government of the day. By singling him out as a worthy opponent, President Ruto not only acknowledges Raila’s political influence but also underscores the vacuum left in the opposition since Raila’s apparent shift toward a more cooperative stance with the government.
The president’s confidence in “finishing” the United Opposition “asubuhi na mapema” (early in the morning) reflects his growing political dominance. Since taking office, Ruto has worked to consolidate his power by courting regional leaders, strengthening his party’s grassroots networks, and using development projects as tools of political persuasion. His statement may therefore be seen as both a warning and a show of strength — signaling that any fragmented or disorganized opposition would stand little chance against his well-structured political machinery.
However, critics argue that Ruto’s comments expose a worrying trend in Kenya’s democracy. A strong opposition is a cornerstone of accountability and transparency in governance. Without a vibrant opposition, the government risks operating without effective checks and balances. Some analysts view Ruto’s remarks as an attempt to delegitimize dissenting voices and weaken alternative political movements that could hold his administration to account.
On the other hand, supporters of the president interpret his words as a mark of confidence and leadership. They argue that Ruto’s statement simply reflects the current reality — that the opposition lacks unity, clear leadership, and a coherent agenda to challenge his administration. From this perspective, Ruto’s dominance is a natural outcome of strategic political organization rather than suppression of opponents.
President Ruto’s statement serves as both a political boast and a mirror reflecting Kenya’s shifting political dynamics. It highlights the decline of a once-powerful opposition movement and the emergence of a president increasingly comfortable in his command. Whether this confidence strengthens Kenya’s political stability or erodes democratic competitiveness remains to be seen. What is clear, however, is that Ruto’s words have reignited a national conversation about leadership, opposition, and the future of political contest in Kenya.
