📷 Image Credits: The Hindu
The recent protests in Kenya against a new finance Bill introduced by President William Ruto’s government have shed light on the growing discontent among the Kenyan population. The demonstrations, which spread across the country and even saw attempts to storm the Parliament in Nairobi, resulted in 30 deaths and over 200 injuries. President Ruto ultimately backed down from signing the controversial Bill, which aimed to raise taxes on essential items. Despite this, the protesters are now calling for his resignation, viewing him as more loyal to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) than to the people of Kenya. The sentiment among the protesters was clear, as a sign read, ‘Kenya is not IMF’s lab rat.’ The anger towards the IMF stems from the conditions attached to the loans provided to developing countries. In the case of Kenya, the IMF had imposed austerity measures as part of the loan agreement, leading to cuts in subsidies, tax hikes, and budget reductions in vital sectors like education and health. President Ruto, in compliance with the IMF directives, implemented these measures, which resulted in massive backlash and protests. These protests have not only been witnessed in Kenya but also in other developing countries that have been recipients of IMF loans. The unequal power dynamics within the IMF, where voting rights are based on contribution quotas rather than democratic principles, have been a point of contention for many countries. The dominance of wealthy Western nations in decision-making processes has led to a sense of disenfranchisement among the nations most affected by IMF policies. The IMF’s history of imposing Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) on developing countries has been widely criticized for exacerbating poverty and inequality. These programs, which require governments to cut public spending, privatize state enterprises, and focus on export-led growth, have had detrimental effects on local populations. Despite facing criticism and backlash, the IMF continues to impose austerity measures, leading to further hardship for the most vulnerable. The protests in Kenya serve as a reminder of the challenges faced by developing countries in asserting their sovereignty and economic independence in the face of IMF interference. The discontent and resistance seen in Kenya are not isolated incidents but part of a larger global movement against the IMF’s influence on economic policies in low and middle-income nations. The unrest in Kenya highlights the urgent need for a reevaluation of the IMF’s role and the impact of its policies on the people of developing countries.
