In August 2026, pastoralists from more than 100 countries gathered in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, for the Global Pastoralist Gathering under the International Year of Rangelands and Pastoralists 2026. Their message was not simply about livestock. They called for recognition and protection of pastoralists’ lands and territories, secure mobility, recognition of Indigenous knowledge, meaningful participation of women and youth, stronger governance, and greater investment in pastoral communities
At the UN Convention to Combat Desertification’s COP17, held soon afterwards in Mongolia, the conversation explicitly connected pastoralism with peace. A dedicated session on “Pastoralism for Drought Resilience and Peace” emphasized governance, cooperation and sustainable resource management as foundations for peaceful communities.
For northern Kenya, these messages raise an uncomfortable question: What happens when the very things pastoralists are seeking to protect—land, territory, identity, mobility and political voice—become instruments of electoral competition?
Kenya’s 2027 General Election is still nearly a year away, but political mobilization is already gathering pace. In Marsabit and neighboring Isiolo, alliances are shifting, political actors are positioning themselves, and communities are increasingly being drawn into conversations about political power, representation, and numbers.
The concern is not political competition itself. Democracy requires competition. The danger comes when competition becomes a contest between communities rather than between candidates, policies, and ideas.
When Numbers Become Political
Northern Kenya has a long history of political mobilization through community networks. In some places, negotiated political arrangements have been used to manage competition. Recent analysis notes that such arrangements have become particularly prominent in counties including Marsabit and Isiolo.
But this can become dangerous when elections are framed as struggles over communal numbers, territory, and access to resources.
Who has the largest voting population? Which community will control a particular ward? Who should produce the governor, senator, or Member of Parliament? Who has settled where?
These questions can be legitimate elements of electoral politics. In fragile environments, however, they can acquire a more threatening meaning. A community may begin to see the political growth of another as a threat to its own future.
Political rhetoric therefore matters. When leaders portray opponents as threats to their communities, repeatedly invoke ethnic or clan identity, or present land questions as battles for communal survival, electoral competition can deepen divisions that peacebuilders have spent years trying to reduce. From 2007 to 2008, Kenya experienced a wave of election-related violence between the Kikuyu and Kalenjin ethnic groups, with some 1,200 killed and 500,000 displaced.
When Land Becomes a Political Weapon
Recent developments in Marsabit illustrate why this deserves attention.
In August 2026, a peace forum in the county identified community-land registration disputes, boundary claims, gold-mining tensions, and concerns over carbon-credit revenues among emerging issues requiring attention ahead of the 2027 election. Participants called for continued dialogue and political tolerance, while the Marsabit Peace Committee urged political leaders to avoid statements that could deepen divisions.
These are important issues in their own right. But during an election, land can acquire another dimension. A boundary can become a political boundary. A settlement can become an electoral calculation. A resource dispute can be interpreted through community identity.
This is why early peacebuilding matters. Waiting until violence occurs is too late.
The Warning Signs Are Visible
Recent research offers another reason for vigilance.
A 2026 study in the Journal of Modern African Studies examined the relationship between elite political competition, pastoral networks and violence in northern Kenya. It documents how political interests have interacted with livestock, land and community mobilization, including allegations surrounding livestock movements and attempts to influence settlement patterns in parts of northern Kenya ahead of previous elections.
The lesson is not that pastoralism causes political violence. Rather, political actors can exploit existing social structures and grievances for electoral purposes.
Peacebuilders should therefore watch for early warning signs: inflammatory political language, hostile alliances, claims that another community is “taking over,” politicized land disputes, mobilization around demographic numbers, threats against opponents, and calls for communities to “defend” territory.
Kenya’s National Cohesion and Integration Commission has already begun preparations for a violence-free 2027 election, including efforts addressing hate speech, incitement and political polarization.
From Mongolia to Northern Kenya
The Ulaanbaatar Declaration provides a useful framework for prevention. If pastoralists need secure territories, land grievances should be addressed through transparent legal and community processes rather than political mobilization.
If pastoral mobility is essential to pastoral livelihoods, political leaders should not turn movement and settlement into tools for creating fear. If Indigenous knowledge and community institutions matter, elders and other trusted local actors should be incorporated into early-warning and mediation systems. And if women and youth are recognized globally as essential pastoralist actors, they should not be reduced to campaign crowds. They should have meaningful roles in preventing violence.
The UNCCD’s focus on pastoralism, drought resilience, and peace similarly highlights governance, cooperation and sustainable resource management. For northern Kenya, this means that protecting peace cannot be separated from protecting the relationships through which communities negotiate land, resources, mobility and political coexistence.
Protect the Political Space Before it Becomes a Conflict Space
The most dangerous moment may not be Election Day. It may be the months beforehand, when political narratives are constructed, alliances formed, and communities persuaded to see one another through electoral arithmetic.
There is still time to change the trajectory. Political leaders can compete without turning community identity into a weapon. Elders can insist that political disagreements do not become communal disputes. Religious leaders can challenge inflammatory rhetoric. Women and youth can refuse to become instruments of political mobilization. Civil society and peace committees can identify warning signs early. Government institutions can intervene before rhetoric becomes confrontation.
Most importantly, voters can demand more from those seeking their support: not simply promises about what their community will gain, but a commitment to ensuring that neighboring communities can also live, move, trade, vote and prosper without fear. That may be the deeper lesson from the pastoralists’ gathering in Mongolia.
The main challenges are political will, mistrust among communities, limited resources for sustained grassroots peacebuilding, and the difficulty of preventing inflammatory rhetoric once electoral competition intensifies. There is also a risk that peace initiatives remain largely reactive unless local peace actors, women, youth and community institutions are given the resources and authority to act early.
The main challenges are political will, mistrust among communities, limited resources for sustained grassroots peacebuilding, and the difficulty of preventing inflammatory rhetoric once electoral competition intensifies. There is also a risk that peace initiatives remain largely reactive unless local peace actors, women, youth and community institutions are given the resources and authority to act early.
Pastoralists asked the world to recognize their rights, territories, mobility and voice. Northern Kenya must ensure that these legitimate aspirations do not become ammunition in an increasingly competitive political arena.
Elections should determine who governs—not which community belongs, who controls the land, or who deserves to feel safe. The work of peacebuilding must begin before the first campaign rally. The ballot should be a pathway to representation, not a route to confrontation.
Keywords: Kenya, northern Kenya, pasture, pastoralists, pastoralism, communities, violence, election, election violence, peace, conflict, conflict resolution
Bilinga is a Teacher & an Information Management Specialist from the Northern Kenya. He has a Master of Science in Information Science, a bachelor degree in the same field and several other Diploma and Certificates. He received Head of State Commendation and celebrated as one of the National Hero for his exceptional service on National Cohesion and Integration in 2023 and another Presidential Gold Awardin 2007 for his role in Youth & Women Empowerment. He has written and published several Analytical and Topical articles on Pastoralism, Governance, Climate Change, peaceful Coexistence & Gender Equality in different platforms and newspaper such as The Standard, African Arguments,The Star andThe Elephant.
