Leader of Vote Count in Kenya Faces U.S. With Tough Choices

NAIROBI, Kenya — He has been charged with heinous crimes, accused of using a vast fortune to bankroll death squads that slaughtered women and children. His running mate also faces charges of crimes against humanity, and as Kenya’s election drew closer, the Obama administration’s top official for Africa issued a thinly veiled warning during a conference call about the vote, saying that Kenyans are, of course, free to pick their own leaders but that “choices have consequences.”

Multimedia

Slide Show

Kenyan Election May Offer U.S. Tough Choice

• Slide Show: Millions Vote in Highly Anticipated Kenyan Election

• Video: Kenyan Voters Speak

• Graphic: Kenya’s Ethnic Groups

• Map: Kenya

Related

• On Eve of Vote, Fragile Valley in Kenya Faces New Divisions (March 3, 2013)

Related in Opinion

• Latitude: Precautionary Tales (March 4, 2013)

Connect With Us on Twitter

Follow @nytimesworld for international breaking news and headlines.

Twitter List: Reporters and Editors

Enlarge This Image

Simon Maina/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Presidential candidate Uhuru Kenyatta has been charged with heinous crimes and accused of using a vast fortune to bankroll death squads that slaughtered women and children. More Photos »

But when the ballot counting began this week, Uhuru Kenyatta, the son of Kenya’s first president, surged ahead in the race for president and stayed out front as the margin narrowed early on Friday. Soon, the Obama administration and its allies could face a tough choice, made even more complicated by the appearance of taking sides against a candidate who may very well win.

Does the United States put a premium on its commitment to justice and ending impunity — as it has emphasized across the continent — and distance itself from Mr. Kenyatta should he clinch this election?

Or would that put at risk all the other strategic American interests vested in Kenya, a vital ally in a volatile region and a crucial hub for everything from billion-dollar health programs and American corporations to spying on agents of Al Qaeda?

Even the little things could be tricky. Are the American diplomats who interact with the Kenyan government on a daily basis not supposed to shake Mr. Kenyatta’s hand? What about sharing a dais with him? The British have already publicly stated that they will avoid any contact unless it is essential.

“This is going to pose a very awkward situation,” said Jendayi Frazer, a former assistant secretary of state for African affairs. “Kenyatta knows he needs the United States, and the United States knows it needs Kenya.”

American officials have declined to discuss publicly what a Kenyatta victory would mean, and several reiterated the rather anodyne video message from President Obama in February, in which he said, “The choice of who will lead Kenya is up to the Kenyan people.”

But Johnnie Carson, the top administration official for Africa, was not quite so diplomatic when he repeatedly warned soon after that “choices have consequences,” which critics say backfired by energizing supporters of Mr. Kenyatta and his running mate, William Ruto, driving many to the polls to rally behind them. “When you inject yourself into an election,” Ms. Frazer said, “you never know how it will play.”

Mr. Carson responded, “One comment does not swing a contest.”

If he wins the presidency, Mr. Kenyatta, who was leading with 50 percent of the vote on Friday, would become the second African head of state after Sudan’s Omar Hassan al-Bashir to face grave charges at the International Criminal Court at The Hague. But that does not mean he will meet the same diplomatic isolation as Mr. Bashir, who is wanted on an arrest warrant and cannot travel to much of the world.

For starters, Mr. Bashir has refused to appear at the court, while Mr. Kenyatta has traveled there to defend himself, so no warrant has been issued. Beyond that, the United States and Sudan were hardly allies when Mr. Bashir was accused of fomenting genocide in Darfur. The relationship was already sour, with Sudan squeezed by sanctions for playing host to Osama bin Laden, among other things.

By contrast, the American-Kenyan partnership has been a particularly symbiotic one, especially recently. American intelligence agents work closely with their Kenyan counterparts, hunting down Qaeda cells in Kenya and Somalia. Kenya receives nearly $1 billion in American aid each year and has agreed to accept captured Somali pirates and hundreds of thousands of refugees, at the request of donors like the United States.

Nairobi, Kenya’s capital, is home to the largest American Embassy in sub-Saharan Africa and a sprawling United Nations campus that runs programs across the world, making it especially difficult for the United States to take its resources somewhere else.

“There is really very little leverage that the U.S. and other countries can exercise,” said J. Peter Pham, director of the Michael S. Ansari Africa Center in Washington.

One former American official with extensive experience in Africa was more blunt. “We need Kenya more than Kenya needs us,” he said.

The United States has to be careful how it handles the Kenyatta issue, analysts say, because Mr. Kenyatta could easily turn to China, which has made important inroads here, building highways and even covertly financing some Kenyan military operations.

Already, the Western concerns about Mr. Kenyatta’s candidacy seem to be provoking a backlash.

On Wednesday, the Kenyatta campaign accused the British high commissioner here of “shadowy, suspicious and rather animated involvement” in Kenya’s election, a claim the British dismissed as “entirely false.”