From “Tunataka Power” to “We Want Respect”: ODM’s Shifting Tone

From “Tunataka Power” to “We Want Respect”: Orange Democratic Movement Recalibrates Its Strategy Amid United Democratic Alliance Zoning Tensions

In Kenyan politics, slogans are never just words. They are signals of mood, strategy, and direction. For years, the rallying cry “tunataka power” defined the posture of Orange Democratic Movement—a party built on agitation, resistance, and the pursuit of state power. Today, however, a subtle but telling shift is emerging. The tone has softened, the language recalibrated, and the message reframed toward something less confrontational but equally strategic: a demand for respect.

This evolution has not happened in isolation. It is unfolding against the backdrop of intensifying political maneuvering by United Democratic Alliance, the ruling party, whose zoning strategy is increasingly shaping the national political conversation. Zoning, in this context, refers to the informal but influential practice of determining which regions or political actors are “allocated” certain seats or spheres of influence ahead of elections or political realignments. While not new in Kenyan politics, its recent application has stirred unease within ODM ranks.

At the heart of this shift is the relationship between ODM and the ruling establishment led by William Ruto. Not long ago, ODM’s posture toward the government was defined by open confrontation. Mass rallies, sharp criticism, and a clear positioning as the alternative government were the order of the day. The message was straightforward: power must change hands. But recent developments suggest a recalibration—one that reflects both political realities and strategic patience.

ODM leader Raila Odinga has, in recent months, adopted a more measured tone. While not abandoning criticism of government policy, he has increasingly emphasized dialogue, inclusion, and mutual respect in political engagement. This change has filtered down through the party’s leadership, with several key figures echoing the same sentiments. The rhetoric has shifted from outright demands for power to calls for recognition, fairness, and dignity within the broader political framework.

Part of this transformation can be traced to UDA’s zoning approach, which has been perceived by ODM insiders as an attempt to encroach on traditional strongholds and redefine political alliances. In regions long considered ODM bastions, there have been growing concerns about external influence and strategic positioning by the ruling party. This has created tension, but also forced ODM to rethink its approach. Rather than responding with outright confrontation, the party appears to be choosing a more nuanced path—asserting its presence while avoiding direct escalation.

This is where the phrase “we want respect” becomes significant. It is not a retreat from ambition, but a reframing of priorities. Respect, in this context, encompasses recognition of ODM’s political weight, acknowledgment of its support base, and inclusion in national decision-making processes. It is a demand to be treated not as an adversary to be sidelined, but as a key stakeholder in the country’s political future.

Critics, however, argue that this shift risks being interpreted as a softening of the party’s stance. For a movement that has historically thrived on assertiveness and mass mobilization, any perceived moderation can raise questions among supporters. There is a delicate balance to maintain—between appearing statesmanlike and being seen as conceding ground. ODM’s leadership is clearly aware of this tension, which explains the careful calibration of its messaging.

At the same time, the broader political environment may be necessitating this change. Kenya is emerging from a period marked by economic strain, public dissatisfaction, and political fatigue. In such a climate, there is growing appetite among citizens for stability and constructive engagement rather than constant confrontation. ODM’s shift in tone could therefore be seen as an attempt to align with this sentiment, positioning itself as a responsible and mature political force.

The relationship between ODM and UDA is also becoming more complex. While still fundamentally competitors, there are increasing instances of indirect cooperation, particularly in legislative processes and national conversations. This does not amount to a formal alliance, but it does indicate a recognition that absolute antagonism may not always serve either side’s interests. In this evolving dynamic, language matters—and ODM’s move from “power” to “respect” reflects an understanding of that reality.

Yet, beneath the surface, the core objectives remain largely unchanged. ODM still seeks influence, relevance, and ultimately a pathway to leadership. What has changed is the method of pursuit. The party appears to be investing more in negotiation, strategic positioning, and long-term engagement rather than immediate confrontation. It is a shift from urgency to endurance, from slogans to strategy.

As the zoning debate continues to unfold, it will test the resilience and adaptability of ODM’s new approach. If the party can successfully assert its space while maintaining a tone of measured engagement, it may redefine its role in Kenya’s political landscape. However, if the strategy is perceived as indecision or weakness, it could open the door for rivals to capitalize.

For now, the transition from “tunataka power” to “we want respect” captures a moment of introspection within ODM—a recognition that political strength is not only about the loudness of demands, but also about the clarity of purpose and the ability to navigate shifting realities. In a landscape where alliances are fluid and strategies constantly evolving, this shift may well prove to be less of a retreat and more of a repositioning for what lies ahead.