US-Kenya Security Pact and Counterterrorism in East Africa and its wider Geopolitical Implications
May 25, 2025 - Written by Jasleen Gill
Introduction
In the context of intensifying global competition and regional insecurity, particularly within the Horn of Africa, the 2025 US-Kenya security pact, can not be viewed in isolation. It is part of a larger trend where Western powers, re-evaluating their foreign policy postures after setbacks in the Middle East and Afghanistan, are turning toward “strategic outsourcing” and partnering with local powers to serve as bulwarks against terrorism and instability. Kenya’s increasing engagement mirrors similar securitisation trends seen in Nigeria, Egypt, and even smaller partners like Djibouti and Niger. Yet, unlike in previous decades, these partnerships now carry heavier implications for domestic governance, civil-military relations, and long term regional security arrangements.
The US-Kenya security pact highlights the growing shift in global power dynamics, where smaller regional players, like Kenya, are being increasingly integrated into the security policies of larger powers. However, this brings to fore several questions about the long-term viability of such partnerships. In a world where global powers are becoming more unpredictable and the nature of conflict is increasingly non-traditional, the US-Kenya pact may serve as a useful model for flexible, regional security alliances. Yet, it also places significant pressure on Kenya to maintain its sovereignty and develop firm security infrastructures that do not depend excessively on foreign powers.
Contextual Analysis
The US-Kenya security pact, renewed and expanded in 2023 and deepened in 2025, was born of necessity and strategic calculation. Kenya has long been a frontline state in the global ‘war on terror,’ particularly since the 1998 US embassy bombings in Nairobi. The rise of al-Shabaab and its deadly attacks, most infamously the 2013 Westgate Mall siege and the 2019 DusitD2 complex attack, strongly entrenched terrorism as a national and regional security priority.
The 2023 memorandum signed by then US Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin, and former Kenyan Defence Cabinet Secretary, Aden Duale, marked a significant pivot. It moved beyond logistical cooperation to include intelligence sharing, joint drone operations, expanded US training of Kenyan Special Forces, and cyber-defence. This strategic deepening aligns with Washington’s broader aim to reduce boots-on-the-ground commitments in volatile regions while still maintaining influence and operational reach.
The expansion of the US-Kenya security relationship indicates the US’s shift towards more sustainable, indirect approaches to global security. The importance of Kenya within US strategy as a regional partner can not be overstated; however, this raises key questions about dependency. The long-term implications of an increasingly militarised counter-terrorism strategy in Kenya could lead to domestic backlash and regional instability if not balanced with efforts to address the underlying socio-economic issues contributing to extremism. In a world increasingly questioning military interventions and their human costs, a nuanced approach that balances hard and soft power becomes essential for sustainable peace.
Core Analysis
Kenya’s counterterrorism policies, while increasingly sophisticated, face complex dilemmas. A key criticism is the reliance on hard power approaches to solve fundamental socio-political problems. For example, while military action has disrupted al-Shabaab networks, it has also driven recruitment through narratives of victimisation, particularly among marginalised Muslim communities.
Additionally, integrating US surveillance technologies - such as ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance) systems and biometric databases - into Kenyan security infrastructure raises significant data privacy concerns. Civil society groups have raised alarms about the unchecked accumulation of personal data, fearing that such tools could be used to stifle dissent beyond terrorism cases.
Kenya’s “Usalama Watch” operations, particularly after the Westgate attack, involved mass roundups and detentions of ethnic Somalis, sparking widespread allegations of ethnic profiling and extrajudicial practices. This approach persists in modified forms, with an emphasis on pre-emptive detentions and intelligence-driven targeting that lacks sufficient judicial oversight.
While Kenya’s military and intelligence capabilities have undoubtedly improved through US collaboration, there is a looming challenge in terms of human rights and governance. The adoption of surveillance technology and militarised policing models without adequate oversight or transparency may end up eroding the very democratic ideals the country seeks to uphold. In the current global order, where democracy and human rights are often seen as indicators of stability, Kenya risks falling into the trap of sacrificing its long-term political stability in the name of short-term security gains. To balance this, it would be prudent for Kenya to invest more in significant legal frameworks that can ensure oversight of security operations.
Key Players and Stakeholders
United States: The US under the Biden administration designated Kenya as a "major non-NATO ally," making it the first sub-Saharan African country to receive this status. This move bolsters US-Kenya relations amidst the growing influence of Russia and China in Africa. The designation was announced during Kenyan President William Ruto's state visit to Washington, D.C., in May 2024. Additionally, the US pledged $300 million in support as Kenya prepared to send up to 1,000 police officers to Haiti to help stabilise the security situation.
Kenya: Under President William Ruto, Kenya is actively participating in the US-led multinational force in Haiti, deploying approximately 400 officers to combat gang violence. Despite the commitment to send up to 1,000 personnel, the mission faced significant funding shortages and challenges in meeting the pledged numbers. Domestically, Kenya continues to enhance its counterterrorism capabilities, including participation in bilateral exchanges on Joint Terrorism Task Force operations with the US Department of Justice and the FBI.
African Union (AU): While not a direct party to the US-Kenya pact, the AU's counterterrorism architecture is influenced by Kenya's military prominence. The AU Peace and Security Council looks to Kenya for operational leadership in East African missions, especially as funding from traditional donors becomes uncertain. However, Kenya's good bilateral relations with the US raises questions about the AU's neutrality and the perception of multilateralism in counterterrorism operations.
European Union (EU): The EU, through its Regional Counter Terrorism Strategy for the Horn of Africa and Yemen, has engaged Kenya in capacity-building initiatives. However, the EU's approach is generally more focused on civilian-led governance reforms and prevention of radicalisation. This occasionally creates friction when European partners view US-led militarisation as overly aggressive or lacking attention to human rights.
Local Communities: At the grassroots level, communities in counties like Wajir, Lamu, and Garissa often bear the brunt of both terrorist attacks and counterterrorism responses. Community leaders have repeatedly called for inclusive dialogue, investment in infrastructure, and job creation as more effective tools against radicalisation. The disconnect between national-level security strategies and local community needs remains a critical gap.
The key stakeholders in this security pact reveal a complex web of interests that are sometimes in tension with one another. Kenya's role as a partner to the US is strategically significant, but it also raises concerns about national sovereignty, regional dynamics, and the future of African-led peacekeeping initiatives. The African Union's increasing reliance on Kenya could lead to perceptions of Western influence over continental security agendas, creating friction with other African states. As global power centres shift, Kenya may face increasing pressure to balance relations between China, the EU, and the US. In navigating these challenges, Kenya must find ways to ensure that its domestic policies are aligned with its foreign partnerships without compromising its sovereignty.
Military, Economic, and Social Dimensions
Expanding Military Doctrine
Kenya’s military doctrine is evolving rapidly, incorporating elements of asymmetric warfare, urban combat, and cyber defence. New doctrines are being written with US assistance to reflect modern threat environments. These include joint command structures, expanded use of drones, and electronic warfare capabilities. The shift from a defensive to a proactive security posture marks a transformation in Kenya’s military identity.
Long-Term Economic Trade-offs
Security partnerships often involve opportunity costs. For instance, while Kenya receives military aid and training, it must also align procurement and policy decisions with donor expectations. This can stifle local defence industries or lead to overdependence on Western technology. Transparency in military spending remains a concern. Civil society watchdogs have warned that opaque defence budgets and procurement processes risk increased opportunities for corruption.
Impact on National Identity
The militarisation of counterterrorism is reshaping national narratives. Patriotism, often defined through sacrifice in the fight against terror, is becoming a central theme in political rhetoric. While this may boost morale and public support, it can also marginalise dissenting voices. Kenyan Muslims, in particular, have expressed concern that they are unfairly portrayed in national security discourses, leading to stigma and alienation.
The militarisation of counterterrorism in Kenya raises concerns about its long-term impact on the social-fabric of the state and national identity discourse. As Kenya becomes increasingly reliant on foreign security assistance, the economic and political costs will also become more pronounced. There is a need for deeper reflection on how military expansion aligns with broader economic and social development goals. For example, the trade-offs between security spending and addressing the root causes of terrorism, such as poverty and unemployment, need more attention. In the broader global context, where militarised interventions are increasingly being questioned, Kenya must look beyond just a militaristic solution and focus on more inclusive and sustainable security measures.
Opportunities and Risks
Opportunities:
Technological Transfer: The partnership provides opportunities for Kenya to acquire cutting-edge surveillance and cybersecurity technologies, potentially boosting capabilities across sectors such as border control and critical infrastructure protection.
Training and Professionalization: US-funded academies and joint exercises promote the professionalisation of Kenya’s military and police forces, introducing best practices and reducing corruption risks.
Soft Power Gains: Kenya can leverage its role as a US ally to influence global forums on security, including the UN Security Council, where it has advocated for African-led solutions to terrorism.
Risks:
Backlash from Extremist Groups: The more visibly Kenya aligns with the US, the more it risks becoming a high-profile target for retaliatory attacks.
Geopolitical Tug-of-War: Kenya’s deepening ties with the US might alienate other global powers, notably China, with whom it has significant trade and infrastructure ties.
Internal Political Weaponisation: There is also the risk that counterterrorism frameworks will be used to suppress political dissent, particularly ahead of contentious elections.
The opportunities presented by the US-Kenya pact come with significant risks, particularly in the context of a rapidly changing geopolitical landscape. Kenya’s role as a regional security leader is likely to grow, but this will require a delicate balancing act between international partnerships and domestic interests. As other global powers, such as China and Russia, continue to expand their influence in Africa, Kenya must be prepared to navigate an increasingly multipolar world without compromising its own political and economic autonomy.
Policy Recommendations
1. Strengthen Oversight Mechanisms: Kenya needs to make sure that its security operations remain transparent and accountable. This includes reinforcing civil military relations and expanding judicial oversight of counterterrorism practices.
2. Prioritise Development and Governance: To complement its security strategy, Kenya should prioritise addressing the socio-economic roots of radicalisation, including unemployment, underdevelopment, and political exclusion.
3. Diversify Foreign Partnerships: While the US-Kenya security pact provides benefits, Kenya should also diversify its security partnerships, including with regional players like Ethiopia, to maintain autonomy and reduce reliance on a single foreign partner.
Policy recommendations must consider the complex and evolving nature of security challenges in East Africa. While the US-Kenya security pact offers tangible benefits, Kenya’s long-term security depends not only on military assistance but also on its ability to address structural factors that fuel extremism and social unrest. In the current geopolitical context, where alliances are increasingly fluid and the global order unpredictable, Kenya must ensure that its security policies are adaptive and resilient.
Conclusion
The US-Kenya security pact and the broader militarisation of counterterrorism in East Africa present both opportunities and challenges. As Kenya navigates the complexities of its international alliances, it must maintain a careful balance between enhancing its security capabilities and protecting its democratic values. The success of this partnership will ultimately hinge on Kenya’s ability to integrate military power with soft power, ensuring that counterterrorism strategies do not undermine its long-term political stability or erode public trust.
As the world grapples with evolving threats from non-state actors and shifting global power dynamics, Kenya’s experience could serve as a critical case study. Its ability to integrate international cooperation with domestic priorities could provide important lessons for other nations in the region and beyond.