Ruto Beijing U-turn: From critic to courtier

President Ruto’s return to Beijing this week marks a striking transformation in Kenya’s foreign policy posture—one that’s raising eyebrows both at home and abroad.
The visit, wrapped in the formalities of a state occasion, carries with it the unmistakable tone of economic desperation. With a metaphorical begging bowl in hand, Ruto’s about-face underscores the complex entanglements of global diplomacy, domestic pressure, and the harsh realities of governance.
Just two years ago, on the campaign trail, Ruto took aim at China with the rhetorical flourish common in electoral politics. He painted Beijing as part of Kenya’s debt problem, accusing the previous administration of mortgaging national sovereignty in exchange for opaque infrastructure deals.
He promised a new chapter—one that would prioritize fiscal prudence, transparency, and a diversified portfolio of development partners. Beijing, in Ruto’s framing, symbolized everything wrong with Kenya’s economic trajectory.
But geopolitics has little patience for campaign bombast.
Now firmly seated in State House, Ruto is learning that leadership demands more than slogans. Kenya’s economy is in a tight squeeze. The country faces mounting debt, a depreciating shilling, rising costs of living, and an increasingly frustrated population.
His administration’s attempts at austerity—while hailed by some international institutions—have done little to ease the pain on the streets of Nairobi and beyond.
The electorate is growing restless. From urban traders to rural farmers, the sentiment is increasingly sour: promises have not translated into relief. And with the 2027 general election creeping ever closer, the political calculus is shifting. The time for ideological purism is over; pragmatism now reigns.
China, with its deep pockets and a track record of delivering infrastructure at scale, remains an indispensable partner for many African states, Kenya included. Despite criticism of its lending practices and the ballooning debt associated with the Belt and Road Initiative, Beijing offers something that the West often does not: speed, scale, and minimal political conditions.
And Ruto, it appears, is no longer in a position to say no.
Yet this return to Beijing carries political risk. Opposition leaders have already seized on the trip as evidence of hypocrisy, lambasting the president for what they call “economic somersaults.”
Civil society groups, meanwhile, warn that renewed Chinese engagement without strong oversight could plunge the country deeper into a debt trap.
But Ruto seems willing to take the gamble.
Reports indicate that the state visit includes negotiations for new concessional loans, particularly aimed at completing stalled infrastructure projects—some of which began under his predecessor, Uhuru Kenyatta. These projects, Ruto now argues, are crucial to spurring economic growth and job creation. In short, he’s betting that visible progress will buy him political breathing room.
Still, the optics are hard to ignore. For a leader who once decried Chinese-funded megaprojects as symbols of state capture and fiscal recklessness, returning to the same source cap-in-hand speaks volumes. It reveals the limits of campaign rhetoric in the face of economic reality. More profoundly, it illustrates how Kenya, like many developing nations, must navigate a global order where options are limited and sovereignty often comes with a price tag.
Diplomatically, Ruto’s China visit also signals a recalibration of Kenya’s international alignments. While his early months in office emphasized ties with the West—particularly through enhanced relations with the U.S. and European Union—this renewed courtship of Beijing suggests a balancing act. Kenya, it seems, is returning to its non-aligned roots, playing multiple powers against each other in hopes of extracting the best deals.
Whether this strategy yields results remains to be seen. What is clear, however, is that the stakes are high. If Ruto succeeds in securing favorable terms and spurring economic momentum, he may yet regain the political initiative. If not, he risks reinforcing the very narrative his opponents are crafting: that he is a man of broken promises, forced to swallow his own words.
As Kenyans watch closely, the message is unmistakable: campaign slogans may win elections, but governing requires compromise. Ruto’s journey from Beijing-basher to Beijing-backer is not just a tale of political reversal—it’s a cautionary story about the brutal pragmatism of power.
In many ways, it mirrors the broader African experience in the 21st century. Faced with rising expectations, limited resources, and a shifting global landscape, leaders across the continent are forced to make uneasy choices.
Ruto’s China pivot is just the latest example,w
hat happens next depends not just on what Ruto brings back from Beijing, but how he sells it at home. He will need to convince a skeptical public that renewed Chinese engagement is not a retreat, but a recalibration. That this is not surrender, but strategy. And that the road to 2027 may very well run through the corridors of the Great Hall of the People.