Opinion - Kenya’s Oil Illusion: Stability Claims in a World Already in Crisis

Kenya, 3 April 2026 - There’s something deeply unsettling about Kenya’s crisis management posture, and perhaps even more unsettling is how comfortable it appears.

In a world that is clearly on the edge, reacting, adjusting and in some cases panicking, Kenya seems… settled. Almost at ease. As if the storm everyone else is scrambling to navigate is somehow passing us by.

Or is it?

Because one cannot help but wonder: are we witnessing calm confidence, or quiet denial?

Is this composure a sign of strong internal controls, or simply a reluctance to confront an uncomfortable reality?

Are we dealing with a crisis that has not yet arrived, or one that has already arrived, but we have chosen not to acknowledge?

There is a thin line between reassurance and dismissal, and Kenya appears to be walking it rather casually.

When global markets swing, when supply chains tighten, when governments elsewhere begin rationing, subsidising and recalibrating policy in real time, Kenya’s response has largely been to reassure, to downplay, to insist that all is well.

But all is well for whom?

Is this a question of misreading the moment?

A lag in policy response?

Or something deeper, a systemic tendency to manage perception rather than confront pressure?

One begins to ask uncomfortable questions: is it confusion at the top, a lack of urgency, or simply a belief that the consequences will somehow be absorbed quietly?

Or worse, have we become so accustomed to crisis that we no longer respond to it?

Because if this is a strategy, it is a risky one. And if it is not a strategy, then what exactly is it?

Perhaps the most uncomfortable possibility is this: that we are not being entirely honest with ourselves. That in choosing calm over candour, we may be mistaking silence for stability.

And in a crisis like this, that distinction matters.

As the Iran–US–Israel conflict sent shockwaves through global energy markets, tightening supply, driving volatility and forcing governments into emergency mode, Kenya chose a different path: reassurance. Calm statements. Stability narratives. A sense that, somehow, we are insulated.

But we are not.

And the cracks are beginning to show.

When the crisis first escalated, the Kenyan government took a noticeably muted stance on oil instability.

There were no urgent national addresses, no aggressive mitigation strategies, no visible contingency planning. Instead, officials maintained that the country was stable, that supply chains remained intact, and that there was no cause for alarm.

Yet on the ground, the story was already different.

Oil marketers were among the first to feel the pressure. Supply costs were rising, logistics were tightening and margins were being squeezed.

Their response was immediate and telling: they began pushing the Energy and Petroleum Regulatory Authority (EPRA) to raise fuel prices, an unusual move that signals distress rather than opportunism.

EPRA, however, hesitated.

And in that hesitation lies the contradiction at the heart of Kenya’s oil policy today.

The government continues to lean heavily on the government-to-government (G-to-G) fuel import deal, presenting it as a shield against global volatility.

On paper, it offers stability, structured supply, deferred payments, and protection from spot market shocks.

But in practice, confidence in the system is beginning to erode.

Dealers are quietly moving away from it, opting instead to source fuel independently. That shift is not ideological, it is economic. It suggests that the G-to-G framework, while politically attractive, may no longer be commercially sufficient in a rapidly tightening global market.

At the same time, Treasury signals are growing more cautious. Cabinet Secretary John Mbadi recently indicated that Kenya holds roughly 16 days of petrol reserves.

Sixteen days.

That number should not reassure, it should alarm.

Because it raises the obvious question: what happens on day seventeen?

Elsewhere, governments are not waiting to find out.

In Ethiopia, authorities have already introduced aggressive fuel-saving measures, including mandating annual leave for non-essential workers and reducing transport demand.

In parts of Europe, countries are tapping into strategic petroleum reserves while accelerating renewable energy transitions.

Australia has moved to halve fuel taxes, directly cushioning consumers from global price shocks.