By Kepher Otieno - Reporter
Kenya, 6 January 2026 - The political rivalry between Edwin Sifuna and Junet Mohamed has emerged as one of the most high-profile and divisive feuds within Kenya’s opposition, drawing attention not just from the media but also from party colleagues alarmed at its potential consequences.
What began as disagreements over party strategy and positioning has escalated into a public spat marked by heated statements, confrontational rhetoric, and media theatrics, raising questions about its impact on the cohesion and credibility of the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM).
Fellow MPs have openly warned that the feud could undermine the party’s unity and effectiveness ahead of crucial political battles.
Rarieda MP Otiende Amollo, noting the growing visibility of the conflict, cautioned that leaders must prioritise service over spectacle.
“When leaders fight in public, it is not the party that benefits, but the divisions deepen, and the people lose confidence,” Otiende said. His remarks underline a growing unease within ODM about how the Sifuna-Junet rivalry is being played out, particularly at a time when the party needs to consolidate its base and present a unified front.
Suba North MP Millie Odhiambo also voiced concern, emphasizing the negative optics of intra-party conflicts. “These spats distract from the work we are supposed to do for the people. Instead of policy debates, the headlines are filled with shenanigans that portray the party as unstable,” she said. Similarly, Nyatike MP Tom Odege warned that such public confrontations could embolden opposition critics and weaken ODM’s negotiating power in both parliamentary and electoral arenas. “Our people want solutions, not drama. Constant public quarrels erode trust in leadership,” Odege stated, highlighting the risks for both individual reputations and collective party standing.
More from Kenya
Analysts say the feud between Sifuna and Junet reflects deeper tensions within ODM over leadership style, generational influence, and the direction of the party in an evolving political landscape. While both leaders hold significant influence, their public clashes have created a perception of fragmentation, which rivals are quick to exploit. The spectacle has also drawn social media attention, amplifying minor disagreements into national controversies and distracting from substantive debates about policy, governance, and party strategy.
The implications for ODM are manifold. First, the feud threatens internal cohesion, particularly as the party navigates preparations for upcoming elections and works to maintain a disciplined caucus in parliament. Second, it risks diminishing public confidence in the party as a credible alternative to the government, as voters may perceive personal rivalries as more important than service delivery or legislative effectiveness. Third, it sets a precedent for other ambitious leaders to engage in public theatrics as a means of gaining attention, potentially eroding norms of discipline and constructive debate.
Despite the tensions, there are signs of a potential recalibration.
The warnings from Otiende, Millie, and Odege suggest that senior voices within ODM are actively trying to mediate the conflict and emphasise unity.
These interventions point to a recognition that leadership credibility is not only about individual influence but also about the ability to manage disagreements without undermining the party’s stability or public image. The party’s internal dynamics, including its efforts to balance youthful ambition with veteran guidance, will be tested by how Sifuna and Junet respond to such pressures.
The Sifuna-Junet saga serves as a reminder of the delicate balancing act in Kenya’s opposition politics: leaders must project strength and ambition, yet avoid letting personal rivalry overshadow collective goals. For ODM, the stakes are particularly high. Publicly visible squabbles risk alienating supporters, providing ammunition to opponents, and distracting from policy and governance priorities. If the party can navigate these tensions through mediation and disciplined leadership, it may emerge stronger and more cohesive. If not, the feud could define the party’s image in the public eye, reducing its credibility at a critical political moment.
Ultimately, the warnings by Dr Otiende Amollo, Millie Odhiambo, and Tom Odege reflect a broader concern that Kenya’s opposition parties must learn from: internal disagreements, when turned into public spectacle, carry consequences that go beyond individual leaders. They affect party unity, voter confidence, and the ability to deliver on promises. As ODM’s current dynamics continue to unfold, the way Sifuna and Junet manage their rivalry could become a litmus test for leadership maturity within the party and the opposition at large.
