Machafuko : 风平浪静 
Unrest : Peace

Kenya marks a shift in China’s stadium diplomacy where infrastructure projects have become politically charged, creating significant public unease. Unlike environments where Chinese involvement was muted or depoliticized, stadium construction and renovation in Kenya have unfolded in an environment of active civic scrutiny and public debate. For many Kenyan citizens, Chinese-funded infrastructure is no longer viewed as developmental assistance but as external dependency that their domestic economy is suffering from. Stadium projects have become targets showing citizens anxieties over debt, and the role of foreign firms in national development.

​

Public unrest surrounding Chinese involvement is closely tied to local concerns about debt sustainability and transparency. As Kenya’s borrowing from Chinese lenders expanded for other infrastructure projects, like railways, highways, and public buildings, citizens have increasingly questioned the long-term fiscal implications of these contracts. Stadium renovations tied to international tournaments were also frequently discussed in the same breath as larger debt-financed projects, folding sports infrastructure into wider critiques of government spending priorities.

​

Labor practices have also fueled public dissatisfaction. Chinese firms involved in the Moi Stadium construction and renovation have been accused of sidelining local contractors and limiting skills transfer to those few local partners. Trade unions and local builders have also raised concerns about delayed payments from major public projects, saying that Chinese firms show limited regard for workers rights and livelihoods.  

​

This unrest has been amplified by Kenya’s competitive political environment. Opposition parties routinely point to Chinese-funded projects in critiques of government corruption and loss of sovereignty. Stadium projects are particularly easy targets, used to question why public funds and foreign loans are being directed toward sports infrastructure while social services and employment remain under strain. 

Chinese influence has to operate under conditions of public skepticism rather than admiration hampering the effectiveness of soft power. Rather than associating China with benevolence or partnership, Kenyan citizens increasingly associate Chinese involvement with debt burdens and elite enrichment.

Yet this public contestation does not halt engagement. Stadium projects continue to move forward because they remain politically useful to governing elites. For political leaders, Chinese financing offers a means to deliver visible infrastructure quickly, demonstrate action, and claim development achievements. Even when public opinion is critical, the ability to showcase new facilities provides short-term political capital.