KQ IN TURBULENCE: CEO EXIT, SH16.1 BILLION LOSS AND THE FIGHT TO SAVE KENYA’S NATIONAL AIRLINE

 CIVIC LENS GAZETTE

Tuesday, 1 September 2026

By Civic Lens Gazette

There are moments when a company changes leadership and the story is simply about a new person taking over.

Then there are moments when a leadership change arrives against the backdrop of billions of shillings in losses, an urgent search for investors, grounded aircraft, rising fuel costs and a turnaround plan whose success is becoming increasingly important to the future of a national institution.

Kenya Airways is facing one of those moments.

Captain George Kamal has resigned as Acting Group Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of Kenya Airways, bringing his relatively short tenure at the helm of the national carrier to an end.

KQ says Kamal resigned for personal reasons. He will remain with the airline for a 30-day transition period and is expected to formally leave on September 30. Habil Waswani, the airline’s Company Secretary and Director of Legal Services and Regulatory Compliance, has been appointed Acting Group Managing Director and CEO from September 15 as the board begins the search for a substantive chief executive.

But the timing cannot be ignored.

Kamal's departure comes only days after Kenya Airways reported a KSh16.1 billion net loss for the first six months of 2026, a 32 per cent increase from the approximately KSh12.2 billion loss recorded during the same period last year.

And therein lies the bigger story.

This is not simply about a CEO leaving.

It is about whether Kenya Airways can finally convert its commercial strength into sustainable profitability.

The uncomfortable mathematics of KQ

At first glance, the numbers appear contradictory.

Kenya Airways is losing billions, yet its revenue is rising.

During the first half of 2026, the airline generated approximately KSh81.2 billion in revenue, representing growth of about 9 per cent from the previous year.

Cargo revenue also performed strongly, increasing by about 18 per cent.

So this is not a straightforward story of an airline that nobody wants to fly.

Quite the opposite.

The airline continues to demonstrate that there is demand for its services.

The problem is what happens after the money comes in.

Operating costs rose significantly, with fuel and maintenance among the major pressures. Kenya Airways has also faced aircraft availability problems caused by global shortages of engines, spare parts and maintenance capacity.

Reuters reported that fuel costs rose sharply, with fuel accounting for roughly half of the airline's total expenses during the period. The airline's pre-tax loss stood at approximately KSh15.92 billion, compared with KSh12.17 billion during the first half of 2025.

This is the economic paradox at the heart of KQ.

More revenue does not automatically mean more profit.

An airline can fill seats and still lose money if the cost of operating those flights rises faster than income.

And that is precisely the challenge confronting Kenya Airways.

From profit to another deep loss

The recent figures become even more significant when viewed against KQ's history.

In 2024, Kenya Airways appeared to have turned an important corner when it recorded a KSh5.4 billion after-tax profit.

It was a remarkable improvement for an airline that had spent years battling heavy losses and debt.

But that recovery proved fragile.

In 2025, KQ returned to the red, recording a loss of roughly KSh17.2 billion.

Now, halfway through 2026, the airline has already recorded another KSh16.1 billion net loss.

That trajectory raises a question that cannot be answered by simply blaming fuel prices or geopolitical tensions:

Why has the turnaround been so difficult to sustain?

The answer is complicated.

KQ operates in an industry where fuel prices, exchange rates, aircraft availability, maintenance costs, geopolitical instability and international competition can quickly destroy margins.

But external pressures alone do not explain everything.

The airline must also confront the structural weaknesses that have repeatedly made profitability difficult.

The aircraft problem

An airline's aircraft are its factories.

When a manufacturer loses a machine, production suffers.

For an airline, when aircraft are unavailable, the consequences are immediate: fewer flights, fewer seats, reduced revenue and greater pressure on the aircraft that remain operational.

Kenya Airways has experienced aircraft and engine availability challenges, with global supply-chain problems making maintenance and spare parts more difficult and expensive.

That has restricted capacity at a time when demand remains relatively resilient.

It is one of the reasons the KQ story cannot simply be reduced to the headline:

"Kenya Airways is losing money."

The more revealing question is:

"Why is Kenya Airways unable to fully monetise the demand available to it?"

That is where fleet availability becomes critical.

And it is also where the search for new capital becomes extremely important.

Investors are watching

Despite the losses, Kenya Airways is attracting interest from potential investors.

That may sound strange.

Why would anyone want to put money into an airline losing billions?

Because investors do not necessarily buy today's balance sheet. They buy tomorrow's potential.

Kenya Airways occupies an important geographical position. Nairobi is one of Africa's major aviation hubs, and KQ provides connectivity between East Africa, Africa, Europe, Asia and other international markets.

The airline also possesses something that cannot easily be built overnight: a recognised national brand, established routes, trained personnel, airport infrastructure relationships and an existing customer base.

Reuters reported that potential investors from markets including the United States, China, South Africa and Singapore have expressed interest as KQ searches for fresh capital.

The discussions are reportedly considering different forms of investment, including equity and other financing arrangements.

But perhaps the most intriguing proposal is the possibility of an investor providing aircraft in exchange for a strategic stake in Kenya Airways.

Business Daily reported that an undisclosed investor had made such a proposal, with the offer forming part of a wider field of potential investors interested in the airline.

That proposal deserves attention because it goes directly to one of KQ's biggest problems.

Instead of simply injecting money into a company that needs aircraft, an investor could potentially bring the aircraft themselves.

It is an unconventional proposition.

But desperate financial circumstances often require unconventional solutions.

The ownership question

There is another delicate issue.

Kenya Airways is not just another listed company.

It is Kenya's national carrier.

That creates a difficult balance between commercial logic and national interest.

The airline needs capital.

Investors want returns.

The government wants to preserve significant Kenyan influence over an institution that plays an important role in the country's aviation, tourism, trade and diplomatic connectivity.

Reuters reported that restructuring discussions have included the possibility of converting government and local-bank debt into equity.

That could strengthen the balance sheet, but it would also raise questions about ownership, control and the future structure of the airline.

For policymakers, therefore, the question is not simply:

"Who will invest in KQ?"

It is:

"What kind of investor will strengthen KQ without undermining its long-term national strategic value?"

That distinction matters.

And then came Kamal's resignation

Against all this, George Kamal's resignation introduces another layer of uncertainty.

Kamal had been at the centre of the airline's public defence of its turnaround strategy.

Just days before his departure, he was still speaking publicly about Kenya Airways' plans and the search for strategic investment.

The board says his resignation was based on personal reasons.

That explanation should be respected unless credible evidence emerges to establish otherwise.

There is currently no responsible basis for declaring that Kamal resigned because of the KSh16.1 billion loss.

The chronology is notable.

The loss was announced.

Investor discussions were underway.

Then the CEO announced his resignation.

But chronology is not causation.

Good journalism must distinguish between the two.

What can be said with certainty is that his departure comes at an extraordinarily sensitive time for the airline.

Waswani inherits a difficult assignment

Habil Waswani will take over in an environment where every decision will be scrutinised.

His immediate task will not simply be keeping planes in the air.

He will have to help preserve confidence in the turnaround strategy while the board searches for a substantive CEO.

He will inherit a company that needs to control costs, improve aircraft availability, attract capital, manage its debt burden and restore profitability.

At the same time, KQ must maintain customer confidence.

That is no small assignment.

For passengers, investors and employees, leadership stability matters.

A national airline cannot afford to look directionless when it is asking investors to commit billions of shillings.

The bigger question for Kenya

The Kenya Airways story ultimately goes beyond the airline itself.

KQ is part of the country's economic infrastructure.

A strong national carrier supports tourism.

It supports business travel.

It facilitates trade.

It connects Kenya to international markets.

It creates skilled employment and supports an ecosystem of aviation-related businesses.

But national importance cannot become an excuse for permanent financial weakness.

Neither can financial losses automatically justify abandoning the airline.

The real challenge is finding a model in which commercial discipline and national strategic interest can coexist.

Kenya has seen what happens when an airline repeatedly requires rescue without solving its underlying problems.

The country cannot afford another cycle of losses, government support, temporary optimism and renewed losses.

The next chapter must therefore be different.

KQ's moment of truth

Kenya Airways is now standing at a crossroads.

On one side is a potentially valuable airline with growing revenues, strong passenger demand, improving commercial opportunities and investors showing interest.

On the other is a balance sheet under pressure, rising operating costs, fleet constraints, substantial debt and another multi-billion-shilling loss.

The resignation of George Kamal adds another variable to an already complicated equation.

But perhaps the most important lesson from the current crisis is this:

Kenya Airways does not merely need a new CEO. It needs a sustainable economic model.

Leadership can change.

Aircraft can be added.

Investors can inject capital.

Debt can be restructured.

But unless the airline consistently earns more from its operations than it spends to provide them, the cycle will continue.

The KSh16.1 billion loss should therefore not be viewed merely as an accounting figure.

It is a warning.

And George Kamal's departure should not be treated simply as another executive resignation.

It is a reminder that Kenya Airways' turnaround remains unfinished.

The national carrier still has a valuable brand, an important geographical position and a market that clearly wants its services.

The question now is whether Kenya can build an airline capable of turning those advantages into lasting financial strength.

That is the real turbulence facing Kenya Airways.

— Civic Lens Gazette, 1 September 2026