BDP schism eating away party flesh and soul
Siki Motshwari Johannes | Friday March 31, 2017 16:24
The BDP has battled with factionalism, without success, for almost three decades. What really triggered off BDP factionalism is a subject of debate.
However, its genesis could be traced to 1989 when former president Sir Ketumile Masire brought into Parliament late retired army general Mompati Merafhe via a special nomination dispensation.
Within a flash, the no-nonsense former BDF chief proved to be no pushover and established himself as a force to reckon with within the BDP circles. Merafhe’s sudden and unexpected appearance on the political scene challenged the hegemony of veteran BDP political heavyweights like the then all powerful secretary general Daniel Kwelagobe.
What began as a narrow and localised tussle for the soul of the BDP between the two giants (Kwelagobe and Merafhe ) spiralled out of control with the passage of time and ultimately metamorphosed into a bitter and prolonged full scale war between two rival groupings. On the one hand, Kwelagobe led the Barataphathi faction and on the other hand Merafhe led A-team axis.
The cat and mouse game that ensued would subsequently culminate in the party’s recording of the lowest popular votes ever in its history of 47% in the 2014 general elections. Concerned with this disturbing state of affairs, different administrations over time came up with efforts intended to address and quell the debilitating factions. But these proved inadequate and factions threatened to rip the party apart.
Like cancer, the party’s internal schism is relentlessly eating away its flesh and soul. It would almost require a magic bullet to stop the cancer from drifting the party fast into political abyss.
Political formations like any other organisations are as good as their leadership. Over the last three decades the BDP has not been blessed with leaders equal to its challenges. Masire probably the author of BDP factions bequeathed to Festus Mogae a fragmented party, and Mogae was to do the same to Ian Khama. And now left with only 12 months in office, Khama is destined to hand over an arguably much more divided party to his successor.
The party is entangled in a vicious cycle, year in, year out. The last three decades saw the party’s internal elections characterised and dominated by campaigns and lobbylists developed along factional lines. The July elective congress will be no exception.
As Abraham Lincoln once put it, “A house divided against itself cannot stand”. The question is how many BDP operatives are fully conscious of the fact that in its present form and shape the BDP cannot withstand the looming opposition onslaught. And that something radical must be done to remedy the situation?
Yes, a divided BDP managed to win the last four elections albeit with reduced margins. The BDP did not feel the impact of its disunity because it was facing an equally ‘disjointed and disorganised” opposition.
With the recent declaration and announcement of opposition unity (at least on paper) the political landscape is now shifting in favour of the opposition which operates under the guise of the Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC). The BDP can only ignore this opposition coalition at its own peril. A limping BDP may not be lucky this time around.
The present circumstances and turn of events call for a thorough re-examination and overhauling of the party’s entire modus operandi which includes exercising extra caution when choosing leaders. The July elective congress in Tonota presents one last chance before the general elections for the party to embark on a mop up exercise. The time for charlatans, chancers and mediocrities is over. Now is the time for the BDP to search for political geniuses, rare gems endowed with exceptional leadership abilities. Nothing should be left to chance.
Political expediency and the quest for survival should be the guiding compass. This consequently means the BDP, if need be, should not confine itself to the list of candidates leaders have already submitted their credentials for consideration at the July congress, which is viewed as a make or break for the ruling BDP. Head hunting a suitable candidate is permissible.
A precedent was set in 1998, when an outsider, Khama (then BDF commander) was roped in to give a new lease on life to the ailing BDP. This can be repeated, if the current crop of leaders vying for positions is found wanting.
The developments in the opposition ranks must worry and concern the BDP. The BDP can no longer afford to remain ruffled by opposition unity and the quality of leadership it has produced.
For the first time in the history of Botswana, the political atmosphere is highly charged. The opposition, assisted by numerous social and economic challenges facing the country, is poised to give the BDP a run for its money in the 2019 elections. To prepare for the changing political landscape, the BDP must have the right people, in the right positions and at the right time. The Tonota July congress could be the starting point for a process of party regeneration and renewal.
The ordinary masses and followers of the BDP (not involved in factions) are banking on the chosen delegates to vote wisely in the interests of the party. At this juncture one may pause to ask who the delegates are? Who chooses the delegates? And whose interests are they serving? The delegates play a critical role in changing the party’s fortunes for better or worse. It goes without saying that great care must be exercised when constituting a body of delegates. Delegates must be men and women of high standards of integrity.
These should be men and women who may not trade their integrity for anything. There are rumours that corrupt politicians buy votes and delegates should be principled enough to resist temptation. The delegates should be men and women who clearly understand what is at stake and be alive to the implications of their choices for the continuing survival of the party that they profess to love.
In other words, the delegates should attach a high premium on the election of the next batch of the central committee members and avoid unnecessary gambling and experimentation. The make up, calibre and character of the central committee can make or break the party.
Unity has eluded the BDP for far too long. Of the many candidates vying for various positions, those standing for the chairmanship must be subjected to close scrutiny. The chairman position puts the holder in a better position to ascend to the presidency. Any candidate seeking to hold the office of chairman should have statesman-like qualities.
The candidate must be mature, calm, collected and endowed with diplomatic and oratory skills. It takes one’s speaking prowess to bring together warring factions and to cultivate a spirit of ‘forgive and forget’.
The chairman should be above factions. It would be suicidal for the delegates to elect a candidate associated or perceived to be having any links with the existing factions. If the party is serious about restoration of unity, the delegates should give a cold shoulder to candidates known to be championing or representing sectional interests.
A candidate who wins the chairmanship by virtue of representing a dominant faction cannot be expected to treat members as equals or even get close to achieving some semblance of unity and order. The occupier of the position of chairman should be a towering figure capable of commanding universal respect among the warring factions.