2014 general elections saw virtually three parties competing for state power, namely Botswana Democratic Party (BDP), Umbrella For Democratic Change (UDC) and Botswana Democratic Party (BCP). This happened against the backdrop of a rallying cry for opposition parties in Botswana to unite in order to topple the ruling BDP which has been in power since independence in 1966, BCP opted out and this became a major campaign issue for the UDC. It is intended here to discuss whether or not total unity of opposition parties guarantees regime change and to what extent that will improve democracy in Botswana. This will be done by exploring hypothetical scenarios and how they may pen out should certain decision be made.
Japan, which experienced regime change for the first time since Second World War in 2009 when opposition party won and ruled only until 2012 when it lost again to the former ruling party, has been chosen as case study as it provides a good example on the predicament faced by Botswana opposition parties and of course the quest for regime change and finally, an argument is made against BCP joining the umbrella. On the 15 December 2014 in Wall Street Journal titled “Another Blow for Reeling Japan Opposition” , Alexander Martin, narrates how Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ), was “swept into power in 2009, ending half a century of nearly unbroken LDP rule, but quickly lost support after it failed to deliver on its campaign promises and internal strife resulted in it naming three prime ministers in 3 years.
Mr. Kaieda, 65 years old, took the DPJ after it was routed in the 2012 election that saw Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe & LDP return to power”. Similarly, half a century of uninterrupted rule by BDP has made opposition unity a recurring issue in Botswana politics with some blaming ‘fragmented’ opposition parties for the reason of BDP dominance and continued win. Unity proponents have largely shifted the focus from other issues that contribute to the fortification to BDP hegemony to the extent that lack of unity has become to represent the unreadiness of opposition parties to rule, perhaps at the expense of other equally or even more important issues.
Opposition unity has, as a result become opposition parties archils heels, a conundrum. In response to pressure from voters and critics to unite, both BNF and BCP (which were major opposition players until the inception of BMD) made several efforts towards unity. BCP merged with BAM, NDF and worked with other smaller parties which later became part of it. BNF cooperated with BMD and BPP and formed UDC, under which they competed in the 2014 general election. This brings us to the critical question; should BCP join the UDC in order to wrestle power from BDP in 2019, hence the conversation. For all intents and purposes, Botswana opposition is not fragmented and this has rather become propaganda; abuse of incumbency and state resources and skewed political playing field largely account for BDP win.
Proponents of united opposition argue that a pre election total unity into umbrella would seal the fate of BDP in any given election, most importantly in a general election. The assumption here is that if BCP joins the UDC, it would narrow the choice to either of the two and voters of opposition parties would outnumber those of the current ruling BDP, this assumption doesn’t envisage dissension from BCP members or any other (of UDC constituents for that matter) who may be opposed to this move, this is despite some BNF experience where those against UDC left and joined either BCP, BDP or contested as independents and may have affected its gains in 2014. Most importantly, proponents of this argument do not contemplate a lose to the BDP by a united opposition and or consequences thereof, furthermore they do not envisage any problems that may reverse the gains thus made to the extent of BDP regaining power in 2024 or earlier, when the only options would be UDC and BDP and therefore failure by one makes the other the only alternative.
After breaking away from BNF in 1998, BCP came to be known for stability, good organization, and generally effective party. It presented itself as a party with the psychology of government in waiting. It went on to merge with other smaller parties, its leaders became selfless as they would cooperate rather than compete for public office and it elected the youthful Dumelang Saleshando and thus became a formidable force to be reckoned with. BNF, which saw its fortunes threatened by the emerging BCP, adapted its old habits and reinvented itself by 1st bringing in the youthful Duma Boko and later on made unprecedented compromises to accommodate mainly BMD and BPP to constitute UDC, which saw it resurge in 2014 general election, which came at a huge cost to BCP, not least BDP. With only 9 seats standing between the ruling party and opposition block, and Khama on his last (constitutional) term, BDP is under immense pressure to both reform and revitalize itself. BDP win came at a huge financial cost, shenanigans and unduly benefitting from incumbency.
There has been notable changes in election demographics, behavior and generally, the voter has become more emboldened, conscious, informed, sophisticated and relentless, agitation for change has never been so strong. Though BDP won, it has become vulnerable and by and large it is voters’ market ( bullish). Botswana’s democracy has become relatively stronger and better both locally and regionally as a result of multiparty democracy and is more likely to improve as political parties respond to voters dictates as manifest in 2014 election results. Subsequent to 2014 general election, political parties are going through rigorous intra party democratic processes in pursuit of positioning themselves to appeal to voter, effectively discharge their mandates and most importantly to win subsequent elections.
In the case of Japan above, after about half a century, as is the case in Botswana, DJP won in 2009, only to lose in 2012 to Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) which returned to power up to now, this has not only reversed the gains made but put paid to hope of regime change. Regime change can happen in 2019, however, efforts to attain it should not undermine betterment of democracy, let alone bring indefinite return of BDP. UDC and BCP can still effect regime change without one joining the other. They both should genuinely recognize the need to find common ground by tolerating and acknowledging the right of each to exist and therefore coexist with a view to forming unity government should that be necessary.
Post election alliances allow each party the independence and latitude to hold dear to its beliefs, (organizationally) culturally and most importantly its pledges as articulated in their respective manifesto, this will provide the necessary checks and balances to such a government. The problem now is mainly futile attempts to destroy each other (undesirable competition) rather than cooperate (create a conducive environment) with a view to unseat BDP and deepen Botswana’s democracy. Examples of post election alliances or unity government (s) are Zimbabwe, Britain etc, they are based on mutual interests or overarching national imperatives, whereupon unity ends when it is no longer deemed necessary or desirable whereas pre-election unity as in the mould of umbrella makes it difficult, for partners to opt out should they desire.
