I have just completed reading the book, Goodye Bafana, about Nelson Mandela’s time in prison, written by a gentleman who was for most of the time his jailer, James Gregory. It comes out clearly that Nelson Mandela became president whilst he was in prison. The white establishment’s conduct suggested that it had effectively conceded that he was the de facto leader of South Africa whilst he was in prison.
After reading the book I recalled what the late Motsamai Mpho was said to have written to Seretse Khama about his ideas on creation of Botswana, and recognizing Seretse as leader of the new country.
I was struck by the similarity between the two gentlemen’s progression to leader of their individual countries.
Nelson Mandela came through the route of liberation of his people whilst Seretse came through the route of creating a self governing state. But even before they became official leaders of their respective countries they had effectively been recognized as such.
In the case of Rre Ian Khama the Bangwato always assumed that he would one day become president, that Rre Masire and Rre Mogae were only holding the fort. Rre Ian Khama’s rise was therefore on the surface of the type of Seretse and Mandela. The fundamental feature lacking in Rre Khama’s case was that there was no openly expressed ideal that he was to carry forth or that he symbolized. Seretse was for a new self governing state, non racial in character, and Mandela an apartheid free South Africa.
Rre Ian Khama has of course set forth his D’s and poverty as his ideals, but because they were not sold to the people before he became president, they had not captured the public mind in the manner that informed Seretse’s and Mandela’s rise to power. That is why even now there are strong pockets of condemnation that are not just about method but the underlying ideals themselves.
There was never any serious objection to independence of Botswana and to the end of apartheid. The same cannot be said about the five D’s and poverty eradication processes followed by Rre Ian Khama.
Rre Ian Khama is now left with five years at best, and the picture emerging from his reign in regard to any ideal that binds us together as a people is not encouraging. His pursuit of poverty eradication has not captured the nation’s imagination because as one newspaper editorial observed, he has turned a blind eye to the sufferings of the middle class, which is taking a pounding from price increases. It does not matter whether this is by design or not. The fact of the matter is that there is very little of Seretse and Mandela attributes in terms of symbolizing a national ideal that one can see in Rre Ian Khama. If he has such an attribute then his publicity machine is doing a shoddy job. But after five years in power surely he should have been able to communicate such an ideal.
Rre Shaleshando comes across as a good government advocate, but he has not been able to get this into the national psyche such that it becomes a national ideal which the people can rally behind and own. Rre Boko is known as a human rights advocate. Like Rre Shaleshando, he has not been able to place human rights in a manner that translates the same to a national ideal that he symbolizes. I do not really know what defines Rre Motswaledi. If one goes back to his suit with Rre Khama one can say he is an inner party democracy advocate. But like the others he has failed to make this a national ideal.
When one looks at our current crop of leaders, Rre Ian Khama, Rre Dumelang Shaleshando, Rre Duma Boko and Rre Gomolemo Motswaledi one cannot identify a national ideal that they symbolize. In the absence of any anchor national ideal, incumbency becomes a very strong factor in our national elections. The opposition leaders cannot become president even before the holding of elections, like Seretse and Mandela could, because they do not symbolize any special ideal shared by the people that can motivate the people to change government.
I used to think that our opposition leaders did not really understand that they need only a four percent shift in the popular vote to have a majority in the popular vote. I now see that the four percent shift needs an opposition leader who can symbolize something that is a national ideal. Good government though a good idea is not central to the majority of our people. Human rights and inner party democracy are likewise not that central to the majority of our people. All these attributes are by any account important but as far as our people are concerned not motivating enough for a change of government.
Both Seretse and Mandela were effectively selling ideals to the converted. I think our opposition leaders do not really understand the enormity of the task that awaits them. In my view talk of a level playing field though legitimate distorts the picture. The opposition needs to identify a leader who represents a shared ideal that is important to the majority of our people. As things stand Rre Khama does not himself represent any identifiable ideal that is shared by a majority of our people. Sure he is extremely popular, but such popularity is not in my view related to any national ideal. Of course he has been very successful at making himself a brand, but a brand tied to a product dies when the product goes out of production.
One can even trace the divisions within the opposition to the lack of a single national ideal. When leaders represent what one may call partial national ideals like good government, human rights, and inner party democracy, they may think that they represent something around which the majority of our people can rally, but I doubt the correctness of their position. Sure there will be good government adherents, they will rally around Shaleshando. There will be human rights adherents, they will rally around Boko. There will be inner party adherents, they will rally around Motswaledi. None of these ideals finds roots within our national psyche in order to rank higher than the others, suggesting that none of the followers can be persuaded to subordinate their ideal to the other.
Our leaders, both ruling party and opposition, are therefore stuck at a level of partial ideals, none of which captures the nation’s imagination. This means none of our opposition leaders can ever become president before elections. In order to win power you must have the incumbent concede defeat in his heart before elections. That is what happened with Seretse and Mandela and the colonial and minority white rulers. The colonial power and the white minority government both conceded defeat before elections. Can any of our opposition leaders seriously tell us that they can have Rre Ian Khama conceding defeat in his heart before 2014?
Can any of our opposition parties seriously suggest that it can with its partial ideal, good government, human rights or inner party democracy, get half of the BDP to decamp to it? I do not think so. We therefore have a situation of the opposition conceding defeat before elections. It does not matter what the opposition leaders say in the public domain, in the privacy of their hearts they have conceded defeat before elections in 2014.
People being animals can sense defeat. If Rre Khama were to concede defeat in his heart before elections, his followers would sense it and some decamp. As far as I am aware no opposition leader has put fear into Rre Khama’s heart. If any opposition leader were to symbolize a national ideal, our people would instinctively follow him, and he would become president before elections in 2014. Even the incumbent would concede defeat before the elections.
Strange as it may seem what I am saying is in line with Rre Khama’s remark that he is leader because he does not believe that the opposition leaders are competent to lead this country. I know some will say that the opposition need not convince Rre Khama of its qualities. The truth though is that convincing Rre Khama makes him send powerful signals to his followers that someone better than him has come along. Such signals include privately conceding defeat, with his followers getting the body language.
I have been told that one time at the Serowe main kgotla when Gaborekwe Molake walked in, one of the dikgosi shouted “kgosi” whereupon the royalty present stood up to welcome him. It took a few moments for them to recollect and then one of them said “Aa ke Gaborekwe” For those few moments they acknowledged him as their superior. Only an opposition leader who can get Rre Khama to do the same, acknowledge him as his superior, can hope to defeat him at the polls in 2014.
