There is a lot of optimism in both South Africa and Zimbabwe.
The optimism is a result of the new directions that those two countries are taking following changes in leadership of the two countries.
Recent political leadership changes in South Africa and Zimbabwe have been events of immense importance as to warrant economic revival.
And the mood is clearly changing.
Owing to a decade long culture of political corruption in that country, credit rating agencies had degraded South Africa to a junk status, while international organizations like the IMF and World Bank had long stopped doing business with Zimbabwe.
Shortly following the departure of Jacob Zuma in South Africa, the same rating agencies issued positive outlooks for that country while observing that a lot still needed to be done.
Following the departure of Robert Mugabe after 37 years as president of Zimbabwe, that country seems to be headed for an upward economic trajectory.
The lenders like IMF are eager to come back and help rebuild the economy of that country.
Business confidence is on the rebound as is consumer sentiment.
For both countries, politics has been the most compelling reason for economic decay.
Nobody knows for sure just when the two economies will turn around. But there is no doubting that there is a clear upward swing.
The truth is that Zimbabwe is coming from a very deep end. And it will take time before any results are discernible.
We outline the above because we believe that Botswana’s economic developmental path is intrinsically linked to these two countries.
It is also worth noting that in today’s competitive world, Botswana has dismally failed to take advantage at a time when these two southern African economies were at a low.
Many skilled Zimbabweans flocked to Botswana during that time. And from the look of things, it will not be long before Botswana’s economy experiences a serious skills deficit as these people head back home as their economy recovers.
There is much more that Botswana, South Africa and Zimbabwe can do together going forward.
Like the rest of Sub-Saharan Africa these countries have a shortage not just of skills but infrastructure as well.
The three countries can team up to negotiate good terms from lenders on joint infrastructure projects.
This is especially helpful given the dwindling appetite among world bodies to lend money to African countries.
Lenders are increasingly worried of default risks especially for countries like Zimbabwe.
The degeneration of credit rating for South Africa has raised costs of borrowing.
Given its small domestic market Botswana is not deemed to be ideal for large and lucrative deals.
Admittedly the three countries are each at the different stages of development ÔÇô and fitting them together to make a single case might not be among the easiest things on earth.
The temptation is always to go it alone. And where possible to sabotage others.
But each of the three countries has a unique offering to make in the case of crowded funding.
How then do countries with such divergent markets and levels of development work together.
The answer is simple: Countries like companies do better when they cooperate and focus less on conflict and competition. It might be necessary for southern African countries to consider cooperating.
