By the time you read this column the strike may be over. The workers may have packed their braai-chairs and they may be now walking the office corridors, still with a militant song on their lips and images of boisterous public speakers on their minds. However, we do need to pause, think and question: was it all necessary? How did we get here? And who are the biggest losers? What really have we learnt from the strike? We will take away different things depending on who we are.
Inevitably what follows is a private observation which, though private, may be shared by many. For me the strike was necessary to unearth and expose many things.
The strike demonstrated that indeed Botswana’s demographics have changed and that Batswana have ceased to be silent. People’s confidence to claim and demand their rights has been strengthened.
When in the past 30 years people accessed tertiary education, many in government thought only about equipping individuals to join Botswana’s workforce. What they were unaware of was what these individuals were picking apart from Economics, Environmental Science, History, Medicine and Nursing. In these institutions of higher learning students learn critical analytical skills which are sometimes more precious than the classroom content. Through the various SRCs students question and lampoon leadership and learn how to toyitoyi and claim rights. In the past 30 years these graduates have now clogged the civil service and when the strike was brought upon them they were prepared, albeit poorly, to strike and articulate their demands as clearly as they could. The docile civil service of the 80s is no more. The current workers are more assertive, so assertive that if they feel a government is unresponsive, they talk of regime change. The concept of regime change in itself is not a bad one. When the Egyptians were changing their government, not through elections but through popular demonstrations, our government praised their legitimate demands. When people in Botswana began speaking the same language as the oppressed Egyptians, the rulers in Botswana said “Ga go na mokoko o o lelang jalo! We were brought in through elections and it is through elections that we will leave.” They had forgotten about what they had said only a few weeks before about the so called Arab-revolution.
The mother of all strikes has taught us that our democracy is fragile and poor. While many may say ntwa kgolo ke ya molomo, those are largely empty and meaningless statements since the Botswana government does not tolerate dissenting voices. It has no clue what: mmualebe o bua la gagwe gore monalentle a le tswe means. Those who oppose government positions are labelled unpatriotic and political opponents. The Botswana government has therefore used the media to cement its rule. During the strike Radio Botswana, Botswana television and Daily News failed to capture the strike.
They literally created an impression that everything in the country was going perfectly well and that if there was any strike, it was by a few malcontents who within no time would have returned to work. One minister even said that 99.9% of medical employees were at work ÔÇô the same minister o jewa ke letswalo everyday when he remembers the inaccuracies he spread on national television at prime time. The suppression of dissenting voices in Botswana’s democracy is one of the shameful points of our society. Information is controlled, managed, manipulated and twisted until it is almost useless. The strike has reminded us yet again that the Setswana philosophical system of resolving issues by dialogue is golden. One who failed dismally to understand the supreme importance of dialogue is the president. Before the budget he had pre-empted the strike and he addressed the small community of Natale and told it that there would be no salary increase and that he heard that the workers had unions and that he belonged to the union of the unemployed. Not only that, after about 10 days of the strike, he was at Barolong, militant as usual, stating that even if the strikers could strike for 5 years there would be no salary adjustment ÔÇô oops! I thought the government wanted to consider increasing salaries in August/September!
The strike has also taught us that we have weak leaders who are unable to articulate the concerns of their people. Some of our leaders are almost a curse to the electorates in that instead of articulating the concerns, fears and insecurities of the people who elected them, they swiftly move to deny them and suppress their expression. Party caucuses are considered more important compared to the interests of the people. That is not democracy. Democracy is not about the transfer of power from the people to the party or to the leaders. In a democracy, power must remain with the people, making the leaders responsive to the demands of the people. In Botswana things are different. The people are servants and beggars while the leaders have absolute power. No one has as much power as the president ÔÇô an individual who was not directly elected by the people ÔÇô but assumed office by piggy-backing on the back of elected MP votes. His power even exceeds that of parliament itself.
The strike has taught us that there is people power when unions and citizens are united. The strike was only effective because the people were united. There may have been members of unions who were not on strike; but what is also true is that unions increased their membership considerably around the time of strike. Because of this strike, unions now know that they are a power to reckon with. Going forward they are a political force in Botswana. They have a large constituency which listens to what their leaders say. The unions can in effect determine which party takes government in 2014. Such a party just has to be friendly to the demands of unions. From now onwards unions are part of the national leadership ÔÇô they can paralyze government or strengthen it.
The strike has also demonstrated that there are people who will die for the employer ÔÇô regardless of how wrong the employer might be. The first 10 days of the strike the president was nowhere to be seen. The face of the strike was Masisi. Kobo! No one can doubt Masisi’s commitment to the president. He took the full brunt of the strike. He has been politically damaged by the strike since he has been at the forefront of the government spinning of the strike. He may deny it, but his political life will never be the same after this. Him, Kgathi and the flamboyant but unreliable Moatlhodi demonstrated some guts to defend their government. Kgathi even blamed the opposition parties for addressing the striking workers. Kgathi did not understand that when people are angry they need to be addressed. Ntwa kgolo e santse e le ya molomo. Church leaders also came to address the striking workers, but no one accused them of looking for members! Such an accusation was levelled at opposition party members. The very same people who ignored the workers, before long, were one after another running for dear life from kgotla meetings across the country. The revolution was not televised and then the former presidents stepped in before the country went up in flames!
