From a distance it looks pretty clear that the diplomatic service is the latest vessel in the public service that has been transformed into yet another bastion of the ruling party. It is not altogether unknown that a failed ruling party politician would be appointed to the position of Ambassador or High Commissioner to go and do a tour for a few years before coming back to rejoin politics.
In the past people like Gaotlhaetse Matlhabaphiri  were sent to do diplomatic service, either as a reward for having abdicated for BDP grandees like Peter Mmusi or simply because they had lost in the party or General Elections.
Roy Blackbeard was sent to the much coveted London office, after he agreed to make way for Ian Khama.
To this day nobody has had the balls to tell Blackbeard that he has overstayed his tour and that it was time he came back home.
Because Roy gave away his constituency to the leader, he can stay in London for as long as he wants.
There is no more glaring example of political patronage than that.
What is, however, more worrying today is the frequency, regularity and high number of such appointments similar to those of Roy Blackbeard.
Informed opinion says that out of Botswana’s twenty or so missions abroad, at least twelve are manned by such political appointees who have either retired, had fallen out with masters at home or those who simply had to be banished abroad because they were viewed to be too much of a nuisance in the serenity of ruling party politics such was the case with Jacob Nkate,Botswana’s Ambassador to Tokyo and, of course, Tebelelo Seretse, who is Botswana’s Ambassador in Washington. We have to point out that Botswana is not unique in its appointment of career politicians to the diplomatic service.
But for a country to now have over 50% of its senior diplomatic staff coming from outside career diplomatic service sends a totally wrong perception, including among young diplomats who join the service with the singular ambition of one day becoming Ambassadors or High Commissioners of their country.
This arrangement will have a demoralizing effect among career diplomats who routinely find themselves overlooked as all undue preferential treatment is given to ruling party failed and disgraced cadres.
It can fairly be asked if its only coincidence that only BDP aligned politicians ever find their way into the country’s overseas missions.
In South Africa, for example, it is usual for well-known opposition politicians to be appointed Ambassadors.
The former leader of opposition and staunch anti-ANC, Tony Leon, has served as South African Ambassador to Argentina.
Still in South Africa, Frank Mdlalose, who was Chairman of the Inkatha Freedom Party during the time when ANC and his IFP supporters were literally hunting each other down ahead of that country’s liberation in 1994 has served as that South Africa’s Ambassador to Egypt.
Choosing diplomats across the political divide is a good thing.
In fact, it is a symbol of patriotism, which our President likes to preach but never practices.
Choosing diplomats from across the political divide (not just from the ruling party) means that the country is able to tap from its full human resource potential.
It also allows all citizens an opportunity to serve their country regardless of their political beliefs and party membership.
The United States of America has many examples of people chosen from outside the ruling party to key positions in cabinet, including Defence.
