Knives were recently out for the Leader of the Opposition, Honorable Saleshando who is also the Vice President of the Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC). His offense was to honor an invitation to the inauguration of Zambia’s new President Hakainde Hichilema.
Opposition functionaries were fiercely opposed to Honorable Saleshando being part of Botswana’s delegation to Zambia with most arguing that accompanying the state president who is also the leader of the ruling party is an abominable act.
Others argued that Hon. Saleshando cannot lambast President Dr Masisi for turning himself into a globetrotting celerity and then happily tag along with the journeyman when it suits him. Tramps who occasionally forget their names and were most likely hearing Hon. Saleshando’s name for the first time also weighed in on his vilification.
Some belligerent agents of some of the UDC member parties went further to call for disciplinary action against Honorable Saleshando for bringing the UDC and the rest of the opposition brigade into disrepute.
The UDC had to release a media statement in defense of Hon. Saleshando, clarifying that the trip was approved by the UDC National Executive Committee, further stating the trip to Zambia gave the UDC the opportunity to network with leaders of other parties in the region that also graced the inauguration.
A majority of opposition functionaries who bayed for Hon. Saleshando’s blood for gallivanting in the company of sworn enemies known for hard partying and plundering belong to a school of thought that holds that the duty of the opposition is oppose.
This school of thought believes that the opposition must oppose every government proposal, decision or anything that is intimately and/or remotely connected to the ruling party for the sake of record.
Their password is ‘oppose’ and it doesn’t really matter whether the proposal stand to benefit a large section of society. For as long as a proposal comes from the other side of the political divide, it must be opposed come hell or high water. These are people who have built a reputation as unrepentant hardliners.
Then there is another school of thought which finds fault with the opposition for often opposing for the sake of it. This group, sometimes called soft-liners, opines that the opposition has a right and duty to criticize the government of the day but that the opposition should do so only when there are sharp differences in policy position in order that they retain the appearance of a credible alternative government, not political junkies on steroids.
This school of thought argues that the decision of Honorable Saleshando to honour the invitation from Lusaka was strategic and a rational choice motivated by a compelling need for the UDC as a government in waiting to cultivate an international profile and establish the coalition as a credible political group that understands its international obligations.
Their position draws from Margaret Thatcher’s use of external trips to demonstrate that she was a substantial politician ready to lead the Conservative Party to victory and ready to lead Britain to prosperity.
Having initially struggled for credibility and having to navigate the gender question in a male-dominated game, Thatcher used international trips for acceptance into the political ramble and to accumulate necessary experience and networks. Thus, the trips helped her to prepare groundwork for her transition from being a party leader to being a national leader.
It is generally accepted that these international trips helped ensure that Thatcher was taken seriously by the international (donor) community and voters as a potential Prime Minister. The trips helped the Conservative Party to establish sufficient authority to be trusted with the management of public affairs.
This is a very compelling and incisive comprehension of the value of external trips to the opposition. As such, the UDC needs more of such trips to reposition itself as a credible alternative government rather than just a noisy rabble of druggies and petty intellectuals.
In a way, had Honourable Saleshando and the UDC declined the invitation, proponents of this school of thought would have launched a scathing attack on the coalition and its Vice President for failing to exploit such opportunities and drum up regional and international support.
Essentially, what it means is that the position of leader of opposition, in particular, of the Leader of Opposition in parliament is one of the most difficult if not the worst job in politics. The leader of the Opposition who actually functions as the leader of all opposition parties in parliament operates in a challenging environments that get them unfairly maligned for doing what is in the best interest of the organizations.
Since these (opposition) leaders are damned if they do and are damned if they do not do, they need high levels of emotional intelligence in order that they balance competing interests as well as to be able to tolerate the nonsense from their otherwise valued members.
The position is basically a classic example of responsibility without power. Whereas most people would prefer to crowd around power or crawl to get as much close as possible to those wielding power, opposition leaders have opted out of these obvious opportunities in order that they become a voice of the minority, in the process condemning themselves to ridicule and what others call a life of illusion.
In spite of all these, the position of opposition leader and in particular, the position of leader of the opposition in Parliament is an important position in its own right more than ever before. Our democracy is under siege from an intolerant and greedy section of the ruling elite who would have preferred that they answered to no one.
Our economy is on its knees under the watch of cruel gang of looters that have gate-crashed state power. Our society has become one of the unhappiest on earth due to a lot of interrelated dynamics borne out of the actions of bandits dressed up in executive suits
On account of these crippling challenges and the obvious incompetence of those in charge of the affairs of the nation, the positions of opposition leader and of leader of Leader of the Opposition in Parliament has become an obligation and responsibility than ever before.
Botswana is at a critical juncture and the economy in a sorry state that is dispiriting and has never been evident. Yet, a flourishing democracy and a thriving economy require a credible and reassuring opposition.
In like manner, a dwindling democracy and sinking economy is an opportunity for regime change. A plummeting democracy and an economy that is literally being pillaged by vultures offer the opposition an opportunity to assert itself as a credible government in waiting. But these developments can only benefit the opposition if they position themselves well.
It is often remarked that opposition parties do not win elections, but ruling parties lose them. The BDP’s time is up but the opposition has to reposition itself and this demand that they play out their role effectively so that they portray themselves as competent and ready to govern.
In this context, the personality and charisma of leaders of opposition parties comes into question, particularly because leaders play a dominant role in campaigning and thus have a strong influence upon voters’ decisions.
Thus, the leader of opposition in and outside of Parliament is effectively the brand of the party which is why they are often at the centre of the storm and often getting bashed for doing what is right under the circumstances.
It is in this light that as opposition parties grapple with the leadership question, at the party and coalition level, they need to be reminded to look for people with the right skillset who can exploit opportunities presented by a BDP seemingly in haste to end its rule, with orgy of self-slaughter.
The voting public is becoming sophisticated and has little time for a leader who appears to be chasing media headlines. They have little respect for an opposition that attaches itself to every violent and crazed dislike of the government for that is a clear sign of desperation and desperate people cannot be trusted.
An opposition leader with a compulsion to be the first to draw blood merely confirms a lack of clear sense of purpose. An obsession with making media headlines by leaping opportunistically on every little misstep by the government causes discomfort to mature voters who have learned to choose their battles wisely in the knowledge that some battles are not worth fighting.
Leadership requires humility especially to accept that a leader is not bigger than the party they lead. A leader with an exaggerated self-worth and a swaggering conduct of a pimp is a real turn off to voters.
Voters have become sceptical of leaders who are quick at side-stepping traditional protocols for the sake of publicity. Thus, rhetoric in opposing government must be restrained and reasoned so that opposition leaders are taken seriously and distinguished from suicidal weed addicts.
