The opening of the Kazungula Bridge on May 10 last year was supposed to sound a death knell for the Beitbridge Border Post between South Africa and Zimbabwe. Not so, according to Southern Africa’s Freight News which reports that Beitbridge is seeing road freight processing times not recorded in decades.
“According to the latest GPS data received from the once heavily congested transit, it is now taking less than 12 hours for a truck to pass through the border… Closer comparison reveals that at Kazungula it takes up to 25 hours for northbound trucks entering Zambia,” says the regional trade publication, adding that the backhaul (cargo carried on a return journey) is much faster, taking two hours.
Naturally, the shorter turnaround times were a direct result of some of the traffic being diverted to Kazungula, which, unlike Beitbridge, is a one-stop border post. However, Beitbridge still retains a natural advantage that Kazungula is never going to have: it is a shorter route into the rest of the continent. As Zimbabwe’s Deputy Minister of Transport and Infrastructure Development, Mike Madiro, bragged last year, Beitbridge remains the primary gateway by road from Southern Africa into the rest of the continent.
“Beitbridge remains the busiest border post in sub-Saharan Africa and this general perception that the coming in of Kazungula Bridge over the Zambezi River and One-Stop Border Post facilities connecting Botswana and Zambia will affect our border in terms of economic benefits does not hold water. In fact, given the ongoing infrastructural developments and Beitbridge being a shorter route, we got all the advantages over Kazungula, which will only complement us,” the state-owned Herald quotes him as saying.
The ongoing infrastructural developments are of a three-phase construction project that costs way more than Kazungula Bridge did and is currently being undertaken by the Zimbabwean government. Even as President Emmerson Mnangagwa attended the official opening of the Kazungula Bridge last year and expressed desire for his country to buy a stake in it, the Zimbabwean government was upgrading Beitbridge and expanding its infrastructure through a $300-million contract. The first phase entails pre-commencement works, the second internal border infrastructure development and the third outside border infrastructure development. The project includes upgrades to the roads to and from the crossing, perimeter fencing, gate controls, parking areas and upgrades to security and lighting systems.
Zimbabwe and South Africa are also implementing a phased one-stop-border-post – like Kazungula – at Beitbridge.
Botswana authorities are evidently aware of how Zimbabwe and South Africa are fighting back but have never publicly acknowledged the threat that Beitbridge poses to Kazungula. In her maiden budget speech last week, the Minister of Finance and Economic Development, Peggy Serame, said no more than that Kazungula “provides a critical link in the sub-continent’s north-south transport infrastructure.” In terms of aggressive marketing, that pales in comparison to what Madiro said about Beitbridge.
Kazungula may also be experiencing early setback in one respect on account of what the previous Zambian administration did. It turns out that after diverting money meant for the bridge to the purchase of 42 second-hand fire trucks and ambulances at inflated prices, Zambia failed to meet part of its financial obligations towards construction costs. This development forced Botswana to meet the shortfall but that was done on the understanding that Zambia would reimburse the money. Lusaka Times reports that in order to raise money for the loan repayment, Zambia has hiked toll fees on its side. This raises the possibility of some truckers using Beitbridge to avoid higher costs on the Zambian side.
The historical record shows that not only have Zimbabwe and South Africa always been opposed to the construction of a bridge at Kazungula, they have also tried to sabotage it at different times and in different ways. In a recently published academic paper, Professors Christian Makgala and Monageng Mogalakwe as well as David Magang say that from the 1960s to the 1980s, South Africa, which was in control of Namibia, was against construction of the Kazungula Bridge. The argument it made was that there is no land border between countries that wanted to build the bridge. Way after the fall of apartheid South Africa and when Namibia had become independent, Zimbabwe did itself try to sabotage the project, making the same argument that apartheid South Africa made – and almost succeeded.
Zimbabwe was part of the project at conception stage (this was during the administration of Robert Mugabe) but upon failing to mobilise the required funds, decided to drop out. At the time, Mnangagwa was Vice President. In April 2014, a ZANU-PF MP, Felix Tapiwa Mhona, wanted the Minister of Transport and Infrastructure, Obed Mpofu, to explain the government’s position on a project that he deemed detrimental to the country’s economic fortunes.
“There is a bridge that is being constructed between Botswana and Zambia known as Kasane Bridge,” the MP prefaced his question, using the wrong name for the bridge. “What is the government policy in place so as to counter this conspiracy whereby you are going to see traffic bypassing our Beitbridge, which is the gateway to southern Africa, consequently impacting negatively on our revenue?”
First describing Mhona’s question as “very important”, Mpofu stated that since there was no border between Botswana and Zambia, construction of the bridge was impossible.
“Our understanding is supported by the United Nations on boundaries; that there is no boundary between Botswana and Zambia. If they want to build a bridge on that piece of land, Zimbabwe has to be involved,” the minister said.
It would seem that the question and answer were a pre-arranged charade to publicly send a message to both Botswana and Zambia – which message the two countries received loud and clear. Zimbabwe had hoped that the project would collapse if it withdrew from it – and that almost happened. Fortunately, the partners came up with a Plan B – which Botswana’s former Minister of Transport and Communications, Nonofo Molefi, detailed to Sunday Standard. Upon hearing Mhona-like talk from other Zimbabwean politicians, Botswana and Zambia decided to make changes the design plan.
“We approached Namibia and asked that the bridge pass through their territory and they agreed,” Molefi said.
The result was that instead of going straight into Zimbabwe from Botswana as had been the original plan, the bridge now curves westwards into Namibian territory, then makes a landfall in Zambia.
In no way are the upgrading of Beitbridge and the Kazungula-like one-stop border post similar to the underhanded tactics of the past. However, they represent continuing effort by Zimbabwe and South Africa to sink the Kazungula Bridge project because it threatens their own cash cow.
