UDC unity claims face scrutiny
Tsaone Basimanebotlhe | Monday March 30, 2026 06:00
UDC has three affiliates, being the Botswana National Front (BNF), Botswana People’s Party (BPP), and Alliance for Progressive (AP).
In recent weeks, the coalition has been confronted with a series of internal challenges that have raised questions about cohesion and discipline within its ranks. For instance, the UDC reportedly struggled to resolve misunderstandings among its youth members at the University of Botswana. The incident, while seemingly isolated, has been widely interpreted as indicative of deeper underlying issues within the coalition’s structures.
Moreover, tensions have also surfaced at the leadership level. Some members within the coalition have accused the National Executive Committee (NEC) of failing to convene regularly, a claim that Dr Molutsi has strongly refuted.
Nevertheless, the persistence of such allegations highlights growing unease among certain sections of the membership, particularly regarding transparency and internal communication. In addition, the coalition has recently had to grapple with cases of indiscipline, especially among councillors.
Reports indicate that some councillors have repeatedly defied party caucus positions, thereby undermining collective decision-making processes. This trend has not only exposed weaknesses in internal enforcement mechanisms but has also raised concerns about the coalition’s ability to maintain unity across its various affiliates. Furthermore, divisions have not just been limited to local government representatives. Some Members of Parliament (MPs) aligned with the UDC have, at times, openly differed with government positions.
While dissent is not uncommon in democratic systems, the public nature of these disagreements has led observers to question whether the coalition is speaking with a unified voice or struggling to reconcile differing viewpoints within its ranks. At the same time, there appears to be a growing disconnect between the coalition’s leadership and its broader membership.
It has become increasingly evident that key stakeholders, including government officials, ministers, the Vice President, the President, and party structures, may not always be aligned with the grassroots base.
This perceived gap has, in some instances, resulted in misunderstandings and conflicting interpretations of policy positions and strategic direction. However, Dr Molutsi has maintained a firm stance, insisting that the coalition remains stable and fully functional.
In response to the concerns, Dr Molutsi explained that UDC structures continue to meet at the highest levels and address issues through established channels. He emphasised that the UDC operates differently from traditional political parties, given its nature as a coalition of multiple entities. “We are a coalition, not a single party,” Molutsi explained. “Therefore, we do not operate in the same way as individual political parties. Our structures engage with matters differently, and that should not be mistaken for dysfunction.”
Additionally, he dismissed claims of internal discord, asserting that the coalition has not received any formal complaints regarding its operations. According to him, the UDC remains “solid” and free of any structural cracks, despite the concerns raised by some members and observers.
Molutsi further clarified that the coalition has its own distinct systems, including separate congresses and conferences, which differ from those typically found in conventional political parties. As such, he argued that applying the same standards used to evaluate single-party systems to a coalition like the UDC would be both inaccurate and misleading.
On the issue of discipline, he noted that cases are handled through a dual approach. Some matters are referred back to the respective member parties for action, while others are addressed at the coalition level, depending on their nature and scope. This arrangement, he suggested, reflects the unique structure of the UDC and its commitment to balancing autonomy with collective responsibility.
Despite these assurances, the recurring incidents of disagreement and alleged indiscipline continue to cast a shadow over the coalition’s internal dynamics and cohesion. While Dr Molutsi’s remarks seek to project confidence and stability, the situation on the ground appears to reveal ongoing challenges that may require more robust intervention.
As the UDC navigates its role within Botswana’s political landscape, the ability to manage internal differences effectively will be critical. Going forward, the coalition may need to strengthen its communication channels, reinforce discipline, and ensure greater alignment between its leadership and membership. Only then, can it convincingly dispel concerns about internal fractures and present itself as a cohesive and credible political force.