Are there any positives from the BDP�s Gabz FM 'no show'?

Lawrence Ookeditse | Thursday July 3, 2014 13:31

The reasons for not taking part in a debate could be diverse: reason one could be that the party not taking part may simply be yellow, scared of debating the others for fear of losing the duels. After all you do not expose your capabilities at war by staying away do you? In this case then, the BDP may just be scared to debate, which would surprise me given the fact that there is no discernible difference in the debate capabilities of different political candidates in Botswana politics. For the BCP’s Dumelang Saleshando the UDC would have a Duma Boko, BDP a Mokgweetsi Masisi. For a Gomolemo Motswaledi, BDP would have a Botsalo Ntuane, BCP would also have someone. For every poor debater at the UDC there is a poor debater at the BDP and BCP. Therefore, any claim that any is better than the others at debate is unfounded- it would be a poor decision by the BDP if they were to be yellow. We know the broad majority of our politicians across political parties are poor debaters. Being yellow therefore should not be the case, if it is, it is misguided. Could it then be strategic planning? Some generals actually say the best war strategy is to avoid war, to win without fighting. Yellow strategists, but also great strategists, do not engage when they can avoid the attrition of battle.  If you can afford to attain your objectives without fighting, you do not. If you must fight, you do not engage the enemy in hostile territory; you tactically retreat and engage where you feel you stand a chance at winning with minimum effort and casualties. At times, even if you’d win a battle on some ground, you avoid the battle for you want to fight when you want- engage at a place and time of your own choosing.

 The BDP has said it has an agreement to do similar debates with a private radio station- which I presume to be Duma FM. They have their own reasons. Parties should map their supporters in order to aid their messaging.  Mapping your audience and marrying that with vehicles of delivery- such as radio and newspapers- entails being able to stay away from some and being able to focus on some. The BDP then appears to have segmented its audience. It should be perfectly acceptable. The headache then should be for the BDP decision makers since if this proves a costly mistake they'll have to account for it.

Now, the opposition should not be worried. The opposition should be devising a way to make the debates not only effective but a great platform at which to sell their alternative programs. Unmarked, they should be going all out to use these debates as an unparalleled opportunity at media access. One of the problems often cited as a weakness to our democracy is the disparity in media coverage between opposition and ruling party. This free reign on Gabz FM gives the opposition their moment and they should complain less and find ways to fully utilize it. It is not for the opposition to worry about the BDP's non participation. Perhaps it is Gabz FM that should be worried by the snub and what it means. The opposition should merely be opportunistic, take full advantage. The big question then is whether this stifles democracy? Well, democracy thrives on a plurality of views and informed choice. It is founded on people knowing what leaders or candidates have in store for them. That is all well and good. Political debates then serve that purpose. It is for that reason that they promote democracy. If the BDP or any other party refuses to take part in all debates or at least most debates, then it suffices to say they are anti-democracy. However, if the BDP or any other party for that matter refuses to take part in a single debate plan but chooses to take part in most, it seems to me not to be any threat to democracy. The threat would be if the BDP then proceeds to disrupt or cause for the debates it shall not be part of to be cancelled. For so long as the party opts out but do not bar others from doing it, it is an exercise, perhaps, of their own democratic choice. That is why they at times say democracy is a 'bastard'- it gives as much as it takes. As for Gabz FM, the radio station need not have sleepless nights over this- they sent out invites and one of the parties felt the radio station may not serve its interests, or rather, may be counter to their interests and opted out. This is just normal and the station should carry on its business without having to fix anyone. An invitee exercised an option not to take part. So then, what seems to bring out so much noise? Is it yet another demonstration of the silly season having caught up? I am persuaded to believe it is.