Khama: Mogae's plan has gone awry

RYDER GABATHUSE
Staff Writer | Friday April 9, 2010 00:00

Factional politics is not a new phenomenon in the BDP. Whilst some trace it to the era of the second president, Sir Ketumile Masire's tenure, some think it is as old as the party itself. The only difference is how the first to the third former presidents managed the explosive factional fights that they prevented a split in the party that has been in power since September 30, 1966. The former presidents can only be credited for containing factionalism so much that it did not spill out of control.

But last week it became apparent that Barata-Phathi's patience had run out to the extent that the long mooted notion of forming an alternative party was no longer a bargaining chip but a reality. And for now, it's only a matter of time before the BDP splinter party is formed and duly registered to face the BDP.

As things continue to get out of control with the BDP leadership cracking the whip on its errant members, it is evident that there is no love lost between Barata-Phathi and the A-Team dominated leadership.

Perhaps, the man to blame for all Khama's blunders is past immediate president Festus Mogae, who retired Khama from his army job to try and secure his presidency, which he felt, was under threat from some Barata-Phathi lions.  Mogae recruited Khama with the hope that he would further stabilise the warring factions and thereby threw him in the lions den.

As a product of factionalism himself, Khama was seemingly more concerned with solidifying the A-Team axis than bringing together the party's feuding factions for a long lasting solution.

His attitude post the Kanye party congress last year aptly signified this. From the first day the results were announced with Barata-Phathi faction winning all the elective positions, Khama never showed appreciation for the winning team. Firstly, he did not want to congratulate the winners, which was indicative of a man who did not tolerate the opposite faction. He chose to run the central committee as a one-man show, with all the decisions coming from him.

Against the party's tradition, Khama would later make a unilateral decision to handpick members of the central committee without the input of members of the newly elected Barata-Phathi-dominated central committee. He went even further to pick sub committee members without consulting his central committee.

It has always been clear that Khama did not want to work with Barata-Phathi. It was not long before his difference with the former party secretary general, Gomolemo Motswaledi metamorphosed into a serious court battle, which Khama later won with Motswaledi banished from the party for 10 years. After his court victory, Khama thought he was in total control of the party and still failed to bridge the gap that existed between him and the party-lovers.

Some Barata-Phathi central committee members tendered their resignations in solidarity with Motswaledi and Khama did not waste his time as he immediately filled the vacant posts with his loyalists.

BDP veteran politician Gabothuse Dijeng said in a previous interview that during Sir Seretse Khama's tenure, he would not leave issues in both the party and government to unnecessarily prolong. 'Whenever there were issues that required immediate attention, he (Seretse, the father of the incumbent President) would summon the party structures to Gaborone and have issues resolved there and then.

Dijeng, who served under both Seretse and Masire, stressed that the control of the party slipped following the death of Seretse.

Like he insisted about eight months ago, University of Botswana (UB) social work lecturer and political commentator, Log Raditlhokwa, maintains that Mogae committed a blunder by trusting that Khama would have the power to bring together BDP warring factions.

He says it was basically Mogae's idea to rope in Khama 'so that he could protect his leadership and this has worked for him'.

He stresses that Mogae used Khama as his shield from some of the serious challenges to his leadership. He also feels that it was just too early for Khama to have been given such a crucial role.

'That's a fundamental mistake. I take it that it takes the whole leadership to come up with a framework that will combat factionalism as a collective decision and bring about credible peace in the party,' argues Raditlhokwa.

Raditlhokwa believes that the issue of unity in the BDP is going to be very complex, as some people do not trust the party leadership now.

'I can safely point out that Mogae's approach worked for him very well as he was able to maintain his leadership until the end. But, the dividends of bringing in Khama as a 'peacemaker' have fallen far short of their intended results.' He further warns that unity and solidarity will never come from the efforts of an individual.

He criticises Professor Lawrence Schlemmer's recommendation to introduce someone popular to help reinvigorate the faction-riddled BDP as a misguided decision. 'The reason I am saying this is that I just wonder what informed him. Even Mogae blundered because he was not informed by anything concrete to think that Khama was popular as he was not necessarily welcomed by both party factions as some even considered him a political novice.'

The commentator says Khama did not come to the BDP as a politician and applied the usual skills of a democratic society. Khama's main blunder, Raditlhokwa says, was to introduce systems of control in the BDP and the civil service.

'We now have a lot of people who are disgruntled since they expected our democracy to grow. Their expectation is at variance with that of Khama's. Instead, for Khama it is difficult to satisfy the hopes of the democratic society.'

Raditlhokwa says that Khama seems to have copied the Singapore model, which developed by taking the risk of undermining some democratic principles in order to gain the requisite development.

'Khama emphasises control whilst some people within the BDP embrace democratic values. People who are breaking ranks with Khama and his leadership are those that feel that internal debate is being stifled,' he states.

He credits Mogae to have used his wisdom widely and posits that this has assisted him to hold the factions together. He adds that Mogae was strategic in that he used Khama's popularity to hold the party together up to the end of his term.

The UB academic says since taking over Khama had ample opportunity to improve the situation in both the BDP and the civil service.

'I don't know why there is this split. People were generally hoping that a lot of people would cooperate with Khama at all costs. Even within Barata-phathi there are people who have always wanted to work cooperatively with Khama.'

He warns BDP members who will remain in the BDP when Barata-Phathi forms a new party that, 'things will never be the same again.'

'The civil service is going to be divided as well and I foresee a lot of trouble because this has a potential of further causing general instability. Bitterness is creeping in which could erode some pillars of democracy,' he says and further warns that there could be a serious backlash in the end.

He also warns of a possibility that some people could be silent today and only to cross the floor tomorrow to a newly set party.

He fears that Khama might call early elections if he feels that Barata-Phathi are a force to reckon with.

'Parliamentary debates are going to be too hot. Barata-Phathi faction are going to debate national issues in a rather hostile manner to prove a point to their supporters that they have a lot to offer.'

Raditlhokwa also fears that the current developments could render Vice President Mompati Merafhe not to go in the mid-term as previously indicated but could stay longer than expected. He argues that Merafhe might hang around longer to stabilise Khama's shaky political base.

He also fears this political conflict has every likelihood of consuming energy of the society and in the process other equally important issues of national interest could suffer.

The state funds, he fears, 'are likely to be used wrongly by the ruling elite to fight the so-called 'dissidents' and mainly as a way of pleasing the electorate in an unsustainable manner.

There will be some hostility which will possibly take long to eradicate.'

The academic holds a strong view that Khama wants to do good things but he does not want to take his time and take people on board. 'Mogae has been exposed as his plan has not worked at all,' argues Raditlhokwa.

Raditlhokwa's UB colleague and political science lecturer, Dithapelo Keorapetse, says that the BDP history shows that the party has always had factions. The only difference with previous regimes is that they contained factions amongst others through concessions and generally through tolerance.

'Khama has changed things and under his leadership, it is either you are with him or not. His approach lacks caution,' suggests UB academic who is also a newspaper columnist.

He says Khama's approach that party dissidents should be pressurised into conformity is wrong and undemocratic and capable of forcing people to react with force.

Keorapetse adds that bureaucracy has remained largely neutral and has always shown its allegiance to the political leadership of the day.

To him politicisation of the bureaucracy has not been an issue. Whilst some civil servants could be BDP card carrying members, Keorapetse says it has not reached a level at which bureaucrats could be immersed in the BDP factions or fight for any political party for that matter.

'The public service is supposed to serve the government in power. In Botswana, the politicisation of bureaucracy has not been an issue,' he says responding to fears from some quarters that the BDP in fighting could spill over into the civil service.

As far as the political scientist is concerned, in light of the tactics adopted by Khama, it is difficult for him to suggest that Mogae made the right choice in choosing Khama to be his successor.

With the BDP leadership requesting members associated with the formation of a new break away party to choose between the BDP and their new party this week, BDP executive secretary, Dr Comma Serema says may be it signifies rebirth.

'May be it signifies the party renewal so that you do not have people who do not believe in the new leadership style of doing things. Barata-phathi faction want change and the party according to them is resisting this change,' says Serema.

Serema is convinced that Khama has brought a new style of doing things and those who are resisting are the ones who are against the party.

'BDP factions are very old and the party leadership is new and one of the new leadership strategies is to end factions for good whilst on the other hand Barata-phathi want the status quo to prevail.'

Serema emphasises that Khama has requested factions to disband and follow the leadership and some people are still resisting.

He dismisses analysis that under Khama it is either you are with him or not and observed: 'Khama has always approached factions with caution.

He has always said let's behave like democrats, serve people with dignity and so forth.'