Why Botswana's shift has Zimbabwe's Zanu-PF on edge

As the region and the continent at large continue to digest the outcome of the recent Botswana elections and their ramifications reverberate across borders, a bigger debate is unfolding on the changing political landscape of southern African.

The debate is now more focused on the upcoming elections in neighbouring Namibia after the Botswana's political earthquake whose tremors shook the region.

Namibia goes to elections on 27 November.

Yet one of the strongest reactions to the Botswana electoral development was not from Namibia, but from Zimbabwe where a former liberation movement, Zanu-PF, has been in power for 44 years.

In a historic turn of events, Botswana's ruling Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) has finally lost its grip on power after 58 years, yielding to the Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC).

With the BDP reduced to a mere four seats in Botswana's parliament, also meaning that it is now the fourth largest party in the country, the electoral outcome signals a profound shift for the country, where the BDP's dominance had been a seemingly unshakeable constant since independence.

President Duma Boko of the UDC stepped into office with a resounding mandate, yet the repercussions of his victory are reverberating far beyond Botswana's borders.

Notably, in neighbouring Zimbabwe, the reaction has been intense and frantic.

Within Zimbabwe's opposition circles, the defeat of the BDP has been celebrated as a triumph for democracy and a hope for change.

Zimbabwean opposition parties have been fighting for change for a long time now. They have come close to winning, most notably in 2008, but Zanu-PF has dug in, and remained ensconced at the helm through its traditional liberation struggle political capital, violence and electoral manipulation.

Indeed, for the opposition leaders and supporters alike in the region, Botswana's election outcome signals the potential for change even in countries where ruling parties have held power for decades.

It came as no surprise that Zimbabwe's opposition leaders like Nelson Chamisa were quick to celebrate the UDC's triumph, emphasising on X (Twitter): “There is no political system or process that is ever immune to change and renewal...”

A statement of hope for what could one day be possible in Zimbabwe.

Chamisa was presented at Boko's inauguration with other Zimbabwean opposition leaders, including Job Sikhala who recently spent about 600 days in political detention.

There were a number of Zimbabwean opposition activists at the inauguration.

How about the reaction within Zimbabwe's ruling party circles?

In stark contrast to the opposition's optimism, Zimbabwe's ruling Zanu-PF predictably responded to Botswana's election outcome with palpable unease, anxiety and in some cases with outright hostility.

Zimbabwean President Emmerson Mnangagwa, a regional political ally of former Botswana president Mokgweetsi Masisi, defeated by Boko, responded with a different attitude to what he did in Mozambique after recent elections.

In Mozambique, Mnangagwa was quick to congratulate new President Daniel Chapo and Frelimo for their disputed victory even before official results were announced.

But in Botswana, Mnangagwa was hesitant, he procrastinated.

He first sent his congratulations through Foreign Affairs and only later put a person touch to it when the differenr attitude was pointed out.

Mnangagwa attended Boko's inauguration, but looked glum-faced during the event.

He looked sad and dejected.

Interestingly, he sat not far away from his regional political nemesis, Zambian President Hakainde Hichilema.

There is no love lost between Hichilema and Mnangagwa after the Zambian leader led the Southern African Development Community (Sadc) to reject Zimbabwe's controversial elections last year.

Hichilema was chairperson of the Sadc troika of the organ on politics, defence and security cooperation which deals with elections in the region.

Mnangagwa has even internationalised the dispute by situating it in a geopolitical context bringing in Russia and the United States into it.

While Mnangagwa, now also Sadc chair, offered congratulatory messages to Boko and UDC, his ruling Zanu-PF foot soldiers, including senior party members, sympathisers and some analysts, have took to social media — and even mainstream outlets in Zimbabwe — to cast aspersions on Duma Boko's win.

Zimbabwean government spokesman Nick Mangwana wrote about the role of Non-Governmental Organisations in elections in Africa, with an indirect insinuation of external influence.

"There are a number of elections being held in Africa and there is evidence that some Western powers are meddling in those processes," Mangwana wrote in the state-controlled newspaper, The Herald, widely seen as the Zanu-PF government Pravda-like mouthpiece.

"In some cases, they have their own horse in the race and accept nothing but their horse's victory. But how can they be both players and observers? When some among us question this, the retort they get is that Western powers are invited by African countries to come and participate as observers. I think it is unfair to judge us harshly for that. We know what happens to those that don't invite them, don't we? They are treated as rogue, illegitimate regimes and outposts of tyranny."

Former Zanu-PF spin-doctor Professor Jonathan Moyo, who is still associated with the party or rather its ideological persuasion and vision, insinuated that the Oppenheimers' Brenthurst Foundation may have been behind the outcome of Botswana elections.

Moyo, a mercurial former Zanu-PF political strategist, is ironically in exile in Kenya due to the ruling party's internal and undemocratic politics, having survived a fierce night raid on his home and that of his political ally during the November 2017 coup which ousted the late former president Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe.

Moyo also criticised the decision Boko to hold a public inauguration ceremony at National Stadium in Gaborone, a week after taking oath of office with lighting speed to avoid a power vacuum as Masisi quickly conceded and stepped aside.

“The adage that the more things change, the more they stay the same; just about summarises the inauguration circus in Gaborone!,” Moyo said dismissingly on X.

In an editorial comment, Zimbabwe's state-controlled newspaper, The Chronicle, portrayed ‘Comrade' Masisi as a fallen hero who met his fate by challenging Western hegemony, alleging that diamond giant De Beers may have played a role in his downfall.

On social media, Zanu-PF supporters were even more blunt, alleging De Beers had installed Boko as Botswana's leader, of course all of that without evidence.

They labelled him a “stooge of the West” and a “puppet,” even seeking to link him with South Africa's Democratic Alliance, a party often criticised by Zanu-PF as a front for white capitalist interests.

Zanu-PF leaders have a propensity of branding the opposition stooges and burying their heads in the sands about legitimate people's demands which create new social movements to oppose it.

The party never really acknowledges the choice of Zimbabwean opposition voters, an anti-democratic culture rooted in local politics.

Zimbabweans are not able to make their own choices without some external force aiding and abetting them to do so, Zanu-PF leaders and supporters seem to think.

Only them are capable of making patriotic and legitimate choices on behalf of the nation.

Well, it is not my place to defend the UDC government — I am sure they can do so by themselves — but as an analyst and former practicing journalist now into research i wonder why Zanu-PF was so badly rattled by Botswana's democratic shift and choice?
Is it because Masisi and Mnangagwa are political allies? Or personal friends? Well, they referred to each other as 'brothers'.

Or perhaps because Mnangagwa dispatched a team of senior Zanu-PF members to assist BDP on the eve of the elections?

Like they did in South Africa in May before the general elections in which the ruling ANC, another former liberation movement, floundered down to 40% - from 57% -  getting forced into a coalition government.

The BDP or ANC experiences are not new in the region.

Former liberation movements have lost power or forced into changes before.

That has previously happened in Zambia, Malawi and Kenya.

In Mozambique now, Frelimo, although it won, is being tested by the opposition which rejected results and called for rolling mass action.

The ongoing  protests have left a trail of destruction, with dozens of people dead and property destroyed.

The opposition leader Valencio Mondlane says he has escaped an assassination bid into South Africa.

Resultantly, Mnangagwa, whose friend Masisi lost unexpectedly, has called for an extraordinary Sadc summit in Harare over the situation in Mozambique, Botswana and Namibia.

Mauritius will also feature. An opposition leader won elections on Sunday there .

There have been opposition victories in Zambia, Lesotho and Sychelles as well in recent years.

The winds of change are blowing across the region, and the mood of former liberation struggle leaders is foul.

Yet these factors alone and on the surface don't seem to explain adequately the intensity and fury of Zanu-PF's reaction in Zimbabwe.

Instead, it reveals a more profound fear that what happened in Botswana could potentially also unfold in Zimbabwe.

This is Zanu-PF's biggest fear at the moment after the shock elections in Botswana.

After all, Botswana and Zimbabwe share a long-standing relationship as fellow liberation nations, each governed by parties born from independence movements.

Botswana was part of the Frontline states which were committed to help liberate other countries in the region and ending apartheid in South Africa and Namibia.

Zimbabwe joined in 1980.

The liberation struggle bonds are strong.

Former liberation movements who fought to end colonial rule are still in power, at least some, and want to remain in there.

They have formed an organisation called Former Liberation Movements from Southern Africa, which was set as a successor of the Frontline States, the union created to support each other in the struggle for independence.

The organisation was formed by six parties: ANC in South Africa, Swapo in Namibia, MPLA in Angola, Frelimo in Mozambique, Chama Cha Mapinduzi in Tanzania and Zanu-PF in Zimbabwe.

For Zanu-PF and these other former liberation parties, the fall of the BDP in Botswana serves as a stark reminder that even the most entrenched ruling parties are not immune to the forces of democratic change.

For years, these parties have held onto power, often invoking the legitimacy of their liberation credentials and showing entitlement to rule.

But Botswana's recent election shows that liberation-era parties are not immune to change when citizens demand it and when the an idea whose time has come manifests itself through the ballot.

As stated earlier, some ex-liberation parties have already lost power in the region, although some reinvent themselves, for instance the National Liberation Front in Algeria.

In other words, Zanu-PF's panicky reaction to discredit the opposition in the region, including  Boko and the UDC, seems to be less about Botswana and more about their own precarious hold on power.

In fact, the party is currently going through what I term power precedent paranoia. This paranoia stems from the fear that a similar shift could occur within their own borders, challenging their entrenched dominance and potentially sparking a wave of democratic demands from their citizens.

I do not have a crystal ball, or the power of clairvoyance, but as the country approaches the 2028 general elections, this paranoia may manifest itself in renewed and intensified efforts to suppress opposition voices, manipulate electoral processes, and control public discourse, all aimed at maintaining their grip on power at all costs.

This is what liberation parties often do and have done, some with success and others not.

After all, Zanu-PF has done that before. It lost elections in 2008 to the then main opposition MDC at the time, but hung into power desperately.

Its leader, Mugabe, who postured as the authentic voice of liberation-era parties in the region, lost the first round of polling.
Mugabe then bounced back through a wave of violence, intimidation and killings.

He was fully backed by the army in the process.

Zimbabwean politics is deeply rooted in militaristic culture.

The politics is profoundly militarised.

Mugabe had come into power through the army during the liberation struggle in the 1975 and he was removed by the army in 2017.

Militarisation of politics is inherently undemocratic and that often subverts the people's will during elections.

Zimbabwe's political landscape has long been characterised by political repression, violence and electoral manipulation, which is different from Botswana.

Zimbabwean political conditions are different from Botswana whose political environment is democratic, but even then if BDP, in power for 58 years, can be defeated at the ballot, that may also happen to the ANC, Swapo, Frelimo, MPLA, Chama Cha Mapinduzi or Zanu-PF.

These are social movements and when when social conditions change, they also risk being swept away by the winds of change unless they adjust, reform and be dynamic to reinvent themselves.

Returning to the present context, the fury of Zanu-PF — or rather Zanu-PF activists and their media outlets — betrays their own political insecurities and fear of what maybe coming.

By spreading calculated misinformation, disinformation and attempting to delegitimise Botswana's democratic choice, Zanu-PF exposes its own paranoia and inability to respond progressively to the changing political environment and landscape.

Rather than attempting to smear Botswana's new leadership, Zanu-PF would do well to heed the warning implicit in the BDP's downfall: No party has a permanent lease on power.

Put differently, Zanu-PF should be drawing positive lessons from Botswana and not just reacting with negativity and needless hostility to people's democratic choices.

Botswana's political shift should not at all be seen as a threat but as a lesson from which positive lessons can be drawn and learnt from.

Zanu-PF's attempts to undermine it with baseless allegations, conspiracy theories, and disinformation only serves to show its political fossilisation, dinosaur mentality and fear.

The fear of losing power, which is real.

Instead of spreading falsehoods and behaving like a cat on a hot tin roof, perhaps it is time for Zimbabwe's ruling Zanu-PF to reflect on its own relationship with power, how it has ruled the country, its legacy, what its own people are saying and consider what lessons it might learn from Botswana's example going forward.

-----------
Ntibinyane Ntibinyane is an Assistant Professor in the Communication Department at MacEwan University and former journalist.