Share this
Twitter
Digg
Del.icio.us
Yahoo
Technorati
Googlize this
Facebook
Hear this text
Print
E-mail
Tags
Election season in southern Africa – does anyone notice?The voters in Botswana very recently elected their rulers for the next five years. The people of Mozambique get their chance on 28 October 2009, while the Namibians will decide a month later on 27 and 28 November 2009 if they want to keep SWAPO in power.Â
There is no need to be embarrassed if you are unaware of these elections. You probably followed the historical election of Barack Obama as president of the United States, and you are probably aware that all indications point to a great defeat for Gordon Brown and his Labour Party when the British go to the polls.
But then, all of us are exposed to the international media to remind us of what is happening in America and Europe or the “War on Terror”, while southern Africa, although important to us, does not feature high on its agenda. Mugabe and his antics are also more noteworthy and makes for more interesting news than three elections with predictable results. Â
Elections generally only happen every four or five years and are supposed to be important events with wide media coverage and in-depth analysis.
Media coverage of the three southern African elections is surprisingly limited and public interest markedly indifferent.
The most plausible reason is most likely the expected outcomes of these elections. In Botswana, Mozambique and Namibia, the political parties currently in power have been there since independence and are certain to win again. The only real question remains whether they will increase their majority in parliament.
In Botswana, the ruling Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) succeeded in doing just that by increasing the majority it gained in the 2004 election by one seat. But, if you won 45 seats out of a possible 57 seats, the victory is sweet and decisive.
Similar results are expected for Frelimo in Mozambique and SWAPO in Namibia, and both political parties will obviously be ecstatic.
Landslide election victories, however, raise the question if it is – in the long run – detrimental to democracy, transparency and good governance. There are ample examples in history to justify this concern.
Democracy prospers best when there is a strong and vibrant opposition keeping the ruling party in check, preventing complacency and arrogance from taking root. The uninspiring election manifestos from both Frelimo and SWAPO, which seem little more than a reprint from the previous election, seem to support this view.
In the absence of a viable opposition that has shown very little, if any, progress or growth since their previous election defeat, both Frelimo and SWAPO may feel vindicated and see little reason for vigorous electioneering.  Â
In both Mozambique and Namibia, the opposition is in disarray and its time and energy is wasted on infighting and insinuations. In Mozambique, this can even lead to Renamo losing its status as the official opposition and perhaps to its disintegration as a respectful political party. Its election campaign to date has been nothing but chaotic and disastrous.
The myriad small and irrelevant parties in both Mozambique and Namibia is proof that the political landscape is interspersed with opportunists viewing it as an easy road to the good life. This opportunism naturally suits the ruling parties just fine and their alleged secret funding of these opportunists to keep the opposition divided is a tactic that will once again deliver handsome dividends.
The Botswana election result is an example of just how difficult it is for any opposition party in southern Africa to replace the party in office.
Before the election of 16 October 2009, the ruling BDP was caught up in fierce internal party squabbling and the party leader and the country’s president, Ian Khama, elicited strong criticism for his autocratic leadership style and allegations that he is militarising Botswana – and places far too much emphasis on the role of the security establishment. With the economic recession as an unsuspected ally, the opposition was adamant that it would make large inroads into the ruling party’s support base. Nothing of the sort happened and the opposition is left in the same shameful position as before. Â
There are those who will argue that in the African context, a single dominating party elected democratically – albeit somewhat flawed in light of irrefutable proof that violence and intimidation occurs during every election campaign – remains the best option. When they then refer to the high levels of peace and stability in Mozambique and Namibia and the growing prosperity in the two countries, one must concede that they have a point, which is reinforced when Botswana is added to the equation.
Critics will counter by pointing to Zimbabwe as an example of how horribly wrong things can go if a single party dominates and then loses direction and vision.
Politics in general, and in southern Africa in particular, is a complicated affair and this short discourse is admittedly a crude and rather unsophisticated look at the status of democracy in the region against the background of three elections covering the western, central and eastern flanks of the region.
Any debate regarding the shape and status of democracy in southern Africa is healthy and will hopefully never cease to attract robust discussion.
