Nkopane Mathibeli
Overall, the electorate in Lesotho votes because it seeks economic prosperity, social development, and political stability. As Basotho, many of us will agree that these three constitute the totality of our national interests, i.e., our highest aspirations as a nation. For example, economically, we all yearn to see Lesotho move from its total dependence on South Africa to producing what it consumes. Socially, we yearn to see our communities emancipated from the social dysfunction that feeds from a broken moral fibre, broken homes and rampant poverty. Politically, we yearn for wise and upright leadership whose virtue lies in selfless and patriotic service. In fact, every political leader who has ever become Lesotho’s Prime Minister (democratically) was so elected because the majority believed he had the capacity to make all these possible.
However, having elected Prime Ministers for a total of eight times within a period of twenty nine years (1993 – 2022), the bulk of what Basotho consume still comes from South Africa; social dysfunction has become a hallmark of community life across the country and instead of stability and virtuous leadership, the political front is plagued with power mongering, defections and distrust. Even though we are far from securing the basics of our national interest, political loyalists speak highly (and rightly so) of milestones achieved when their parties governed. They include roads (gravel & tarred), rural and urban electrification projects, bridge construction, school and clinic construction, and interventions through various policies and legislation. Each of these is a necessity and is rightly celebrated. However, their combined contribution to the achievement of the national interest has been minimal. My intention with this piece is to argue that this occurs primarily because governments undertake development initiatives with the next election, rather than the national interest, in mind. Why has this become a norm?
A ceremonial national interest
The problem is that we have a ceremonial national interest. As a rule, anything that is ceremonial is, in passing, afforded half-hearted recognition because that which is ceremonial is not the ceremony itself. This is precisely how the political class treats our national interest. They all recognise what ought to be done to improve the welfare of the masses, yet once in office, they prioritise self-enrichment for a good part of the term. Only a year or two before the next election, they pick a few items from the national interest and begin serving the masses in “earnest”. They launch a couple of important national-level projects, supplemented by upgrades to existing infrastructure in various communities across the country. This typically involves upgrading older gravel roads, patching potholed tarred roads, and intensifying garbage collection in urban centres. To the credit of incumbent governments, a fair number of people get those badly needed jobs, even if temporarily. A new and equally effective addition to this election-oriented actualisation of the national interest is the provision of food parcels in communities by both government-aligned and opposition-aligned politicians. For years, this is how the national interest has been treated without consequence.
Changing the script
For the political class, the value of this modus operandi is that people enter the electoral booth with uplifted spirits due to tangible evidence of a government that is demonstrably working. Given that these interventions do indeed give hope, they would normally deserve unconditional recognition. Time has, however, taught us that they do not serve to dignify the existence of the masses but to pacify their anger; to neutralise the frustrations arising from the reported embezzlement of billions amid collapsing social services, nepotism, and cronyism. In this regard, they constitute an insult to the national interest and must be condemned and rejected. Rejection does not imply turning their backs on food parcels or vandalising vote-buying projects. It implies a principled resistance to their votes being swayed in the direction of these fake philanthropists; it implies their recognition that the expressions of concern are superficial. That would be a sign of civic virtue, which is best complemented by a calculated execution of civic duty – voting in line with the national interest. This is ideal, but realistically, it is only possible if the national interest is mainstreamed into the political psyche, thereby becoming a core determinant of political culture. If we are to avoid falling into the trap of believing that democracy has failed in Lesotho, we must pursue this ideal with earnest, uncompromising determination, because it is the only safeguard against the political manipulation of the electorate.
Who leads this process?
Perhaps we should begin by asking whether our country has formalised and documented its national interest as a reference point and compass. Have Basotho ever articulated their highest aspirations for their country? The answer is in the affirmative. In 2000, Vision 2020 was launched. The document was the outcome of a national dialogue, the goal of which was for Basotho to express their long-term vision for the Lesotho they wanted. So in essence, the suggestion for a mainstreaming of the national interest into the political psyche is not about reinventing the wheel. It is recommended that we turn the wheel with slightly more force. It is the recognition that our democracy is at risk of losing its legitimacy because the electorate is unable to exercise the power it holds. As a result, it has become imperative for the national interest to be the subject on which national consciousness is inculcated.
Luckily, much of the work of shaping the national interest was done in 2000, and Basotho expressed consensus on six components of their national interest. They expressed that in the long term, their collective aspiration is a Lesotho that is: (a) a stable democracy; (b) a nation at peace with itself and it’s neighbours; (c) healthy and has a well developed human resource base; (d) strong economically; (e) well managed environmentally and; (f) well advanced technologically. This is literally the template of our national interest. All that is left is to set performance targets and timeframes of execution within both the constitutional framework and electoral cycles. A programme must thereafter be drawn to neatly knit this structure of our national interest into the subconscious of the masses. In time, it will become a reference point on which their political psyche is based. Who then must take ownership of this programme? It is obviously not the government. After all, the goal of the programme is to empower the electorate to dictate terms to the government. On this ground, it is clear that the role with all its logistics and costs falls squarely at the door of our perfectly capable but seriously underfunded civic movement.
Matekane’s prospects
Just like previous governments, the current one is similarly implementing development initiatives with the next election in mind, not the national interest. None of its flagship projects is directed to any of the six components of our national interest. For instance, it was the completion of the reform process that would have secured a stable democracy for us. Unfortunately, the process got stalled for unpatriotic reasons. Given the high rates of domestic and cross-border crime, nothing substantial is being done to ensure that we are a nation at peace with itself and its neighbours. With the collapse of businesses due to low demand, closure of factories and loss of jobs without the tabling of credible solutions, nothing is being done to ensure that the country is economically strong. There are, however, celebrations about the construction and upgrades of roads, the provision of vehicles to various government departments and the acquisition of agricultural equipment to intensify food production and yields.
In all of these, the electorate does not care about the finer details. They do not ask critical questions such as: under which component of the national interest does this initiative fall; what is its position in the hierarchy of national priorities, and is its current implementation done with the national interest or the next election in mind? As a result, the outcome of the next general election may still favour Matekane as the euphoria around him remains relatively intact despite evidence of rampant corruption. It is correct to blame those who still see him as a saviour because democracy demands that they hold him accountable to the national interest. We must, however, acknowledge that their failure to correctly hold him accountable is not a distinctly RFP problem. Rather, it is a reflection of Lesotho’s entrenched political culture of maintaining loyalty to political leadership, not the national interest.
Summary
- They all recognise what ought to be done to improve the welfare of the masses, yet once in office, they prioritise self-enrichment for a good part of the term.
- Only a year or two before the next election, they pick a few items from the national interest and begin serving the masses in “earnest”.
- For the political class, the value of this modus operandi is that people enter the electoral booth with uplifted spirits due to tangible evidence of a government that is demonstrably working.
Your Trusted Source for News and Insights in Lesotho!
At Newsday Media, we are passionate about delivering accurate, timely, and engaging news and multimedia content to our diverse audience. Founded with the vision of revolutionizing the media landscape in Lesotho, we have grown into a leading hybrid media company that blends traditional journalism with innovative digital platforms.
