Connect with us
Advertisement

Scientific advice, adaptive management, and public policy

Crafting scientifically enlightened management interventions that address environmental and socioeconomic challenges can be treacherous terrain. To do both, it sometimes isn't enough to simply lay the evidence before the public in a dispassionate way.

At times, one has to assume the role of an advocate and use the tricks of the trade. But it is well-advised to maintain respectable distance from professional advocates who, like some politicians, are paid to exercise their passion and persuasion on behalf of clients or courses in which they may not privately believe. Rather, science-based discourse, procedure, and delivery offers tremendous potential in repositioning adaptive management as a useful framework in guiding public policy design, implementation, and review in Botswana and the developing world.

Scientific and technological advances are the bedrock for socio-economic development and progress. Science is a venerable way of knowledge acquisition and application. In the mainstream mode, science is a formalised protocol of accumulating factual knowledge and understanding of practical natural phenomena.

Properly pursued, the process seeks sequential observations, controlled experiments, and staged management actions that distinguish among alternative possibilities, progressively zeroing in on a better understanding of the phenomenon or problem under interrogation. We may think of understanding as what we use in order to adequately apply our wisdom and our knowledge in guiding our actions. Understanding is more often used to try to alter an outcome than to repeat or perpetuate it.

That’s why psychologists and psychiatrists try to understand the minds of poachers, passion killers, murderers, and rapists, why social historians try to understand tribalism and genocide, and why medics try to understand the causes of disease. In their respective fields, these professionals do not seek to justify poaching, passion killings, murder, rape, genocide and illness. Instead, they seek to use their understanding of an intricate train of causes so as to modify or interrupt the chain. Management, governance, and administration should thrive on similar principles and approaches.  

As benevolent custodians of the truth, scientists are supposed to reinforce existing paradigms of management by increasing the precision and efficiency of data collection rather than merely testing questions that may overturn policy. Scientists accumulate knowledge that may be called upon for policy formulation; they should have the various pieces ready if needed.

Scientists must announce crises through alerting society of the failures and dangers of past, perceived, and existing policy on challenges such as biodiversity changes, human-wildlife conflict, HIV/AIDS, alcohol use and abuse, poverty alleviation and eradication, deteriorating moral fabric, etc. Scientists should systematically interrogate and integrate the requisite knowledge, if and when solicited so as to advise policy reform. They should also use their knowledge and experience to contribute towards new, evidence- or science-based policy with the intention of better and adaptive management.

Generally, adaptive management incorporates research into strategic action. Specifically, it is the integration of design, management, and monitoring to systematically test assumptions in order to adapt and learn from coordinated experience.  Adaptive management is good management, but not all good management is adaptive management. Adaptive management requires common sense, but that is not a licence to just try whatever crosses, or appeals to, the mind.

Instead, adaptive management requires a scientific approach to challenges through testing hypotheses and systematically trying different actions to achieve a desired outcome. It is not however, a random trial-and-error process as reported in lay terminology. Instead, it first involves conceptualising the problem at hand, then developing a specific set of testable hypotheses carefully crafted from existing theory, aligned with what actions might be undertaken to explain those phenomena.

These actions are then implemented and results thereof actually rigorously monitored to gauge how they compare with predictions. The key here is to develop an understanding of not only which actions work and which do not, but also how and why. Adaptation is about taking action to improve delivery based on the results of past or existing monitoring regimes. If actions do not achieve the expected results, the likelihood is that; a) actions were poorly executed, b) conditions of application have changed, c) monitoring was sloppy, or d) some other permutation of the above.

But the sad reality in Botswana is that we are having some policies and legislation supported by the grossest of superstitions, suspicions, and other degrees and expressions of ignorance and religiosity, especially those attempts reportedly aimed at correcting environmental problems and societal discord. And it is some celebrated professionals, experts, and consultants who are supplying government and the public with latently terminal advice on how to behave into the future.

It becomes worrisome when experts deliberately manipulate and dupe government and the public that misinformation, mediocrity, dishonesty, deceit, and coercion are sustainable premises for successful policy delivery.  We need formal peer review that helps reassure the consuming public that the policies advanced are founded on sound scientific footing. Once we abandon strict adherence to what science tells us, once we start arranging the truth in media briefings and other consultative fora, then anything is possible.

In one context, we might accomplish some mobilization against some environmental and socioeconomic challenges, but in another context, we court disaster. The danger is always there, if we subvert science to extreme partisan and business ends. As humans, scientists are not quite impartial, but science should be impartial. That is why it is so important for the future of science in Botswana that the line between what science can say with certainty, and what it cannot, be drawn clearly and defended.

In one sense, the practice is that, with a trendy name and purported objective, with a strong policy position and an impassioned and aggressive public campaign, nobody will dare to criticize the science, and in short order, a terminally weak policy thesis will be masqueraded as scientific gospel. Thereafter, any criticism becomes beside the point.  Such is how bad science is used at times to promote what some people would consider good policy. Uncertainties in scientific evidence are glossed over in the unseemly rush for an overarching policy, and for consultants to invariably propose and support policy by delivering findings that are desired by the patron or commissioning institution.

Next, there is organised marginalisation, discrimination, and isolation of those scientists who sound technical and procedural deficiencies to policy formulation and review, and the characterization of those scientists as “academics”, “outsiders”, and "sceptics" – suspect individuals with suspect motives, reactionaries, or simply anti-establishment nutcases. In short order, debate ends, even though citizen scientists are uncomfortable about how scientific protocols are being trampled. Is this what science has become? Hopefullynot. But this is what it will become, unless there is a concerted effort by citizen scientists to reconcile science and public policy, and also aggressively separate science from politics. Scientists best serve public policy by living within the ethics of science, not those of politics.

The connection between scientific evidence and public policy has regrettably become elusively elastic in Botswana. Several hypotheses help explain this observation; a) the complacency of the citizen scientific profession, b) the lack of good science education among the public; c) the rise of specialized advocacy groups which have been enormously effective in getting publicity and shaping policy, and d) because of civil society’s failure as independent assessors of evidence.

When distinguished institutions no longer differentiate between factual content and institutional opinion, but rather mix both freely in press statements and workshops, then who will hold anyone to a higher standard? We should strive for broad education about science, and about its methods and uncertainties. But we should do this precisely because it will promote wide and engaged debate, and airing of worries and precautions, not under any delusion that such a scientifically literate society will be a passive consumer.

Especially in the early stages, questioning, dissent, and dissident opinion are hugely useful. It is important that consensus is not reached too early least it inhibits important lines of investigation. That initial resistance or opposition is a fundamental characteristic of human nature. It is quite valid because it accords the progenitors and the public critical opportunity to reconsider and interrogate procedures and the prevailing evidence. Sharing ignorance is important in gaining confidence from the public.

True to its practical expression, science will provide no miracles, but science can do a lot to ameliorate the dislocations that are gaining currency in Botswana as it has delivered for the developed world. While much of science deals with things that are indeed well understood, many of the topics that engage public attention in Botswana lie at or beyond the frontiers of what is currently known.

Regrettably, the fair majority of current science advice to government policy-makers is routine, grounded on tired and fairly plodded areas of science. Here, public expectations – “tell us the facts” are the order of the day. In this instance, it is necessary to understand that science is as much – or more – a way of asking illuminating questions, as it is a collection of tidy and certain answers. There are areas of science where, for all practical purposes, certain answers can be given, while uncertainty looms in other areas. This needs to be taken in sobriety.

The key to credibility lies in soliciting inputs from a wide range of stakeholders and in being open and sincere about the process, institutions, and people involved. This amounts to a matter of accountability: both the policy-makers and the advisers have to be accountable – ultimately to the public – for the advice given and the use made of it. What is clear, however, is that on environmental and socio-economic challenges, science and policy have become inextricably mixed to the point where it will be difficult, if not impossible, to separate them out.

The primary role of the scientist is not to determine which risks are worth taking, or deciding what choices we should take, but the scientist must be involved in indicating what the possible choices, constraints, and possibilities are. Policy-makers have to know what they can expect from scientific advisers. There is much that science does not know, otherwise research would be redundant! Policy issues arise in areas of scientific ignorance as well as scientific knowledge.

But the uncertainty and controversy that can characterise science at the limits of current knowledge do not mean that science has nothing to contribute or that all ‘scientific’ opinions are equally plausible. Although there will be cases where the science is inconclusive and experts agree only that further research is needed, established scientific knowledge should often be able to set boundaries to the uncertainty and thus provide a guide to advised and reserved action.

Science is about exploring and discovering new things rather than deciding how, or even if, these things should be used. It is the role of society as a whole to decide how the new knowledge discovered by science should be used. In the end, the debates on scientific matters are not just about science. They involve not just our rational minds but also aspirations, emotions, and experiences of the greater public.

Kabajan Sam KAUNDA is a Nature Detective: People & Wildlife
Senior Lecturer & Research Coordinator: Wildlife Ecology & Conservation 
Department of Biological Sciences at the University of Botswana

Continue Reading

Opinions

Our Strength is our Unity

18th March 2022
Craig-Cloud

Putin Chose War.  We Remain United with Ukraine.

U.S. Ambassador Craig L. Cloud

This is a dangerous moment for Europe and for freedom-loving people around the world.  By launching his brutal assault on the people of Ukraine, Vladimir Putin has also committed an assault on the principles that uphold global peace and democracy.  But the people of Ukraine are resilient.

They’ve had a democracy for decades, and their bravery is inspiring the world.  The United States, together with our Allies and partners across the globe, will continue to support the Ukrainian people as they defend their country.  By choosing to pay for a war instead of investing in the needs of Russians, Putin’s invasion of Ukraine will be a strategic failure for the Kremlin and ravage the future of the Russian people.

When the history of this era is written, it will show that Putin’s choice to launch an unprovoked, unjust, and premeditated attack left the West more unified and Russia exponentially weaker.

United in Our Response

This will not end well for Vladimir Putin.  Together, the United States and our Allies and partners are taking action to hold Russia accountable.  As a result of unprecedented global sanctions coordination, the United States, the United Kingdom, the European Union, Japan, and Canada have removed selected Russian banks from the SWIFT messaging system and imposed restrictive measures on the Russian Central Bank.

President Biden announced sweeping financial sanctions and stringent export controls that will damage Russia’s economy, financial system, and access to cutting-edge technology.  After Putin began his invasion, the ruble hit its weakest point in history, and the Russian stock market plunged.

Along with the United Kingdom and European Union, the United States imposed sanctions on the architects of this war, including Putin himself.

By moving in close coordination with a powerful coalition of Allies and partners representing more than half of the global economy, we have magnified the impact of our actions to impose maximum costs on Putin and his regime.  In response to Putin’s war of choice, we will limit Russia’s ability to do business in U.S. dollars.

We will stunt Russia’s ability to finance and grow its military.  We will impair Russia’s ability to compete in the global economy.  And we are prepared to do more.

In addition to economic penalties, this week President Biden authorized an additional $1 billion over the $350 million of security assistance he recently approved, and a $650 million in 2021, to immediately help Ukraine defend itself, bringing America’s total security assistance to Ukraine over the past year to $2 billion.

We also stand ready to defend our NATO Allies.  President Biden has coordinated with Allied governments to position thousands of additional forces in Germany and Poland as part of our commitment to NATO’s collective defense.

He authorized the deployment of ground and air forces already stationed in Europe to NATO’s eastern and southeastern flanks:  Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and Romania.  Our Allies have also added their own forces and capabilities to ensure our collective defense.  There should be no doubt about the readiness of the greatest military Alliance in the history of the world:  NATO is more united than ever.

The United States has also coordinated with major oil-producing and consuming countries to underscore our common interest in securing global energy supplies.  We are working with energy companies to surge their capacity to supply energy to the market, particularly as prices increase.

Putin’s Unprovoked and Premeditated War

This was an attack that Vladimir Putin has planned for a long time.  He methodically moved more than 150,000 troops and military equipment to Ukraine’s border.  He moved blood supplies into position and built field hospitals, demonstrating his intentions all along.

He rejected every good-faith effort by the United States and our Allies and partners to address his fabricated security concerns and to avoid needless conflict and human suffering by engaging in diplomacy and dialogue.

Putin executed his playbook exactly as we had warned he would do.  We saw Russia’s proxies increase their shelling in the Donbas.  We saw the Russian government launch cyber-operations against Ukraine.  We saw staged political theater in Moscow and heard outlandish and baseless claims made about Ukraine in an attempt to justify Russia’s aggression.

Russia continues to justify its military aggression by falsely claiming the need to stop “genocide” in Ukraine – despite there being no evidence that genocide was occurring there.  We saw Russia use these tactics before when they invaded Ukraine in 2014 and Georgia in 2008.

And then, at almost the very same moment the United Nations Security Council was meeting to stand up for Ukraine’s sovereignty and forestall disaster, Putin launched his invasion in violation of international law.  Missiles began to rain down, striking historic cities across Ukraine.  Then came air raids, columns of tanks, and battalions of troops, all riding a renewed wave of disinformation and outright lies.

We have been transparent with the world.  We declassified our intelligence about Russia’s plans so there could be no confusion and no cover up.  Putin is the aggressor.  Putin chose this war.  And now his people will bear the consequences of his decision to invest in war rather than in them.

Transatlantic Unity and Resolve Stronger Than Ever

Putin’s goal of dividing the West has failed.  In the face of one of the most significant challenges to European security and democratic ideals since World War II, the United States and our Allies and partners have joined together in solidarity.  We have united, coordinating intensively to engage as one with Russia and Ukraine, provided assistance to Ukraine, developed a broad response, and reaffirmed our commitment to NATO.

Putin has failed to divide us.  Putin has failed to undermine our shared belief in the fundamental right of sovereign nations to choose their destiny and their allies.  And Putin will fail to erase the proud nation of Ukraine.

The next few days, weeks, and months will be incredibly difficult for the people of Ukraine.  Putin has unleashed great suffering on them.  But the Ukrainian people have known 30 years of independence, and they have repeatedly shown they will not tolerate anyone who tries to take their country backwards.

The world is watching this conflict closely, and if Russian forces commit atrocities, we will explore all international mechanisms that could be used to bring those responsible – whether members of the military or their civilian leadership – to account.

Putin’s aggression against Ukraine will cost Russia profoundly, both economically and strategically.  The Russian people deserve better from their government than the immense cost to their future that this invasion has precipitated.

Liberty, democracy, and human dignity are forces far more powerful than fear and oppression.  In the contest between democracy and autocracy, between sovereignty and subjugation, make no mistake:  Freedom will prevail.

Continue Reading

Opinions

Kgafela’s Letter to Masisi

21st February 2022

9th December 2021
Dear Mr President.
RE: BOTSWANA CONSTITUTION REFORM – BAKGATLA BA KGAFELA POSITION

I hope this correspondence finds you well.

I would like to express my gratitude for the decisions you have made to open dialogue in Botswana leading towards Constitutional reform. We understand you have advanced a step ahead by appointing a Commissioner to lead the process. However, we must caution here that, ultimately, your government needs to pass legislation to legitimize and guide the Constitutional reform process. Otherwise, right thinking members of society all over see the futility of the exercise as presently constituted, and will not have confidence in your procedures. Nonetheless, you stand out as the first President of Botswana to take any tangible step towards constitutional reform. Whatever the outcome of the exercise may be, and whatever the motive, credit must accordingly be given where it is due. This much said about Botswana, we now turn to the main topic of this letter.

There are certain pertinent matters that we must make clear at the very beginning, and record our Bakgatla special requests to your Excellency. Whilst we Bakgatla Ba kgafela, and I (Kgafela ii) desire to experience a new future for Botswana, under a new constitution, our unique situation as Bakgatla requires recognition and special attention. The history of Bechuanaland – Botswana and Bakgatla from 1885-2021 is well documented. It is available in Prof Fred Morton’s book: When Rustling became an Art, my recent publication -The Last Frontier, Baloyi Judicial Commission of Inquiry Report of 2019, and the Lord Hailey Commission report. Lord Hailey stated in his report that: Bakgatla land belongs to Kgosi & his morafe. Her Majesty the Queen of England accepted that position in statutory title, which has not changed by lawful process to this date. All those statutes since 1899 (and Commissions of Inquiry reports) are as valid today as they were at the time of their promulgation/reporting. Even the Tribal Territories Act is still law in present day Botswana because it has not been repealed.

There is nothing in law and history to gainsay a glaring truth that:(a) Bakgatla Ba Kgafela are the lawful owners of Bakgatla Tribal Territory, as defined in the Tribal Territories Act and Her Majesty’s Proclamations; (b) Sir Seretse Kgama and BDP party expropriated our country in 1966, without consultation or agreement with Bakgatla; against international law, and against common & customary law concerning the taking of another’s property. Simultaneous with Seretse & BDP taking our country, they imposed a foreign system of human affairs called ‘western democracy’ or ‘multi-party democracy’ upon us in our country; yet again without consultation or agreement. That system has gradually deteriorated the quality of life for our people to the present day of total despair.

Bakgatla do not want to live under that system anymore, whatever name it goes by. We don’t want to be detained by its faults in our progress to the future. We want to rule ourselves in (our country) where we may practice and live our heritage without undue restrictions, including the heritage of being led by a Kgosikgolo (King), and not a politician. There is no logic in our people being driven to vote for a leader every five years, when we already have provably competent traditional leadership amongst us. This desire is consistent with international law (self- determination) and the law of property ownership.

In addition, we have ambitions of the future which may not necessarily coincide with ambitions of other Batswana in their respective localities. For instance, the rest of Botswana may wish to continue with western democracy and leadership by politicians, whilst we don’t, because we have seen the system clearly for what it represents. Moreover, our Bakgatla Kingdom extends into South Africa. Different considerations apply. It has been so, even during British colonial rule. That is why the colonial government always excluded Bakgatla land when it passed legislation for Bechuanaland Protectorate. A case on point is the Bechuanaland Protectorate (Lands) Order of 16th May 1904, which states at section 1: For the purposes of this Order the expression “Crown lands” means the lands abandoned as aforesaid by the Chiefs Khama, Sebele, and Bathoen, to wit, the lands bounded on the West by the native reserves of the Bangwaketsi, the Bakwena, and Bamangwato, on the North by the Shashi River, on the East by the Transvaal, and on the South by the territory of Barolongs always excepting the territories of the Chief Moghosi of the Bamaliti, and Linchwe of the Bakhatla, all of which Native Reserves and territories have been or shall be more particularly described in Proclamations of His Majesty’s High Commissioner for South Africa(my underlining for emphasis).

The key words are: “always excepting the territories of the Chief Moghosi of the Bamaliti, and Linchwe of the Bakhatla”. We cannot speak for Bamaliti or other tribes & peoples of Botswana because we do not have a mandate to do so. They have their own Dikgosi and representatives. We wish to focus for now only on us Bakgatla, and our demand for restoration of ownership rights to our country. We do not want our ownership issue lumped in generalization with the rest of Botswana issues. We say this with respect, recognizing always that we have family, friends’ relations and other investment across Botswana. We love Botswana. As such, we do not want to burden anyone with our uniqueness, or they becoming an albatross in our march into the future. Pertinently, we do not want our future held hostage to any delays or failures – if any – within the Constitutional review exercise your Excellency has commenced.

Accordingly, this correspondence serves to kindly ask your Excellency to utilize his current powers as leader of BDP and State President, to take such steps as necessary to redress the injustices of 1966 perpetrated against Bakgatla – by returning Bakgatla Tribal Territory to its rightful owners.

It seems to me that we are asking something relatively simple and reasonable, because all you need do is: (a) present this demand to your BDP parliament caucus; (b) discuss with your cabinet, and (c) proceed to amend the current Botswana Constitution (application clauses) to indicate that the current constitution does not apply, and should never have applied to Bakgatla Tribal Territory (this should have been done in 1966 at the London Conference and stipulated in the Bechuanaland Independence Act passed in London), (d) declare our Bakgatla independence,(e) pass transition legislation, and (f) inform the United Nations and SADC accordingly that you have released us to our independence. This bold step will resolve a historical injustice in a short space of time with the least amount of energy. What we do with our independence moving forward is our business. We have competent leadership, intelligent resourceful people and good ideas to sort ourselves out. Be rest assured that Bakgatla shall experience a better quality of life to that we have endured under the current Botswana constitution since 1966.

Whilst it may be tempting to lose the simplicity of our demand in rhetoric, decorum, political red tape, and fear of the truth & change, it remains glaringly clear to us (victims of injustice) that: In as much as Sir Seretse Kgama and his BDP of 1966 managed to take our land by passing a law (Constitution), it should be within your same powers with current BDP to pass a similar law (amendment of constitution) to restore our country. Your Excellency has sufficient numbers in parliament, and all power of government to achieve this. Your party hasthe power to pass pretty much any law you please, as has been the case over the past 55 years. You also happen to be a Mokgatla man, well positioned to achieve these goals of freedom for Bakgatla. The only relevant question you need ask yourself, colleagues and interested persons now is: Show lawful cause why restoration of Bakgatla country must not happen!

May it be clear that: Bakgatla will not participate in any talks for Constitutional reform in Botswana, until we have full restoration our country (Bakgatla Reserve). Otherwise, we risk falling into error of betraying our forefather’s stand, recorded in Kgosi Linchwe 1’s letters of 1894, Kgosi Linchwe ii’s letters of December 1965, and all their gains since 1870, which are (our inheritance) systematically taken from us by politicians and foreign rule disguised as a democracy. Only then, with our country in hand, shall we be in a position to meaningfully contribute to constitutional reform, and negotiate a Federal State of Botswana (in the very least of compromises), where Bakgatla retain their independence, or semi – autonomy, within the greater Botswana.

Your Excellency must appreciate that we Bakgatla will never give up on our demands for restoration of our country. Our stand is a matter of principle informed by history and law. It is a reality of having no choice, given the history of cruelty we and our Bogosi have suffered at the hands of your BDP government and western democracy since 1966. In the climax of it all, your BDP government has advanced as far as passing laws in 2010-2014 (Court Judgements & Executive Orders) declaring your non-recognition of Bakgatla apex leadership, and prohibiting Bakgatla bogosi from leading our people.

In addition, your BDP government has effectively expelled the Bakgatla monarch out of Botswana (under threat of imprisonment) and left our people leaderless to date. These actions are a clear indicator that Bakgatla (have never been accepted) under BDP rule and current Botswana constitution. We have glaring indicators (red lights) that we must have a formal separation which endorses the status quo prior to 1966 in relation to land ownership and sovereignty. Logic dictates that your BDP government must release us Bakgatla into independence, if your government despises us so much as we have all seen over time. Setswana proverbs say: Monna o nkga le di tsaagwe – Motse fa o bakwa re tla o kgaogana.

Therefore, your failure (if any) to heed our demand, can only delay the inevitable. It will always reflect regret towards missed opportunity, as one president after another grapples with the same demand. Unfortunately, you will place us in the awkward position where we have to trouble your BDP government throughout your reign, the British Government, and British Royal Family in various forums over matters that we could have resolved locally as suggested herein. Unfortunately too, you will miss Bakgatla formal participation in the Constitutional reform talks. That entire exercise will become still-born from a failure of participation by a major tribe within the country. You will end up perpetuating the 1966 errors, exactly as they are recorded in the letters and other representations of 1965/66 made by those who opposed Seretse Kgama’s & BDP coup. We are already seeing sign posts from that same road.

The individual Mokgatla man or woman may speak for themselves, as they please. We do expect that some may stand against our course; especially those whose loyalties reside more with politics than Bakgatla heritage. But none – in their small or large numbers – has a legal mandate to speak for our private ownership of Bakgatla Tribal Territory.

Your Excellency must concede the factual reality before us that currently, I am unable to lead, let alone live amongst my people, because of BDP political interference, well documented in my recent book – The Last Frontier. It has always been open to your government to establish real (as opposed to abstract) conditions for my safe return and living amongst my people in Mochudi. Your law officers in DPP & Attorney General have power to formally withdraw all those fake criminal charges against me in Court (if they so wish), and draft legislation for your majority BDP to pass in parliament conferring Kgosi Kgolo Kgafela ii due and deserving immunity of a Kgosikgolo. It will not be the first time your government passes legislation specific to an individual (Kgafela ii).

Likewise, your government has power to pass legislation that formally recognizes, respects and adequately provides for office of KgosiKgolo in Botswana. That kind of legislation would have relieved Batswana of the current morass created by the 2011 High Court Judgement and related Executive Orders.

Rather than perform these relatively simply to understand tasks in the past ten years, we have observed a shameful trend amongst your party members, including your Excellency’s behavior (we say this with respect), where individuals use my name and integrity for political campaign. The theme is – bringing Kgafela back home – without attending to the real matters of legislative intervention. Your Excellency has been recorded saying that you will not rest until Kgafela is back home. But to date, you have not spoken to me. We see you visit people all over Botswana and the world, but you have not made time to visit and talk to me directly less than 400km away. Your party’s political rhetoric using my name treats me more like a stray Poodle, available to any passerby to grab and pose for a selfie – sometimes laced with disrespect.

There is no doubt that your BDP government displays superficial attitudes towards my return to Botswana. That same disposition makes it delusional for anyone to believe that your BDP government will ever pass the legislation suggested above (establishment of office of KgosiKgolo & immunity) because if the contrary were true, we would have seen signs sprout in the past ten years, especially since 2018. As such, trust is impossible, and we have to live with that reality.

I have come to terms with my fate that: the only way I will ever see my father country, or enjoy Botswana, is when Bakgatla have recovered our independence, or there is a new government that will create a safe environment for me to walk freely in Botswana enjoying respect of a KgosiKgolo. In the meantime, we will endure such fate that we continue to suffer property losses, poverty, and so many other difficulties flowing from my inability to access my property and my people in Botswana. Indeed, we have lost a lot of money so far, from having to defend ourselves and innocent tribesmen against politically motivated criminal trials, whilst thieves took advantage of our vulnerability to crush us deeper into poverty. We have no hope for compensation from government.

My Botswana Identity document (Omang), passport and driver’s license have expired. It is impossible for me to renew. I cannot visit a nearest Botswana embassy for help whilst there is risk of being arrested because of outstanding criminal charges in Botswana. Effectively, my Botswana citizenship under the current legal regime has expired, and I am left with no hope of renewal. I stand banished today, as it were with my grandfather Kgosi Molefi. These are repeating cycles of history we must break, once and for all.

Be that as it may, please understand that we hold no grudges against your Excellency or anyone in Botswana, given the conclusions and the decisions of destiny we have taken about the future. Nothing else matters now, other than that future. To that end, I am hereby formally inviting your Excellency to make time to come here and see me in South Africa, so that we may talk about these matters, and perhaps others of national interest. We need a very clear way forward post March 2022 concerning restoration of our country, because we intend to escalate our plight. Your Excellency may usefully arrange through my brother Hon Mmusi Kgafela and Kgosi Sekai, both of whom will liaise with Kgosi Ramono here in South Africa. Please let me know your response on or before 30th January 2022.

Continue Reading

Opinions

Botswana to Become a Vaccinated Nation: Pandemic Anxiety Over?

30th March 2021

OSCAR MOTSUMI

This is a question that should seriously exercise the mind of every Botswana citizen and every science researcher, every health worker and every political leader political.

The Covid-19 currently defines our lives and poses a direct threat to every aspect and every part of national safety, security and general well-being. This disease has become a normative part of human life throughout the world.

The first part of the struggle against the murderous depredation of this disease was to protect personal life through restrictive health injunctions and protocols; the worst possibly being human isolation and masks that hid our sorrows and lamentations through thin veils. We suffered that humiliation with grace and I believe as a nation we did a great job.

Now the vaccines are here, ushering us into the second phase of this war against the plague; and we are asking ourselves, is this science-driven fight against Covid-19 spell the end of pandemic anxiety? Is the health nightmare coming to an end? What happy lives lie ahead? Is this the time for celebration or caution? As the Non State Actors, we have being struggling with these questions for months.

We have published our thoughts and feelings, and our research reviews and thorough reading of both the local and international impacts of this rampaging viral invasion in local newspapers and social media platforms.

More significantly, we have successfully organised workshops about the impact of the pandemic on society and the economy and the last workshop invited a panel of health experts, professionals, and public administers to advance this social dialogue as part of our commitment to the tripartite engagement we enjoy working with Government of Botswana, Civil Society and Development partners. These workshops are virtual and open to all Batswana, foreign diplomatic missions based in Gaborone, UN agencies located in Gaborone and international academic researchers and professional health experts and specialists.

The mark of Covid-19 on our nation is a painful one, a tragedy shared by the entire human race, but still a contextually painful experience. Our response is fraught with grave difficulties; limited resources, limited time, and the urgency to not only save lives but also avert economic ruin and a bleak future for all who survive. Several vaccines are already in the  market.

Parts of the world are already doing the best they can to trunk the pestilential march of this disease by rolling out mass-vaccinations campaigns that promise to evict this health menace and nightmare from their public lives. Botswana, like much of Africa, is still up in the disreputable, and, unenviable, preventative social melee of masked interactions, metered distances, contactless commerce.

We remain very much at the mercy of a marauding virus that daily runs amuck with earth shattering implications for the economy and human lives. And the battle against both infections and transmissions is proving to be difficult, in terms of finance, institutional capacities and resource mobilization. How are we prepared as government, and as citizens, to embrace the impending mass-vaccinations? What are the chances of us  succeeding at this last-ditch effort to defeat the virus? What are the most pressing obstacles?

Does the work of vaccines spell an end to the pandemic anxieties?

Our panellists addressed the current state of mass-vaccination preparedness at the Botswana national level. What resources are available? What are the financial, institutional and administrative operational challenges (costs and supply chains, delivery, distribution, administering the vaccine on time, surveillance and security of vaccines?) What is being done to overcome them, or what can be done to overcome them? What do public assessments of preparedness tell us at the local community levels? How strong is the political will and direction? How long can we expect the whole exercise to last? At what point should we start seeing tangible results of the mass-vaccination campaign?

They also addressed the challenges of the anticipated emerging Vaccinated Society. How to fight the myths of vaccines and the superstitions about histories of human immunizations? What exactly is being done to grow robust local confidence in the science of vaccinations and the vaccines themselves? More significantly, how to square these campaigns vis-vis personal rights, moral/religious obligations?

What messages are being sent out in these regards and how are Batswana responding? What about issues of justice and equality? Will we get the necessary vaccines to everyone who wants them? What is being done to ensure no deserving person is left behind?

They also addressed issues of health data. To accomplish this mass-vaccination campaign and do everything right we need accurate and complete data. Poor data already makes it very hard to just cope with the disease. What is being done to improve data for the mass-vaccination campaign? How is this data being collected, aggregated and prepared for real life situation/applications throughout Botswana in the coming campaign?

We know in America, for example, general reporting and treatment of health data at the beginning of vaccinations was so poor, so chaotic and so scattered mainstream newspapers like The Atlantic, Washington Post and the New York Times had to step in, working very closely with civil society organizations, to rescue the situation. What data-related issues are still problematic in Botswana?

To be specific, what kind of Covid-19 data is being taken now to ready the whole country for an effective and efficient mass-vaccination program?

Batswana must be made aware that the  end part of vaccination will just mark the beginning of a long journey to health recovery and national redemption; that in many ways Covid-19 vaccination is just another step toward the many efforts in abeyance to fight this health pandemic, the road ahead is still long and painful.

For this purpose, and to highlight the significance of this observation we tasked our panellists with  the arduous imperative of  analysing the impact of mass-vaccination on society and the economy alongside the pressing issues of post-Covid-19 national health surveillance and rehabilitation programs.

Research suggests the aftermath of Covid-19 vaccination is going to be just as difficult and uncertain world as the present reality in many ways, and that caution should prevail over celebration, at least for a long time. The disease itself is projected to linger around for some time after all these mass-vaccination campaigns unless an effort is made to vaccinate everyone to the last reported case, every nation succeeds beyond herd immunity, and cure is found for Covid-19 disease. Many people are going to continue in need of medications, psychological and psychiatric services and therapy.

Is Botswana ready for this long holdout? If not, what path should we take going into the future? The Second concern is , are we going to have a single, trusted national agency charged with the  mandate to set standards for our national health data system, now that we know how real bad pandemics can be, and the value of data in quickly responding to them and mitigating impact? Finally, what is being done to curate a short history of this pandemic? A national museum of health and medicine or a Public Health Institute  in Botswana is overdue.

If we are to create strong sets of data policies and data quality standards for fighting future health pandemics it is critical that they find ideological and moral foundations in the artistic imagery and photography of the present human experience…context is essential to fighting such diseases, and to be prepared we must learn from every tragic health incident.

Our panellists answered most of these questions with distinguished intellectual clarity. We wish Batswana to join us in our second Mass-vaccination workshop.

*Oscar Motsumi: Email:oscar.motsumi@gmail.com

Continue Reading
Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!