We always make decisions as individuals or as a nation. The question is, do we ever stop to think whether our decisions conform to our ethical or moral values. It is imperative in my view that whatever we do or decide to do must be based on the fact that it is the right thing to do. We should not do things just because we have the right to do or have the power to do it so.
Before we discuss whether it is important to make sure that whatever we decide on should always reflect our ethical values. Let us start by examining what we understand by ethics.
A good friend of mine and a former colleague at Kgolagano College Dr. Vincent Dippenaar once said “ethicists are endangered species”. He was giving a public lecture on current moral issues facing Botswana. According to Dippenaar, ethics is about the truth and many people prefer lies than the truth. What this mean is that sometimes people know the right thing to do and in most cases do the wrong thing.
Ethics from Christian perspective is the study of how human ought to live as informed by the Bible and Christian conviction. However, ethics is a broader concept. The English word ethic comes from the Greek word ethica, which comes from ethos meaning what relates to character.
The ancient Greek ethicist Aristotle suggested that ethica is derived directly from ethos which means custom or habit. In more general sense, ethics is often viewed as one major branch of broader discipline of philosophy. In that case ethics is regularly defined as moral philosophy. The origin of the term moral is the Latin mos (adjective moalis) which is like Greek contemporary meaning custom or usage
There is a thin line between ethics and morality or morals. Ethics is the study of the right and the good and morality is the practice or living out what one believes to be right and good. Morality involves the actual living out of one’s beliefs that such things as lying and murder are wrong, whereas ethics entails the study of why it is that these practices are immoral.
Wayne Meeks describes ethics as a reflective second-order activity and morality is referred as self-conscience. Although ethics and morality may not be completely synonymous, to set up too strict a distinction between the two, is probably arbitrary. The presences of the terms in the English language reflect the ethical Greek and Latin heritage of the English language.
It was the great Greek thinkers like Socrates in the fifth century B.C who perused the question of the good. They sought to determine what constitutes a good person. Since Socrates’ day generation of philosophers have reflected of morality, moral problems and moral arguments. Jack Glickman for example, describes moral philosophy as consideration of various kinds of questions that arrive in thinking about how one ought to live one’s life.
Glickman then explains, we want to know, for example, which actions are right and which are wrong. Which activities and goals are worthwhile and which are not; and which action and institutions are just and which are unjust. At the same time we especially want to find out how one can justify judgments about what is right, good, just or worthwhile and precisely what such judgment mean. We also want to know how all these various questions are interrelated.
Seen as the moral philosophy as the pursuit of question such as these, ethics is not an exclusively Christian endeavor. One does not need to be a Christian to engage in philosophical reflections on morality nor does this endeavor necessarily draw primarily from scriptures or the Christian tradition. Rather human reasons stand at the centre of philosophical, ethical enterprise.
Ethics as moral philosophy seek to develop a conception of the ethical life in which all humans could participate and to which all humans could have access through the use of human reason. And it is especially concerned to providing a rational justification for morality, perhaps in a somewhat scientific manner.
Ethicists divide ethics into three major dimensions namely empirical, normative and analytical. Empirical ethics or descriptive morals, involves the observation of moral decision making process with a goal of description or explanation of the phenomenal. Empirical ethicists studies how people actually make ethical decisions. Normative ethics, when we hear or use the word ethics, we more likely have the normative ethics in mind.
Normative comes from the word norm, which in this context means standard or principle. So normative ethics is connected with the formulation of standards or principle of living. It involves assertions as to what is or is not worth pursuing and what is or not to be done.
We engage in normative ethics whenever we form opinions or judgments about what is right, good or obligatory and whenever we offer reasons for such judgments we also enter the realm of normative ethics when we describe a person, things or acts or good or evil, admirable or despicable. In ethics such discussions are about theories of values.
Each day we make arguments of various types. Many of them fall under the context of normative ethics, for they reflect what we consider to be the norms or standards of moral obligation for, state what someone is morally obligated to do or be.
These maybe quite particular, referring to a specific in a specific situation. There is a saying that honesty is the best policy meaning that people are morally obligated to tell the truth. Unlike judgments of moral obligation, judgments of moral values do not declare….what someone ought to do or be, rather they express what we value.
The third aspect of the ethical discipline is analytical ethics. Analytical derives from analyze which means to take things apart, to look at the constituent pieces of something. Therefore analytical ethics take ethics apart. It explores the nature of morality itself. It attempts to build a theory as to what value judgment mean and how they can be justified.
Analytical ethicists pursue the question of definition. What is good and ought to mean? What are we asserting when we say a person is free or responsible? What does it mean to say something is good? On what basis can one say judgment is good or true? But they also seek to determine how such ethical judgment can be established or justified. They raise the question, what form the foundation for making value judgments? For example on what basis can one say that the relocation of Basarwa from CKGR was morally wrong?
One person who did not merely talk about boundary situation, but actually focused on ethical quandary was Socrates. According to Plato, Socrates’ student Crito and friend advised him while Socrates was on death row that there was plan to rescue him from prison. Socrates refused to escape from prison neither did he allow his enemy to kill him; instead he decided to take his own life.
Decision making is not a simple process; it needs among other things intelligence, determination and bravery. You don’t wake up in the morning and decide about your future or the future of the organization or the people you lead. Human beings are social animals, whatever you think is personal and making decision for yourself will somehow somewhere affect others in one way or another.
Those we elect to represent us in different institutions and organizations should know that the decisions they make should always reflect the ethical values of the organization or institution they lead. But some of them, the moment they have been elected into those positions they forget completely about those who voted them into power.
Sometimes when you listen to some members of parliament and councilors tabling motions, or debating issues, you are forced to ask yourself the central question, are these people in the council chambers or parliament by mistake. Some will oppose something even if it is going to benefit his or her….constituency just because it is from the opposition or vice versa. If an idiot says, let’s run the rain is coming and you just stay because it is the idiot, who says the rain coming first, then it is you who is an idiot and the idiot becomes a clever person. If the BDP come up with some programs which are helping people encourage people to use those programs to better their lives.
And if the opposition comes up with motions which might help the people, my expectation is that BDP MPs should support those motions. When MPs are in parliament they should work as a team to serve Batswana. This does not mean opposition MPs should always support BDP otherwise there will be no opposition.
The same can be said about the BDP MPs. They cannot be expected to support everything from the opposition, but there are times when what is proposed either side is in the interest of the nation. Those who are elected to represent their constituencies in parliament and they miss the parliament sessions and at the end of the month they get their salaries, ethically speaking they are thieves.
They have stolen from the nation because they were given money which they did not deserve. They are worse than those who accepted housing allowances by mistakes while staying in government houses. When we take ethics to its logical conclusion, we can see that while we make noise everyday about moral crisis facing the youth, the real moral crisis is the one faced by the elders. When 95% of the wealth of the country is owned by 2% of the population of this country, then we have a serious moral crisis.
Immorality is more than just who is sleeping with whom, where and how or (matanyola). Some of the so called ills of the society are in fact they are symptoms of the real diseases of the society. In ethics we say social ethics produce individual ethics, not the other way round. How do you expect a young poor boy to refuse matanyola when matonyola can bring food on the table.
That is why Thomas Sankara used to say there are different kinds of prostitutions and prostitutes. The difference according to Thomas Sankara is on time and amount involved. There are those who stand in the streets and get $10 for thirty minutes and some for $20 for an hour. Some $50 for a night and others $100 for a week or month. Some marry for a year or two and then they divorce after getting what they wanted. In Sankara’s view, they are all prostitutes.
The difference is time and amount. My former German Pastor, Peter Ohligschlager, used to say almost the same about thieves. According to Pastor Peter Ohligschlager, there are those small thieves who pick pocket, those who break into houses, and those who make laws in their favor in order to enrich themselves from public wealth. Ethically according to Ohligschlager they have taken what they don’t deserve.
What I am stating here are ethical issues. And according to Socrates, ethical questions must be settled by reason alone. And secondly ethical questions are answered according to the standards of the person involved, not in consideration of what others think.
And third according Socrates, the outcome of an act is irrelevant the only consideration is whether it is intrinsically right or wrong. In this declaration Socrates delineated what has become a fundamental watershed in ethics, the differentiation between the deontological and theological (or consequentialist) approaches to ethical decision making.
He set forth he divide between those who declare that the right should be done for its own sake and those who base moral duty on some goal to be thereby attained. It is imperative in my view that when we make decision we ask ourselves whether it is intrinsically right or wrong. And more importantly, when we say so and so, it’s immoral, we ought to look at the standard of the person we are talking about.
As I said, above most of the time we blame the youth of immorality. If we compare the standard of the youth to that of some elders who are engaged in immoral activities under the cover of law or legality, ethically speaking what is intrinsically wrong is wrong regardless of what the law says. Remember Socrates was sentenced to death by court of law but he did nothing wrong. His “crime” was to teach the youth about the truth and their right. Let us make decision which one is comparable to our standards as leaders and also which are intrinsically right.
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.
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.
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.