Maravi

Michael can resolve the Barotse issue

Michael can resolve the Barotse issue
By The Post
Wed 29 Feb. 2012, 11:00 CAT

THE Barotse Agreement and the issues surrounding it are not beyond the capacity of Michael Sata to resolve. There is nothing complicated in that agreement and the issues surrounding it that Michael cannot address. What is required is simply having the right attitude and approach.

Those in power must have the self-confidence to want power and to believe that their exercise of it can tilt the country in the right direction. The test of their statesmanship in the context of history will not therefore be how many issues they suppress or how many individuals they humiliate, but how they fit into a continuous process of adaptation in which leadership is combined with sensitivity to the national mood.

In stating this, we are not making a clarion call for them to do nothing about problems. This is not a recipe for inaction or for the avoidance of controversy. Some measures - good measures - will be bitterly contested. All this implies a certain respect by politicians for the opinions of their opponents. And this is both possible and desirable.

Indeed, where bitterness remains, it is more often directed against previous colleagues than against previous opponents. Yet when they are exercising power, there is only too often a shrill and an unconvincing attempt to portray almost everyone on the other side as either a fool or a knave.

But we should all know that this country will not be a good place for any of us to live in unless it's a good place for all of us to live in. And the ultimate strength of our country will lie in the unity of our people.

This we believe very deeply. In the Zambia we live in today, we should realise that we are first Zambians and then secondly, whatever we want to be in terms of region of origin or tribe. And it has to be in that order always and only. If we understand this and internalise it, we will not be tortured by many things, by regional issues, by Barotse agreements.

We all want many things for ourselves and for the areas in which we live. There is nothing wrong with this. After all, life is a unique combination of "want to" and "how to," and we need to give equal attention to both. We can have more than we have got because we can become more than we are.

Human beings possess a variety of sometimes contradictory desires. People want safety yet relish adventure; they aspire to individual freedom yet demand social equality.

Democracy is no different, and it is important to recognise that many of these tensions, even paradoxes, are present in every democratic society. A central paradox exists between conflict and consensus. Democracy is in many ways nothing more than a set of rules for managing conflict.

At the same time, this conflict must be managed within certain limits and result in compromises, consensus or other agreements that all sides accept as legitimate. An overemphasis on one side of the equation can threaten the entire undertaking.

If groups perceive democracy as nothing more than a forum in which they can express their demands, the society can shatter from within. If the government exerts excessive pressure to achieve consensus, stifling the voices of the people, the society can be crushed from above.

There is no easy solution to this. Democracy is not a machine that runs by itself once the proper principles and procedures are inserted. A democratic society needs the commitment of citizens who accept the inevitability of conflict as well as the necessity for tolerance.

We all need to learn to negotiate with others, to compromise and to work within the constitutional system. We need to learn to pursue our goals in a democratic manner and ultimately how to live in a world of diversity. We also need to learn how to argue peaceably.

To govern is to communicate. Democracy is communication: people talking to one another about their common problems and forging a common destiny. Through the open exchange of ideas and opinions, truth will eventually win out over falsehood, the values of others will be better understood, areas of compromise more clearly defined, and the path of progress opened.

Our problems of and differences over the Barotse Agreement can be cleared through talking to each other, negotiating with each other and building consensus with each other. As we have stated before, negotiated solutions can be found even to conflicts that have come to seem intractable if we all try to reach out to find the common ground.

The Barotse Agreement is a political question requiring talking to each other. And when you negotiate with others, you must be prepared to compromise and accept the integrity of the people on the other side. Concessions are inherent in negotiations. But good leadership is required.

There are disappointments in life. But leaders must learn to discipline their disappointments. It is not what happens to us, it is what we choose to do about what happens that makes the difference in how our lives turn out.

We therefore urge Michael and all those involved in the Barotse Agreement issue to put aside what was said last week and see how they can work things round and reach some consensus so that our country can continue to move forward as a united nation and as one people.

Leadership is needed on all sides. And the challenge of leadership is to be strong, but not rude. Be kind, but not weak. Be bold, but not a bully. Be thoughtful, but not lazy. Be humble, but not timid. Be proud, but not arrogant. Have humour, but without folly. Clearly, leadership is the challenge to be something more than average.

Let's get over the Barotseland Agreement issue and move our country forward. We have many challenges today that need to be addressed. There is depressing poverty everywhere and people want to see their lives go forward. Let's offer our people tangible and meaningful solutions to their problems.

When mistakes are made, let's admit them, apologise and correct them. If there are shortcomings, we should not be afraid to have them pointed out and criticised if our job is to serve the people. Anyone, no matter who, may point out our shortcomings. If they are right, we should make corrections.

If what they are proposing will benefit the people, we should act upon it. It is hard for any person to avoid mistakes, but we should make as few as possible. Once a mistake is made, we should correct it, and the more quickly and thoroughly, the better.

We cannot afford to devote too much time to the Barotse Agreement, a matter we can quickly resolve and move on. There is a lot of work to be done. There are higher things that we can attain far above the Barotse Agreement - let's give them to our people.

But lessons have to be learnt on what can be done and what cannot be done, on what can be said and what cannot be said. But it seems we don't learn. It is true that we should learn from mistakes, but who hasn't made mistakes - over and over again? An old refrain says that humans are the only animal who stub their toe on the same stone twice. This is especially so if that stone is politics, so his having done so isn't very important.

There is no need for more careless talk of this issue. Those who have nothing to calmly offer on this score should simply shut up and let Michael find the way forward out of this short but bumpy patch. Michael can find the way out and it is his duty to do so.

And if he needs assistance, let's give it to him so that once again, the nation can devote its time to addressing the other many economic and social problems facing our people. We should not try to play political games, bojo with the lives of our people.

And we shouldn't forget that there is no good thing in the service of a person which the person cannot abuse, but always to one's own harm and to that of the community.

Labels: BAROTSELAND AGREEMENT, MICHAEL SATA

posted by MrK @ 6:16 PM