The Politics of Botswana

So I had a fascinating conversation about the political system of Botswana with a few Batswana today. I should note from the outset that the following is a combination of my observation and the results of my conversations with only a handful of people so it should be taken as only worth a grain of salt, but still, I believe them to be valid or else I wouldn't publish them in the public sector.
A short history to begin.
After tensions escalated between the Tswana and the Boers the Tswana appealed to the British for protection. In 1855 the British obliged and Bechuanaland (modern Botswana) became a protectorate. It maintained this status until 1964 when the British accepted proposals for Botswana to become a free and democratic state. Independence Day was celebrated September 30th, 1966. At that time Seretse Khama became the first executive and held that position until his death in 1980. After his death his vice president, Quett Masire, succeeded him and held the position until 1998. He retired and was replaced by his Vice President, Festus Mogae. He held the position until 2008 when Seretse Khama Ian Khama took over. If the name looks familiar (as well as unusually long) it is because he is the son of the first president's son and adopted his father's name in his memory.

(Seretshe Khama overlooking Parliament)

I describe this succession pattern in order to provide historical background as well as to demonstrate obviously one of the major peculiarities of the system. The system is parliamentary in nature and the executive is elected from among the ruling parties parliamentarians, very much like the British system except the Executive is then named President, not Prime Minister.

(The Parliament of Botswana)

During the whole history of the Country only one party has ruled, the Botswana Democratic Party. Opposition parties do exist and there are genuinely free and open elections, no one questions that. However in every previous election the opposition parties fragment and leave the BDP alone at the top. This has provided them the opportunity to maintain the presidency for the whole free history of the nation.
In itself this is odd, but not extraordinary. However, the succession pattern is irregular, perhaps even disconcerting. The first president was the leader of the freedom movement, the second was the first's best friend. At the time of the third president's election he was the most elite person in the country and a close partner of both the first and second presidents. And obviously the fourth is the first presidents son, a General, in fact the youngest general in the history of the country, thanks to who, his father the first president. This tangled web is not that surprising though, after all the first president, Khama, founded the party who has ruled the country all along so it makes sense that he would choose is his closest allies to lead the party after his passing, but does this sound like a terribly democratic process? I don't think so.
So the question becomes if this is a problem and there are no barriers to political change why has the democratic constituency not rearranged the leadership through the elective process.
In order to answer that question a simple knowledge of the demography of Botswana is useful. Botswana has two major groups of people, the rural and the urban. Botswana has only one real city (perhaps one would count Francis town but lets make it simple and say it is a large village) Gaborone. So politics become Gaborone vs. the Rural areas. Gaborone outnumbers the rural areas in terms of population as well as housing most of the richest, best educated people. The rural areas are traditional and as such, tribally driven. But even most of Gaborone is very traditional. As one of my Batswana friends said, of the 4 districts in Gaborone only the Central District, where UB is located, is actually political all the other are traditional.
This means that in most cases political decisions are made by who you are, not what you stand for. Chiefs and there relatives generally always hold political positions and once they have them, it is nearly impossible for them to lose them because there constituency, their tribesman, is fiercely loyal. To demonstrate Khama was the Chief of the largest tribe in Botswana, the Bamangwoto. His son Ian is also chief and thereby very powerful in Botswana politics. As my friend said, "real politics won't take place until the two systems [the Tribal and Political] are separated." The president is not the only incident either, most politicians have these types of connections and therefore political change is hindered. This means that the ruling party is allowed to grow corrupted.
An example of this corruption is the fact that the wealthiest people in the country are also the most powerful, the politicians. There has been significant public outcry recently about a P10million settlement given to an outgoing politician as well as the gross wealth of the BDP treasurer but the tribal nature of politics keeps electoral change from happening.
Another example is a vastly unpopular recent media censorship bill that would increase the governments control over the media, the bill was rejected in Parliament but significant media censorship already takes place. For example after publishing the recent pamphlet "Presidential Succession in Botswana: No Model for Africa" the author, Kenneth Good was deported. There is some thought that his deportation from Ghana, and Zimbabwe, may have some impact on his deportation but the fact of the matter is that serious political criticism is not easy to swallow here. (More Info on the Ken Good Case)
I pointed out to the Batswana I was talking to that the Government is not all bad and in fact has developed the country well and that stability and safety have value but they argued that any party could have done that.
Personally I think the government is more good than bad and they are truly trying to make the country a better place but there are serious ills that should be modified before the country can truly modernize and be considered fully developed.