From Kanye to Serowe: Why Tribal Politics Still Matter in Botswana

Botswana, often hailed as “Africa’s success story,” has long been admired for its peaceful political transitions, relatively strong institutions, and low corruption levels. However, as with many African nations shaped by colonial constructs and post-colonial compromise, Botswana’s national unity rests on fragile foundations when carefully examined. One of the underlying challenges is tribal politics—a force that, while not always visible, continues to shape the country’s democratic development and socio-political cohesion.

In this article, we explore the history, present manifestations, and future of tribal politics in Botswana, drawing historical parallels with Zimbabwe, analyzing the role of different tribal leaders in influencing politics, and examining how some traditional roles are used to influence politics, including some existing tribal issues.

Tribalism and the Birth of the Nation-State

Botswana’s modern political architecture is rooted in its colonial past, where British indirect rule empowered traditional chiefs through Native Authorities. These structures provided a level of autonomy to major tribes, especially the Bangwato, Bakwena, and Batawana, to mention a few, while sidelining minority ethnic groups such as the Bakalaka, Bayeyi, and others. After independence in 1966, President Sir Seretse Khama and the ruling Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) sought to promote a unified national identity. However, the legacy of tribal hierarchies remained embedded in land ownership, chieftaincy, and political representation. While the rhetoric was nationalist, political capital remained unequally distributed, with dominant tribes having more influence over government policy, appointments, and development priorities, as they were more exposed to education and benefited from nepotism.

Let us recall the words of Kwame Nkrumah: “The problem is not the existence of tribes. The problem is when they become tools of exclusion and domination.” Exclusion was evident both before and after independence, and what arguably held the country’s peace together was the silence, perhaps deliberate ignorance, of other tribes, even though such issues were common. Would it be wrong to suggest that the peace of this country was preserved by the quiet endurance of minority tribes, who bore the brunt of unemployment, limited resources, and lack of government services, yet chose to remain silent? One might even say that ignorance saved Botswana.

Tribal Politics in Practice in Botswana: Subtle but Powerful

Unlike other African states where tribalism erupted into open conflict, in Botswana it operates more covertly, embedded in social behavior, electoral trends, and administrative structures. The ruling party at the time, which has maintained power for decades, partly benefited from a loyal base in Bangwato-dominated regions like Serowe, Mahalapye, and Palapye. This demonstrated the persistence of tribal politics, as the Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) was closely associated with the royal family. Another example is the past dominance of the Botswana National Front (BNF) in Kanye, which was influenced by Kgosi Bathoen.

Botswana’s voting trends, while often portrayed as merit-based, also follow ethnic and regional lines. In the past two elections, ethnic influence played a significant role, especially during the conflict between the Bangwato Kgosi-Kgolo and President Masisi. In the 2019 elections, the BDP lost its stronghold in Serowe to the Botswana Patriotic Front (BPF), a party affiliated with the Chief. The question arises: did the people of Serowe vote based on party manifestos, or was their decision driven by tribal loyalty?

In contrast, North-Western Botswana, home to the Batawana, Wayeyi, and Hambukushu, increasingly leans toward the opposition, particularly the Botswana Congress Party (BCP), partly due to the region’s association with the Shaleshando family. The tribal influence of prominent individuals enabled the BPF to secure seats in areas where Kgosi Khama held sway, both in the 2019 and 2024 elections. In fact, all parties affiliated with Khama, including the Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC) in central Botswana and the BCP while it was still part of the UDC, gained more seats in regions where Khama was influential.

Across many regions in Botswana, voters have increasingly chosen leaders based on ethnic identity rather than democratic ideals or leadership quality. Even when tribal leaders are in the wrong, it is difficult for the government to hold them accountable, as seen during Masisi’s administration. His stance, though arguably aimed at correcting past injustices, was perceived by many as targeting a tribal figure, which ultimately led some voters to reject him in order to protect their fellow tribesmen. Masisi may have been fighting for the right cause, but many felt he did so in the wrong way.

In terms of development, some regions have been left behind due to tribal voting patterns. Areas like the Okavango, despite contributing significantly to the national economy through tourism, cattle farming, and natural resources, suffer from a lack of infrastructure. There are still no tarred roads connecting Xhauxhau and Etsha since independence, while roads in the eastern part of Botswana continue to be renovated. It is painful to witness this disparity, especially when communities are expected to remain silent for the sake of peace and stability, even as they are knowingly excluded by tribal-based governance. Every state leader in Botswana has focused development in their home region, a practice that has become normalized while ignoring the needs of other populations.

In constituencies like Nata-Gweta, people cannot even farm freely due to the presence of wildlife, yet no special government aid is provided to compensate for this restriction. Over the years, a pattern has emerged: if you voted for the BDP, especially in Tswana-speaking areas, you received the benefits that were supposedly meant for all citizens. This reality has shaped political expectations and development outcomes in Botswana.

Lessons from Across the Border: Zimbabwe’s Ethnic Fault Lines

Botswana’s tribal politics are subtle, but Zimbabwe’s history offers a view of what happens when tribalism festers unchecked. After independence in 1980, Zimbabwe was governed by ZANU-PF, dominated by the Shona majority. The opposition party, ZAPU, largely represented the Ndebele minority. Fearing dissent and consolidation of power, the ZANU-PF government led the Gukurahundi massacres (1983–87), resulting in the deaths of over 20,000 Ndebele civilians in Matabeleland. The violence cemented ethnic division, suppressed opposition for decades, and turned tribal identity into a survival mechanism. Even today, Zimbabwe’s elections are shaped by these wounds, with Mashonaland (Shona stronghold) consistently voting ZANU-PF, and Matabeleland (Ndebele region) remaining an opposition bastion. Let us Africans remember the words of our great African hero Kwame Nkrumah who said “tribalism is a colonial weapon, dressed in African names, to divide the people”. True independence is unity in diversity. Botswana has avoided such extreme outcomes through ignorance by the oppressed ethnic groups but the early warning signs are there. If tribal marginalization is not addressed through political education, inclusive development, cultural recognition in the constitution, and equitable political representation, similar tensions could erupt, even if not violently.

Youth Influence in Tribal Politics

Generally, youth in Botswana and Zimbabwe don’t support politics related to tribalism. They break the chains of tribal loyalty . One of the most promising signs of progress in both Botswana and Zimbabwe is the growing political consciousness among youth. Frustrated by unemployment, political stagnation, and economic exclusion, young people are increasingly questioning the tribal loyalties of their parents’ generation which benefited a small group of people who once looted their country’s resources pre and post-independence. Urbanization, access to education, and digital platforms are creating new spaces for pan-African, class-based, and feminist movements to thrive. Through movements such as Organization For Youth and Elections in Botswana (OYEBO), the younger generation is more interested in service delivery, political education reform, economic justice, and political accountability than tribal origins of leaders. They are disrupting inherited loyalties and demanding systems that deliver for all Batswana, not just those connected to the “right tribe”. “Anchoring the words of Thomas Sankara who said the “The revolution and tribalism cannot live together. One must die for the other to live.”

Future Predictions: Which Path Will Botswana Take?

1. Khama’s influence in politics has to be an issue to solve under the current regime. The regime should reduce interaction between itself and Khama. The UDC should remember the real Khama and the extent to which he can go to safeguard his powers in government. People voted for the UDC as they were against the oppression of the BDP regime, which during Khama’s time was excessive and led to a national strike. Affiliation with such individuals, who later use tribal political approaches as backup, is dangerous to the stability of the country. The question we should be asking ourselves is: what if Khama and President Boko’s relationship becomes sour? Would we see the Masisi and Khama crisis repeat itself? Is he above the law, or is he immune to the law?
2. Gradual decline of tribal voting — as younger, urban voters become more politically active, Botswana is likely to see issue-based politics gradually replace tribal loyalty. The opposition should maximize on this issue-based politics. The role of tertiary student movements such as Moono Wa Baithuti, anti-cultural activists, and youth leagues within political parties will be critical in shaping this shift. Through proper political education and training, this trend of tribal politics will be eliminated in Botswana.
3. Rise of Inclusive Political Movements — parties such as the Botswana People’s Party (BPP), through its youth league in tertiary institutions and general communities, with its Pan-Africanist and democratic socialist agenda, could attract a diverse coalition of youth, workers, and marginalized groups. This echoes the rise of the MDC in Zimbabwe during its early years, where ethnicity took a backseat to civic issues, as many public servants supported it.
4. Regional tensions and resource inequality — without targeted development, neglected regions, especially in the North-West, may escalate their demands for autonomy or representation, especially if resource discoveries (e.g., oil or tourism) fuel regional wealth disparities. This will be due to those regions feeling that they have been neglected over a long period of time. Botswana’s division can easily be triggered through those neglected regions and can be exploited negatively by terrorist groups, as those people lack basic needs and development.

Recommendations to the Current Government of 2024–2029

1. President Boko should leave Khama alone and take our country back to the democracy we long preached since 1966.

2. President Boko should solve the Bayeyi and the Basubiyatribal issues to curb political campaigns in Okavango and Chobe about such issues.

3. President Boko should recognize other tribes in the constitution and curb political ideologies advocating for tribal issues.

4. President Boko should ban dikgosi from participating in politics based on tribal affairs.5. All political leaders should preach about ideologies that does not influence tribal politics