Loyalty vs Opportunism: Can The Betrayer Be Trusted?- Dr. Mwelwa
By Dr. Mwelwa
At the heart of this debate lies a difficult but unavoidable question: can a betrayer be trusted over a loyal member?
Politics may tolerate defection, but it cannot ignore character. When an individual abandons one political family under pressure or convenience, the act itself raises a fundamental concern—not about where they are going, but about what they are capable of repeating. Loyalty is not tested in comfort; it is proven in difficult seasons. Those who remained when power was distant demonstrated something deeper than strategy—they demonstrated conviction.
UPND must therefore reflect carefully. Its foundation was built by men and women who endured years of opposition, uncertainty, and sacrifice. These are individuals who did not calculate convenience; they committed to a cause. When such loyalty is placed side by side with recent defectors seeking immediate inclusion, the comparison is not merely political—it is moral.
To elevate the betrayer above the loyal is to send a dangerous signal: that endurance counts for less than timing.
History is unforgiving on this point. Political organisations that reward opportunism over loyalty often weaken their internal spine. Today’s defector, welcomed for numbers, can become tomorrow’s point of instability. Trust, once compromised, does not fully regenerate simply because allegiance has shifted.
This is not to say that all who cross over are without value. Some may genuinely seek realignment based on principle. But principle reveals itself over time, not in moments of political convenience. It must be tested, observed, and earned—not assumed.
In an election season, the temptation to prioritize numbers is understandable. But numbers without trust create fragile structures. A party may appear strong externally while quietly eroding internally.
UPND must therefore choose the kind of institution it wants to be.
One that rewards those who stood firm when it mattered most, or one that elevates those who arrive when the path is already cleared.
Because in the end, the question is not about political arithmetic. It is about identity.
And identity is built not by those who join at the moment of opportunity, but by those who stayed when there was nothing to gain.
A betrayer maybe be useful – but a loyal member is dependable.