OPEN LETTER TO THANDIWE KETIS NGOMA
By: Frank BWALYA
Director-General for Media under the United Party for National Development (UPND) Presidential Support Programme (PSP),
Dear Thandiwe KITIS NGOMA,
I am writing this open letter in response to your recent message addressed to His Excellency Dr. Hakainde HICHILEMA, published on November 9, 2024, by the Zambian Observer and circulated on various social media platforms. Your letter, titled “The Deep Ethical Implications of Parading Chipo Mwanawasa at State House”, seeks to criticize President Hichilema under the pretense of voicing dissent in alignment with democratic values. I intend to address the misconceptions in your letter and defend President Hichilema and his administration from what I perceive as ill-conceived and politically motivated criticism.
*1. Misplaced Outrage over the President’s Defense of Ms. Mwanawasa*
You claimed to feel “profound dismay and anger” after watching the video in which President Hichilema addressed harmful rumors alleging he had impregnated Ms. Chipo Mwanawasa. I find it puzzling that such a response arose from a video where the President defended a young woman subjected to malicious and hurtful propaganda. Notably, this address took place at the Lusaka Multi-Facility Economic Zone, not at State House as you alleged.
In that video, President Hichilema asked Ms. Mwanawasa to stand before the audience to visibly dispel the rumors. His message was clear: the nation must grow beyond the spread of destructive falsehoods on social media. President Hichilema expressed frustration at the malicious rumors and emphasized his commitment to protecting individuals’ reputations, even if that meant defending Ms. Mwanawasa’s honor publicly. He reiterated that he was willing to tolerate personal attacks but would not allow innocent people to be dragged through the mud. Seeing his response as “disrespectful” to Ms. Mwanawasa reveals a skewed perspective on what was a compassionate defense of a young person’s dignity.
*2. Questionable Motives in Your Open Letter*
From my viewpoint, it seems that you have presented yourself as someone who criticizes the rescuer rather than the perpetrator. In this case, President Hichilema is the rescuer, stepping in to protect Ms. Mwanawasa from baseless accusations. By focusing your critique on the President instead of those who spread the rumors, you inadvertently expose a potential agenda to undermine his reputation.
One can reasonably deduce that your open letter, although couched in seemingly well-intentioned rhetoric, ultimately seeks to cast doubt on President Hichilema’s leadership under the guise of offering “checks and balances.” This approach appears designed to sway those who might not analyze your arguments critically.
*3. Logical Flaws and Strawman Fallacies*
Your open letter is replete with logical flaws. You argue, for instance, that the President’s actions were motivated by concern for his public image rather than respect for individuals, particularly young women in vulnerable positions. This assertion is unfounded. President Hichilema defended Ms. Mwanawasa against vile rumors; there was no “personal scandal” to protect, only an attempt to shield an innocent person from harm.
The allegation that the President exposed Ms. Mwanawasa to further scrutiny is also misguided. The rumors had already tarnished her name publicly, and President Hichilema’s intervention was aimed at dispelling these falsehoods. Had Ms. Mwanawasa not already been associated with the scandalous rumor, your critique might have merit. However, she was already drawn into the public eye by those malicious claims.
*4. Constructive Criticism vs. Baseless Accusations*
You have the right to provide constructive criticism. In a democratic society, leaders are subject to scrutiny, and your right to question the President’s actions is undeniable. However, repeatedly misrepresenting facts and cloaking malicious intent in high-sounding concepts and principles will ultimately reveal an agenda to discredit the President rather than promote meaningful discourse.
*Conclusion*
You began your letter with the phrase, “As a woman…” — a statement that begs a question: as a woman, how did you feel watching Ms. Mwanawasa suffer under the weight of such malicious allegations? Instead of standing against those who concocted this damaging narrative, you chose to criticize the person who stepped in to defend her. It is perplexing to think that your empathy as a woman seems to align more with political opportunism than with solidarity for a fellow woman targeted in this hurtful campaign.
Respectfully,
Frank BWALYA.
November 12, 2024