The Real Reason Behind the Hatred of Hakainde Hichilema: A Threat to Zambia’s Unitary State

*The Real Reason Behind the Hatred of Hakainde Hichilema: A Threat to Zambia’s Unitary State*

By Farai Ruvanyathi

10th July 2025

*The Most Vilified President in Zambia’s History*

If there has ever been a President more hatefully criticized, ridiculed, and demonized in Zambia’s political history, it is undoubtedly Hakainde Hichilema. Since his days as an opposition leader, he has endured relentless abuse: branded a capitalist, an American puppet, an imperialist, a Freemason, a Satanist, and, of course, accused of being “too Tonga” to lead.

Of all these accusations, only one stands as the true and enduring reason for the visceral animosity toward him: his ethnicity. His opponents, while eager to dismiss this fact publicly, betray themselves through their own words and actions. Time and again, what lies beneath their rhetoric surfaces unmistakably,  Hichilema is hated primarily because he is Tonga.

*The Language of Prejudice*

During his years in opposition, slogans like “MuTonga takateke” (“A Tonga shall never rule”) and “Ruling a country is not like herding cattle” echoed at rallies and on radio stations.

Even former President Edgar Lungu once conceded grudgingly that there would be a Tonga President someday, “but not this Tonga,” a pointed reference to Hichilema. PF stalwart Bizwell Mutale was even blunter, declaring, “There shall never be a Tonga President,  ever!”

At rallies, talk shows, and even church meetings, this ethnocentric refrain became the unspoken dogma of Zambia’s political discourse. Prof. Nkandu Luo went so far as to claim that national leadership was reserved for “family members,” suggesting that others were outsiders. Shortly afterwards, Chishimba Kambwili argued, in a disturbingly sectarian tone, that “Tongas wouldn’t vote for Jesus Christ if He stood for President.”

Even a Christian worship song was recently stopped mid-performance at a PF rally because, as rowdy supporters insisted, “We don’t want a Tonga song here.” The absurdity of that moment, rejecting a hymn of faith on ethnic grounds , exposed the monster they had created and now struggle to contain.

*The Irony of “Tribalism” Accusations*

In perhaps the most ironic twist of Zambia’s post-independence politics, the very people who stoked these flames of division now accuse Hichilema of tribalism.

Yet, his Cabinet is the most ethnically balanced since 1964, with many ministers drawn from regions that did not even vote for him. By contrast, under Edgar Lungu’s administration, Southern Province , Hichilema’s region,  was deliberately excluded from Cabinet representation.

Southern Province itself has a record that puts its detractors to shame: in 1991 and again in 1996, it gave Frederick Chiluba, a Bemba-speaking President, an overwhelming 100% parliamentary vote,  a feat that contradicts any claims of inherent Tonga tribalism.

*The Dangerous Entitlement of Power*

What we are witnessing is not simply opposition politics; it is an old, dangerous sense of entitlement. Since independence in 1964, certain citizens of Zambia have treated power and the national purse as their birthright, marginalizing others.

That pattern was briefly interrupted during the presidency of Levy Mwanawasa, only to return after his death. Hichilema’s election shattered this entrenched entitlement, and his opponents are desperate to reclaim their perceived birthright, even at the expense of national unity.

In their desperation, they have even invented a political construct they call the “Zambezi Province,” inadvertently galvanizing a powerful electoral base for Hichilema. Ironically, no future Zambian President can now win without courting this region, a reality his detractors created by their own divisive rhetoric.

*A Call to Defend Zambia’s Unity*

Hichilema’s opponents are not just fighting one man; they are undermining Zambia’s very identity as a unitary, peaceful state. By clinging to ethnic prejudices and stoking divisions, they endanger the future of a nation built on unity in diversity.

It is time to confront this hypocrisy with honesty and courage. The true danger to Zambia does not lie in the ethnicity of its President but in the sectarian mindset of those who refuse to accept that leadership belongs to all Zambians,  not just a privileged few.

*Conclusion: Time for Maturity*

Zambia has always prided itself as a beacon of peace and inclusivity on the continent. The attacks against Hichilema reveal just how fragile that legacy can be when poisoned by hatred masquerading as politics.

We must rise above this divisive and dangerous rhetoric. Our unity is our greatest strength, and it is far more valuable than the ambitions of those who would tear it apart simply because they cannot stomach a Tonga in State House.

Speak up. Defend the Zambia you want to leave to your children, one where leadership is earned, not inherited, and where no child is told they “cannot rule” because of the tribe into which they were born.