Judy Smith-Höhn, Senior researcher, African Conflict Prevention Programme, ISS Pretoria Office

Next week, on 20 September 2011, Zambians will go to the polls to elect its next President. As is often the case with elections in this part of the world, questions have been raised about the likelihood of the elections leading to violence.

It should be said that elections are an inherently conflictual process that tend to exacerbate existing tensions in an already divided society; they can therefore easily be manipulated by opportunistic political leaders to pursue their vested interests, aggravating social conflicts.

However, in the case of Zambia, given the conduct of voters and political players in previous elections, while one may witness small-scale pockets of violence, there is little likelihood that such violence will escalate.

In the 2008 presidential elections, for example, where the main opposition leader Michael Sata from the Patriotic Front (PF) lost by only 30.000 votes (Sata won 38% while Banda secured 40% of the total votes), Sata had decried electoral fraud as election results from the rural areas began trickling in. His aggressive rhetoric gave credence to arguments around the likelihood of violent post-electoral disputes, yet the opposition party leader soon called for calm among his supporters. Although contenders fought a highly charged battle for the presidency, political leaders did not manipulate this willingness to resort to violence to further their interests as has been witnessed in countries like Kenya and Zimbabwe.

Moreover, Zambian politicians appear to be driven by career ambitions, and not by ideology, and politicians have been known to change allegiances whenever it benefits their political survival. Former President Frederick Chiluba’s return to the Movement for Multiparty Democracy (MMD) after supporting the opposition in the 2008 elections is a case in point.

The upcoming election is likely to be very closely contested, even though the PF and United Party for National Development (UPND) have dissolved their alliance. For one, Sata was only beaten by a narrow margin back in 2008.

President Rupiah Banda, while he may have the benefit of incumbency - commanding a formidable electoral machinery - he has lost a number of powerful allies. There have been serious rifts in the ruling MMD – with key members and longstanding political backers of the party having either left, been axed, or even crossed over to the main opposition party, among them founding members Mike Isaiah Mulongoti, Mbita Chitala and Sebastian Zulu, who all joined the PF. Ngandu Magande, the well-respected former Finance Minister, has formed his own party following disputes over Banda’s competence and so-called “dictatorial tendencies”. His party, the National Movement for Progress, may not be a serious contender for the presidency, but the votes he garners will surely be at the expense of the MMD.

Also in 2009, the president fired his former election campaign manager and ally of 50 years, Vernon Johnson Mwaanga and replaced him with Boniface Kawimbe, former deputy education minister. This move was allegedly engineered by his sons, who many perceive are using Kawimbe as a front to control their father’s election campaign. Having family members involved in campaigning certainly weakens Banda’s electoral appeal. The death of former President and Banda ally, Chiluba, will also damage the president’s campaign.

Understandably, Sata’s popularity has grown as public discontent with the government has increased, and the government-funded infrastructure development programmes currently underway in the PF stronghold of the Copperbelt will not likely make a big dent in the PF’s support. Yet it’s too early to say whether all these factors will have enough influence to tip the scales. Just as much as people are disenchanted with the government’s poor performance in delivering services, so they are disillusioned with the opposition’s failure to offer any united front against the ruling party. The collapse of the opposition alliance between Sata’s PF and Haikanda Hichilema’s UPND again favours the ruling party.

By and large, the electoral campaigns of all contenders will revolve around money. The MMD will boast about the economic boom that has resulted from high metal prices, while the PF will claim that this boom is not benefitting Zambians, but foreigners, as labour unrests increase in the run-up to elections.

But will the policy environment alter drastically even if an opposition party leader like Sata wins? The president’s main challenger has used the xenophobic rhetoric to garner support, but he also recently reversed his populist policy of calling for an increase in taxes on mining companies, saying that he favoured low taxes for foreign mining investors. Sata has also spoken about a “smart partnership” with China, and it is therefore unlikely that the PF will depart from the MMD’s pragmatic policy agenda that involves adherence to market-oriented agenda and macroeconomic stability.

A further stabilising factor has certainly been the positive response of the military to the governance challenges faced since the country’s independence. To this day, the military have remained non-partisan and have not interfered in politics, and have enjoyed very good relations with the civilian population. Aside from the three failed coup attempts, the defence forces have largely remained neutral and professional, they have upheld a policy that reaffirms transparency and accountability, and they have been subjected to stringent parliamentary oversight since 1991.

Notwithstanding these low risks to overall stability, the country is not without challenges. Zambian politics is based on a system of patronage whereby leaders reward their supporter with jobs and contracts to secure their loyalty and power base. Thus any change of government results in the creation of new patronage networks and, faced with prosecution for looting state assets, those on their way out are usually reluctant to leave. In addition, leaders’ use of public funds for private purposes further exacerbates social inequalities and poverty levels, posing deep-seated structural threats to economic development and political stability. Zambia may still be a poster child when it comes to holding peaceful elections in the region, but that stability rests on a fragile foundation.