The UPND reaction to the Bweengwa violence is shocking.

Instead of acknowledging a clear wrong, advisor to Hakainde Hichilema, Douglas Siakalima has launched an angry tirade against President Edgar Lungu in a manner that is uncharacteristic, uncivilised and  at worst the epitome of temerity.

Instead of addressing the violence, he chose to address the President using the most pathetic of languages.

It is the sort of language we would never use on Mr Hichilema, however much we would disagree with his politics.

Whatever opinion Siakalima may hold of President Edgar Lungu, does not justify the intemperance and coarse language, which will only serve to inflame and anger those who voted him into office.

Roman 13:1-14 says “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience…”

To state …”HH is not concerned about tracking where that little character goes. Lungu is too minute to HH. HH is thinking about how he will tackle the debt that Lungu has accumulated.”

“Let him not provoke the country. He is just a small little character. I know him and he knows that I know him…so yes it is an eye for an eye. With a President like this one, our only option is to protect ourselves.” Siakalima has been quoted as saying.

Syakalima made these remarks after UPND cadres beat up innocent people and abducted civil servants.

As an advisor Syakalima should have been more circumspect because what he says reflects the character of his president.

President Lungu is President of this country and had every reason to speak against violence.

The Bible is clear that “violence begets violence” which means that violent behaviour promotes other violent behaviour, in return.

This is demonstrated in the Gospel of Matthew when Jesus in verse 26:52 told Peter, a disciple who drew a sword against using the weapon.

The Son of God was straight to the point when he told Peter to put his sword back in its place. Jesus said; “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword”.

Martin Luther King, Jr, the American civil rights activists was also clear when he commented on violence and the reasons why it should not be promoted.

 “The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it. Through violence you may murder the liar, but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth. Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate. In fact, violence merely increases hate. Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.”

It is therefore surprising that instead of condemning violence, especially political, some politicians want to use it as a solution to party cadres who are faced in such situations.

There are so many examples that disapprove the prescription of violence as a solution to violence.

Syakalima should be reminded of genocide in Burundi and Rwanda which started with ethnic isolation. It is a path that must be avoided at all costs because the results will be too ghastly to contemplate.

Not everybody hates Lungu and those who love him will not take kindly to remarks that go beyond political dialogue.

Since independence in 1962, Burundi has recorded two genocides .

While in 1972 there was mass killings of Hutus by the Tutsi-dominated army, in 1993 there was mass killings of Tutsis by the majority-Hutu populace.

This tells us that while in 1972, the Hutus were a weaker grouping and were defeated, 21 years later, the Tutsis regrouped and avenged their defeat.

 Therefore, it is naïve and simply lack of love for once’s country to promote violence as a way of sorting out violent behaviour.

All should remember that violence begets violence. Once it starts, it has a spiral effect. This cannot be allowed.

Categorized | Editorial

Comments are closed.

Our Sponsor

Jevic Japanese Auto Inspections

Social Widgets powered by