The Editor Zambia
They rejected Guy Scott despite him being intellectually, administratively, and constitutionally better placed to succeed Michael Sata because he was white.
They pushed Given Lubinda to the margins because of his mixed parentage. 
They have equally kept Fred M’membe at arm’s length because he is Lozi, despite having a Bemba father.
That is the ugly and uncomfortable truth about the ethnic and racial prejudices lurking beneath Zambia’s opposition politics today.
One does not need to guess which political grouping we are talking about — it is the dangerously tribal alliance emerging around Brian Mundubile, a Bemba and Makebi Zulu, an Easterner ahead of Zambia’s August 13 general election.
The alliance between Brian Mundubile and Makebi Zulu ahead of Zambia’s August 13 general election has once again brought an uncomfortable but unavoidable issue to the surface: the enduring influence of regional and tribal politics squarely hinged on the North/East bloc that has dominated the country’s political landscape from 1964 to 2021.
The new political alliance, unveiled just days before nominations open, is officially being marketed as an attempt to consolidate opposition votes against the ruling United Party for National Development (UPND) and President Hakainde Hichilema.
Yet beyond the rhetoric of unity and democratic competition lies a deeper and disturbing phenomenon that Zambia is drifting back toward the divisive regional politics that marked parts of the First Republic where United National Independence Party (UNIP) regarded the Zambezi region-dominated African National Congress (ANC) as a tribal party despite the ruling party itself exercising tribal balancing and ethnic calculations.
It is in this light that Zambians should perceive the Mundubile/Zulu pact — a toxic alliance hinged on dominance by the Northern/Eastern political establishment against the rise of leadership from the Zambezi region comprising Southern, Western and Northwestern provinces.
Even the other opposition figures rallying behind this alliance largely hail from the North/East regional bloc, a manifestation of tribal politics that refuses to die despite decades of national appeals for unity.
The concern is not that politicians come from particular ethnic groups — that is inevitable in any democracy — but that political projects like the Mundubile/Zulu pact increasingly appear designed around ethnic arithmetic and political hegemony rather than national consensus.
To guide Zambians who may be oblivious to this dangerous trajectory, this debate is not new. Zambia’s early post-independence history was shaped by tensions between UNIP under Kenneth Kaunda and the ANC led by Harry Mwaanga Nkumbula.
While those rivalries were rooted in ideological and constitutional disputes, they also carried strong regional and ethnic undertones that threatened national cohesion.
It was precisely because of those dangers that the slogan “One Zambia, One Nation” became central to the country’s political identity.
Critics of today’s opposition alliances have rightly argued that Zambia risks revisiting old fault lines of North/East dominance in politics.
This can be seen in the fierce criticism directed at President Hichilema and the UPND by sections of the opposition whose hostility often goes beyond ordinary democratic criticism and reflects discomfort with the shift in political power away from regions that historically dominated national leadership.
The tribal undercurrents become even more evident in the opposition’s internal contradictions. For instance, Fred M’membe of the Socialist Party has struggled to gain acceptance within broader opposition circles partly because he is perceived as Lozi, and therefore outside the preferred ethnic establishment that seeks to dominate Zambia’s politics.
Similarly, Given Lubinda, despite his experience and political standing, has often faced quiet resistance because of his mixed-race heritage, exposing how tribalism in Zambia sometimes overlaps with racial prejudice and notions of “acceptable” political identity.
Zambians have seen this kind of politics before. The treatment of Guy Scott within the Patriotic Front (PF) remains one of the clearest examples of racial and tribal intolerance in modern Zambian politics.
After the death of President Michael Sata, Guy Scott was arguably better placed intellectually, administratively, and constitutionally to lead the PF. Yet he was pushed aside largely because he was white, paving the way for Edgar Chagwa Lungu to emerge as party leader and eventually Republican President.
That episode exposed the uncomfortable reality that many political actors who loudly preach democracy and inclusiveness still harbour deep tribal and racial prejudices beneath the surface.
Indeed, since President Hichilema’s election in 2021, political discourse has at times descended into dangerous tribal insinuations from multiple sides of the political divide, much of it amplified by figures associated with the Northern/Eastern political establishment.
Social media has further intensified stereotypes, regional narratives, and ethnic suspicions in ways that threaten Zambia’s long-standing reputation for peace and coexistence.
That is why the current Mundubile/Zulu alliance is viewed by critics as the epitome of tribal politics cloaked as healthy democratic opposition and checks and balances.
Though supporters of the two leaders insist the coalition is simply an electoral strategy aimed at strengthening opposition competitiveness after years of fragmentation, critics argue that this political tribal arrogance has been a recurring trend since 1964.
In short, the Mundubile/Zulu alliance is seen not as a normal political partnership but as an attempt to restore regional dominance to the exclusion of others.
Equally troubling is the fact that much of the coalition’s energy appears focused on opposing President Hichilema and the UPND rather than presenting a coherent alternative vision for economic recovery, youth unemployment, debt management and national unity.
This is where the ruling UPND sees political opportunity. By portraying itself as a national project confronting old patterns of regional dominance, the party hopes to consolidate support beyond its traditional strongholds and frame the election as a contest between inclusive governance and divisive politics.
Ultimately, Zambia’s democratic maturity will be tested not by which alliance wins power but by whether political leaders can resist the temptation to mobilize citizens primarily through ethnic identity.
The country’s history offers a clear lesson: once tribal politics becomes the main currency of political competition, national unity becomes the casualty.
