The Editor Zambia
As Zambia moves steadily toward the August 13 general election, one uncomfortable truth is becoming increasingly clear for the opposition: anger alone is not a campaign message.
Former Patriotic Front (PF) secretary general Davis Mwila appears to understand this reality better than many within his own political camp, and his blunt observations may be the most honest internal assessment the opposition has produced so far. 
Mwila’s criticism cuts directly to the heart of the opposition’s growing political dilemma. According to him, opposition leaders have failed to present a convincing alternative vision capable of persuading undecided voters.
Instead of telling citizens how they would improve livelihoods differently from the ruling United Party for National Development (UPND), the opposition has largely concentrated on grievances surrounding arrests, detentions, and the legal troubles facing former PF officials.
“There’s no way we are going to beat Bally like this,” Mwila lamented, referring to President Hakainde Hichilema.
His remarks expose a painful contradiction within the opposition campaign strategy.
While ordinary Zambians continue battling the high cost of living, unemployment, and economic pressure, much of the opposition messaging revolves around freeing detained political figures and settling internal political scores.
Mwila’s frustration reflects what many ordinary voters are quietly asking: beyond removing the UPND from power, what exactly does the opposition intend to do differently?
That question has become even more difficult for the opposition to answer because many of its leading voices remain closely associated with the former PF administration.
Tonse Alliance candidate Brian Mundubile, lawyer Makebi Zulu, and several prominent opposition campaigners were central figures during the PF era.
To many voters, the faces may have changed positions, but the political brand remains unmistakably PF.
That reality presents a major credibility challenge. Zambians have not forgotten the economic difficulties that characterised the PF government’s final years in office.
Rising debt levels, currency instability, corruption allegations, and strained relations with international creditors remain fresh in public memory.
The opposition, therefore, faces a difficult task convincing voters that the same political establishment responsible for those problems can suddenly become the solution.
Mwila’s observations become even more significant when placed alongside comments from veteran politician Katele Kalumba.
Kalumba has acknowledged that President Hichilema remains the favourite heading into the election despite growing pressure arising from the cost of living and public frustration.
Kalumba’s assessment is politically realistic. The ruling party still enjoys the enormous advantages of incumbency: visibility, state-wide structures, government programmes, and a development record it can actively market across constituencies.
Infrastructure projects, debt restructuring progress, and renewed mining investments continue giving the government tangible achievements to present before voters.
At the same time, Kalumba correctly recognises that economic hardship remains a serious political vulnerability for the ruling party.
Many households continue struggling with mealie meal prices, youth unemployment, and rising living costs. This frustration explains why the election remains competitive despite the UPND’s advantages.
However, frustration alone does not automatically translate into opposition victory.
For the opposition to become genuinely competitive, it must convince citizens that it represents renewal rather than a return to the past.
That is precisely where Mwila believes the current strategy is failing. When campaigns become dominated by calls to release political allies instead of concrete proposals for jobs, agriculture, energy, health care and economic recovery, voters begin viewing the opposition as a movement primarily focused on rescuing its own members rather than addressing national concerns.
Mwila’s “ichitumbi” analogy captured this sentiment sharply. He argued that citizens want justice immediately, while opposition leaders appear more interested in preserving political grievances as campaign tools capable of generating sympathy votes.
Such messaging may energise loyal supporters, but it struggles to persuade undecided voters searching for practical economic solutions.
The opposition also continues battling internal fragmentation. Coalition disputes, court cases, and leadership disagreements continue weakening efforts to present a united national front.
Meanwhile, the UPND has largely maintained organisational discipline while aggressively projecting development-oriented messaging.
This does not mean the ruling party is politically invulnerable. Economic realities remain difficult for many families, and elections can shift quickly when public dissatisfaction deepens. But Mwila’s warning suggests the opposition risks wasting that opportunity by failing to articulate a credible alternative agenda.
Ultimately, Zambian elections are rarely won through nostalgia or grievance alone. They are won by convincing citizens that tomorrow will look better under different leadership.
Until the opposition clearly explains how it intends to improve the lives of ordinary Zambians beyond simply opposing President Hichilema, Davis Mwila’s warning may continue haunting its campaign.
