The Editor Zambia
Recent remarks by Citizens First (CF) leader Harry Kalaba, in which he reportedly dismissed opposition figure Brian Mundubile’s latest stream of campaign rhetoric as mere “noise”, deserve closer attention than many may initially appreciate.
Politics often provides moments when rivals, intentionally or otherwise, reveal uncomfortable truths. Kalaba’s assessment appears to be one such moment. 
For some time now, opposition politicians have sought to convince Zambians that the current political landscape presents a viable alternative to President Hakainde Hichilema.
However, as the campaign season gathers momentum, the contrast between substance and spectacle is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore.
Mundubile’s rallies have frequently generated headlines, yet headlines alone do not constitute leadership. The electorate ultimately judge leaders not by the volume of their speeches but by the quality of their ideas, the credibility of their vision, and their ability to inspire confidence in the nation’s future.
It is against this backdrop that Kalaba’s characterisation of Mundubile’s pronouncements as “noise” carries particular significance. Whether intended or not, the statement reflects a growing acknowledgement that political rhetoric without meaningful policy content is unlikely to persuade a discerning electorate.
More importantly, it suggests that some opposition figures may be arriving at a reluctant but unavoidable conclusion: President Hichilema continues to stand head and shoulders above the current crop of political leaders in terms of leadership credentials, governance experience, and national appeal.
Leadership is tested, not when circumstances are easy but when they are difficult. Since he assumed office, President Hichilema has faced considerable economic and social challenges, many of which were inherited. Yet despite these obstacles, his administration has pursued reforms aimed at restoring economic stability, expanding educational opportunities, attracting investment, and strengthening public institutions.
Naturally, no government is beyond criticism, and constructive scrutiny remains an essential feature of any healthy democracy. Nevertheless, criticism must be accompanied by credible alternatives. This is where much of the opposition has struggled.
Too often, opposition campaigns have relied on attacking personalities rather than presenting comprehensive solutions. The result has been a political discourse dominated by slogans, accusations, and crowd-pleasing rhetoric rather than serious policy engagement.
Kalaba’s comments, therefore, represent more than a passing political jab. They highlight a broader reality confronting Zambia’s opposition: defeating an incumbent requires more than generating excitement at rallies. It requires demonstrating superior leadership, clearer vision, and greater competence.
At present, that challenge remains unmet.
As the nation moves closer to the next electoral contest, voters will increasingly compare records, ideas, and leadership qualities. In that comparison, President Hichilema’s experience, composure, and reform-oriented approach continue to provide him with a significant advantage.
If even some of his political rivals are beginning to recognise the difference between noise and leadership, then Kalaba’s remarks may well be remembered as an inadvertent acknowledgement of a reality that many Zambians have already concluded for themselves: that Hakainde Hichilema remains the most formidable and credible leader in Zambia’s contemporary political landscape.
