The Editor Zambia
When you point a finger at someone accusing him of some wrong, four fingers are pointing back at you.
This old saying has acquired particular relevance in the aftermath of Zambia’s election, where some voices from the Chambeshi and Luangwa regions have been quick to accuse Southern, Western, and North-Western provinces of tribal voting. 
That accusation deserves scrutiny because it risks exposing precisely the tribalism its authors claim to oppose.
England-based Zambian lawyer Terence Chibula makes an important point: voting patterns can not simply be reduced to ethnicity.
People vote according to a complex mixture of trust, history, political relationships, shared interests, leadership, development expectations, and the ability of candidates to connect with communities.
Southern Province is no exception.
The Tonga people, like every other Zambian community, have their own political history and social character. As Chibula argues, when Tongas commit themselves to something they believe serves their interests, they can mobilise remarkably effectively—as families, chiefdoms, and sometimes as an entire province. That should not automatically be described as tribalism.
Indeed, the election itself provides evidence against the simplistic argument.
If Southern Province were voting exclusively on tribal lines, how does one explain a Tonga presidential candidate, receiving negligible support in some parts of the province while candidates from outside the region perform strongly? Richwell Siamunene of New Focus Party (NFP), who is former Sinazongwe member of Parliament and a son of Sinazongwe, polled fewer votes than Brain Mundubile, a Northerner. Where is tribalism here?
If indeed ethnicity were the only consideration, the figures would look very different.
The same principle applies to Northern and Eastern Zambia. Candidates such as Brian Mundubile and Makebi Zulu naturally enjoy strong support in areas where they have deep political and social roots.
President Hakainde Hichilema, however, has also built substantial support in those regions over many years. That suggests that political relationships can transcend ethnicity when candidates invest time, effort, and credibility in communities. In this election, President Hichilema has managed to win members of parliament in all the 10 provinces. This positive achievement is a result of President Hichilema’s promotion of One Zambia, One Nation. More so, President Hichilema campaigned in all the 10 provinces while Brain Mundubile campaigned in nine provinces, and left out Southern Province.
There is also an instructive lesson from Britain. The Labour Party and Conservative Party are the two dominant forces in British politics, yet neither has simply been able to overcome the Scottish National Party’s electoral strength in Scotland by accusing Scottish voters of being tribal.
The political reality is that communities can develop strong regional political identities because of history, interests, leadership, and perceptions of representation.
That does not make every Scottish voter an ethnic nationalist, just as strong support for a particular Zambian politician in a particular province does not automatically constitute tribalism.
This is precisely where Sunday Chanda’s emotional concession of defeat becomes particularly revealing.
His disclosure that some people were unhappy with him because he had chosen to work with the “wrong party and tribe” should trouble every Zambian who genuinely believes in a united nation.
If a politician can be judged primarily by the political party he joins because that party is perceived as belonging to another tribe, then the problem is not Southern Province. It is a broader national problem.
It is here that the accusations of tribalism from the north and east become deeply ironic.
For decades, Zambia has witnessed political leadership disproportionately emerging from certain regions, particularly the Chambeshi and Luangwa political belts, from 1964 to 2021. Yet when voters elsewhere organise around their own political interests, they are suddenly accused of tribalism.
That is a double standard.
No province should be demonised because its voters overwhelmingly support a particular candidate. The proper question should be why they support that candidate.
Have they been persuaded by his policies? Do they trust him? Has he invested time in the area? Do they believe his leadership will improve their lives? Does his political history resonate with them?
These are legitimate democratic considerations.
Political parties seeking national office must, therefore, stop expecting automatic votes from communities they have neglected.
If Brian Mundubile and his colleagues believed they could win Southern Province, they needed to go there, engage the people, explain their programme, and earn their votes. Democracy requires persuasion, not entitlement.
Zambia cannot build national unity by branding entire province tribal. Nor can it defeat tribalism by pretending it exists only in one region.
The lesson from this election should instead be that tribalism must be confronted wherever it appears—whether in Southern, Western, North-Western, Northern, Eastern, Luapula, Central or Copperbelt.
The finger pointed at Southern Province must, therefore, turn around.
Four fingers are pointing back.
And perhaps those doing the accusing should first examine what those four fingers are saying about them.
