Like brother, like brother?

There are a lot of policy questions on which President Joyce Banda and I have never agreed and I doubt we ever will.

But on the issue of the Lake Malawi border dispute with Tanzania, the Head of State has made the right call despite bungling some messages in some instances that Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation Minister Ephraim Chiume has had to mop up with hastily crafted press statements to clarify Lilongwe’s policy stance.

But broadly speaking, Mrs. Banda has provided steady leadership on the issue, with multilateralism rather than unilateralism as the guiding principle in her approach to finding a durable solution to a stand-off that should never have been there in the first place.

There are two things that President Banda has clearly understood. The first is that history and international law is on Malawi’s side.

The second is that unlike her Tanzanian counterpart, Jakaya Kikwete, the Malawian leader has been more strategic, preferring to look at the bigger picture rather than the narrow view of looking at the dispute as a mere Malawi-Tanzania issue.

The international community, whose respect and confidence we must earn on this matter, appreciates such leadership.

That is why Mrs. Banda’s administration has flatly refused to be dragged into political jockeying that she fears can jeopardise the stability of the region; hence, her commitment to the mediation (which should never be mistaken for negotiation) process but without taking any options—including force—off the table.

This position is well reflected in policy briefs that I have been privy to on the matter. From the policy briefs, it is clear that Capital Hill understands that the importance of ensuring that this dispute is resolved on the basis of established principles of international law goes beyond the interests of the two parties to this dispute.

The administration tightly grasps the fact that it was, after all, the father of Tanzanian independence, Julius Nyerere, who proposed to the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) in 1964 that African leaders should adopt the principle of respect for colonial boundaries to ensure the stability of boundaries across Africa.

This is why Malawi’s claim of an eastern shoreline boundary running along the Tanzanian coast is based on the clear words of an 1890 treaty between Britain and Germany which established the boundary in these terms as well as other international statutes and agreements.

Capital Hill rightly notes that the Britain-Germany treaty is relevant to many other boundaries in east, central and southern Africa; hence, the need to avoid setting dangerous historical precedents.

This is why, as The Nation reported on Wednesday, the Joyce Banda administration  believes that the borders of Africa should be safeguarded and that an African solution based on law is the only path to a fair and mutually acceptable solution to the lake dispute.

This strategy should never be misunderstood—as Peter Mutharika is alleged to have said—to mean acquiescence.

I want to believe that President Banda is channeling former US president Theodore Roosevelt’s “Speak Softly and Carry a Big Stick” doctrine that became the hallmark of America’s foreign policy during his time.

It is an approach that preaches non-aggression while at the same time allowing a country to retain and demonstrate, subtly, that you have the power (call it military might if you want) to respond with force should diplomatic negotiations fail.

But you don’t project that power through careless statements, bellicose language and saber-rattling as the DPP leader reportedly said; otherwise, you can be seen as a toothless dog that barks to project an aggression it cannot execute for the simple reason that it lost its teeth a long time ago.

Otherwise, issue threats only when you are ready not only to fight the enemy, but also to put him or her into permanent sleep.

That is why although the Banda government is participating in the mediations—because it is good to be nice and listen to your neighbours—it has also been firm in stating that it will under no circumstances cede an inch of Lake Malawi to Tanzania.

The beauty is that both countries realise that should the mediation process fail, the United Nations’ International Court of Justice (ICJU)—the principal judicial organ of the United Nations with decades of experience in resolving African and other boundary disputes—will be called upon to do its duty.

Otherwise, someone should tell Peter Mutharika that embracing his brother’s leadership style, if he did, of shooting from the hip, foaming about and kunyenyanyenya threats rarely works in international disputes.

It only isolates a country at a time it needs as many allies as possible.