Has Masisi lost control of Magosi?
Chaos, confusion, drama, tragedy, comedy and utter stupidity. All hallmarks of a banana republic in motion are here. Sealing off office of Director General of anti- corruption agency like the DCEC in other countries would send utter shock to the entire nation, but here, it is a negligible incident. It is just one of those. Nothing is surprising anymore.
In case you are surprised, welcome to Peter Magosi’s world, where there is no line between fact and fiction. Having followed the circus that was Butterfly’s case with a great sense of bewilderment, I have come to a conclusion that, in Magosi, there lies Masisi’s demise. Permit me to once again, remind Magosi that, intelligence and opinion are two different things. They are two different sets of knowledge. The logical form of intelligence analysis dictates that, opinion does not inform intelligence, instead, intelligence informs opinion. How this ‘ Butterfly’ fairy- tale has ended, is another serious credibility dent, not only on Magosi, but on the entire security apparatus. Further, it is not only an embarrassment to Masisi, it is a lethal indictment on his leadership.
Since assuming the position of chief- spy, Magosi has been nothing but a grand circus show. The blunders, legal and otherwise, have seen us becoming a laughing stock of all nations. The political burden, insurmountable. The national shame, indescribable. But contrary to boundaries of logic, Magosi still stands. He still retains his position as chief- spy.
The ‘ transition’ of DIS from Isaac Kgosi to Peter Magosi has turned out to be nothing more than just a cosmetic surgery. Instead of dressing the wound, we applied make- up.
The fundamental structural, doctrinal and orientation challenges still remain. When Magosi came in with his reform rhetoric and commando theatrics, it was a perfect recipe for an epic failure because, one cannot reform something that does not exist.
I still maintain, the DIS as an intelligence organ, never existed. Having said that, the fundamental commonality between Kgosi and Magosi is their ardent believe in the employment of fear as an instrument of control. However, the divergence between the two, is where to apply it.
While Kgosi applied it on the general populace, Magosi seems to be applying it on President Masisi. As far as I am concerned, Masisi is a helpless victim of fear and blackmail. He is constantly reminded by his top spy of an ever- present danger of imaginary assassins lurking in shadows and ready to pull the trigger. Khama and Kgosi are his best bogeymen. And they too are playing the role to perfection. Why not, after all, at one point, Magosi was the bogeyman. They have just swapped roles. I even doubt Magosi wants to see Khama and Kgosi out of this soap opera anytime soon.
They are the very reason he is there. Now imagine if they are gone, he may no longer be needed.
Masisi is still struggling with strategic stability in his government, especially in the security sector. As far as I am concerned, this is largely attributable to Magosi.
The decisions that Magosi has taken so far, are proving to be a political burden to Masisi. In more rudimentary terms, Magosi is a serious political liability to Masisi. As far as his fruitless raids, lost court cases and other accompanying theatrics are concerned, it is safe to conclude that extending Magosi’s stay in office is just waiting for the worst.
There is no pretense to it, we can all see that, Magosi’s games have come to a dead- end. Magosi has been moving us from pillar to post for too long.
The only safe conclusion to reach is that, Magosi has nothing under his sleeves. Magosi’s efforts at reforming Botswana’s security architecture and processes have been reactive, emotional, careless, piecemeal and only incremental rather than holistic.
The crux of a thriving national security strategy is an informed administration, provided in part by the intelligence communities’ objective analysis.
National security can never be driven by opinion. Masisi ought to know that, establishing credibility is very different from establishing access. That is, having access to an intelligence brief does not mean it is credible.