When you are poor, you must tread carefully, especially when making decisions that could affect your economy. Every move counts and missteps can be costly.
There was a time when President Lazarus Chakwera appeared to take a subtle swipe at our donors, not in their role as financial benefactors but in their capacity as supporters in other areas such as the provision of Covid-19 vaccines.
Their response? Indifference. They simply turned away, recognising that the remark held no real weight.
This is the reality of poverty: when you lack economic leverage, you become a playground for the powerful.
- Advertisement -
Others can afford to toy with you, knowing full well that you have no means to respond meaningfully.
- Advertisement -
We have already witnessed the damaging ripple effects of decisions made by United States President
Donald Trump, particularly the suspension of aid.
That single act, made with the stroke of a pen, disrupted our healthcare system—a disruption that continues to be felt and will likely reverberate for years to come.
As if that were not enough, Trump also placed Malawi on a list of countries whose citizens would face tightened visa restrictions when seeking to enter the United States, the so-called “land of diversity”.
- Advertisement -
Admittedly, this move might inadvertently work in our favour.
Many of our officials, who seem to derive inexplicable satisfaction from flying to irrelevant conferences, may finally be grounded.
Perhaps then we could save some much-needed foreign exchange that would otherwise be wasted on frivolous trips.
In fact, without these needless flights by ministers and senior government officials, the limited foreign currency circulating within our economy could go a long way.
But instead, we find ourselves with a President and a Cabinet who seem to prefer operating from hotels and conference centres in distant cities rather than from their actual offices.
I digress slightly, but the point ties in. We cannot continue to make careless decisions, particularly those with implications for our foreign relations and national image.
Consider the recent diplomatic tension with Tanzania, following Malawi’s directive to ban certain imports, some of which come from our north-eastern neighbour.
Tanzania, in typical fashion, has threatened retaliation. But let us be honest: the trade imbalance between our two countries is already significantly skewed in their favour.
Should they impose their own restrictions, we are unlikely to feel the pinch as harshly as they might expect.
Besides, Tanzania has long been a problematic neighbour. At one point, they even threatened war over the Lake Malawi dispute, erroneously calling it Lake Nyasa.
Though efforts have been made by the current administration to mend ties, the relationship has historically been rocky.
If they choose to ban Malawian goods or restrict transit through their territory, so be it.
We have alternative routes, especially now that relations with Mozambique, once a bitter adversary, have improved significantly.
That said, our policies must remain aligned with broader frameworks such as the African Continental Free Trade Area, to which we are signatories.
This agreement encourages minimal tariffs and non-punitive trade measures. If we must enact temporary bans, they should be well-justified, time-bound and clearly communicated to international partners.
Now, let us turn to a far more troubling matter: the issuance of a diplomatic passport to a Nigerian national whose background raises serious concerns.
According to multiple reports, this individual has been the subject of investigations, making the decision to grant him such a privilege all the more baffling.
Unfortunately, he is not the first recipient of this questionable generosity. In Malawi, it seems anyone with a bit of money and a philanthropic title can manipulate the system and walk away with a diplomatic passport. This is not only reckless, it is dangerous.
In many countries, diplomatic passports are sacred. They are granted sparingly and only to individuals with legitimate national service or standing.
Here, however, corruption and carelessness reign. We hand out these passports like flyers, tarnishing their value and the nation’s reputation in the process.
The most pressing question remains: who approved the issuance of this passport and why?
Are we now saying that anyone who shows up during a crisis and offers a helping hand is entitled to diplomatic status?
This is a deeply flawed and primitive approach to governance.
Revoking the passport is only the first step. There must be a thorough investigation into how it was issued, who authorised it and what motivations lay behind the decision.
There is far too much disorder in this country and it is high time we cleared the mess.
As long as we continue to operate with such negligence—domestically and internationally—we shall remain vulnerable and poor.
We cannot afford carelessness when our position in the world demands caution, strategy and integrity.
