WILD BW: THIS IS SO WRONG: RAMPING UP SOCIAL SECURITY IS NOT THE ANSWER TO FMD-IT IS THE PROBLEM.

Oshinka Tsiang

( Please note that this article was first published in the Tuesday Grill on 15th June 2026. Consequently, much has progressed in the fight against Foot and Mouth Disease. The Ministry of Agriculture and Lands has since lifted the ban on the slaughter of cattle in specific areas and eased restrictions on cattle movement within zones as a result of successes in the control of the outbreak. Details of the specific conditions can be found on the Ministry's digital platforms or at the nearest offices of Agriculture. The facts in the following article were as they were at the time of publication.)

The Ministry of Local Government and Traditional Affairs issued a Savingram last week, signed by the Acting Permanent Secretary, directing all councils in the areas affected by the Foot and Mouth outbreak to immediately undertake assessment and registration of all individuals, households, farmers and livestock herders who have been adversely affected by the outbreak of FMD. Savingrams, by their nature, are internal government administration communication tools. They are not for public circulation. But they regularly find their way into the public domain via leaks. They also get public airing through announcements for implementation purposes. So my first instinct on seeing the savingram MLGTA 1/9/6 I, dated 10 June 2026, was “this is fake.” I am still hoping that it turns out to be fake. A bad joke, perhaps. But if it is indeed genuine, this would be a powerful blow to our confidence, our identity, and a crushing of any lingering hope that we could ever return to the way of life we have been accustomed to for centuries-cattle. At a time when we expect government to resolve the FMD crisis to rescue Batswana from a calamitous spiral into poverty, they are preparing us to LIVE with poverty. At face value, this looks like a genuine demonstration of care and concern. But a deeper reading of this savingram reveals something else. An action that says, get ready to be a long-term statistic for “Mmaboipelego.” It cannot be interpreted any other way.

The very first paragraph is a dead giveaway into the sort of thinking behind the intended action. It is either terribly naive or disingenuous. In the second sentence, the savingram declares, “the disease outbreak and the associated control measures appears to  have significantly disrupted livestock production, marketing activities, household incomes and livelihoods, resulting in considerable hardships for farmers and livestock herders.” I am not sure if the authors of this document expect anyone to believe that they genuinely didn’t know the consequences of a blanket ban on the local trade in livestock-specifically cattle. If they do, then it’s a huge indictment of their view of our intelligence.  So to say the outbreak and control measures “appears” to have caused considerable hardships is quite frankly a questionable conclusion. A simpleton would have diagnosed the impact right from the word go. So I don’t believe they did not know. I can only speculate that they used that term to set us up for what they were about to say in paragraph two, in which all councils in the impacted areas are directed to undertake a major data collection and registration of those who are from then on going to be state property-the subsistence farmers, their cattle herders, their dependents, etc. The claim is that you cannot dispense off the handouts before you take the numbers and identity of the individuals impacted. It is an excuse for a data collection exercise that will document everyone, including those who have hitherto been outside the purview of the globalizing digital identity. (That is another topic for another day.) Suffice it to say the savingram does not hide the fact that this registration exercise is to yield data for a long-term goal. Paragraph three declares, among other things, that the objective of the exercise is “….to facilitate the development and implementation of appropriate relief and support interventions in future where necessary.” Take note of that word, “future.” That means we are in this thing for the long term. Do not be lulled by the two words that follow. Trust me, there will be a perpetual necessity.

Think for a moment: since the outbreak of this disease, the response has been very questionable. The spread does not seem to be contained. Meanwhile, livelihoods have been devastated. You would think the focus would be on how best to stop the downward spiral of livelihoods, especially when the economy is doing this badly. You would think the focus would be on how you untie Batswana’s hands to enable them to earn a living in the best way they know how. But no. Instead, the approach is a tacit admission that a considerable number of people have been impoverished and the solution is to add them to the social security budget with the view to keeping them there for a long time. This is not a decision made by one individual sitting in some air-conditioned room. It is a well-considered collective decision by individuals whom the public has entrusted their lives to- to make the best decisions on our behalf.  

They would have already thought of where the money for these handouts will come from. Whether it is more borrowing, in which case it is a further debt burden around Botswana’s neck, or some global grant, in which case, a further erosion of any lingering trace of sovereignty in decision-making due to conditions attached to such grants. They would have already thought of how much each individual would be given, what conditions that individual would have to fulfil to qualify for such handouts, what would be the conditions for terminating such support, etc. So my guess is there is a “largesse” somewhere that the country will tap into to dole out to those who have hitherto been depending on cattle for their livelihoods. I fear that there is a huge temptation to normalize this and not return Batswana to their centuries-old liberating livelihood. Otherwise, we would be doing everything we can to shorten this current crisis.

We have commented in this column before about the impact of the handling of the current outbreak of FMD. Our argument was, and still is, that there is no reason for this blanket ban on the local consumption and trade in livestock. We have argued that the experience we have, the resources at our disposal, and the very nature of FMD being not harmful to human beings, demand that we avoid subjecting farmers to abject poverty. Additionally, a frank assessment of our value extraction from the EU market, which apparently is the reason we cannot breathe, suggests that it is insignificant in the larger scheme of things. In my recollection, we have never fulfilled our quota. So we do not really miss it to a point where we have to self-sabotage. We can afford to get our house in order while we continue to live. Spain has been doing it with the swine flu outbreak. But this decision by the MLGTA, to me, points to something that is genuinely concerning. A managed impoverishment and systematic disempowerment of Batswana. (I could use stronger terms, but decency gets the better of me.)  My cry is, let us for once decide on our best interest. (Check out my post at https://www.wildbw.org/post/wildbw-uncertainty-the-silent-strangulation-of-the-cattle-economy-this-fmd-demands-out-of-the-box )

If you are wondering what this has to do with WILD BW, the answer is everything. The cattle industry is one of the major targets under the global green agenda. The plan is to reduce their perceived contribution to greenhouse gas emissions. (Check out my interview with Mrs Monamati on Wildbw Podcast where she debunks the myth) Hence the mad drive to develop lab-grown meat. There are also activities that are meant to manage human-wildlife conflict, which include creating corridors for wildlife. These have been piloted extensively in various parts of Botswana and are ready for implementation.  Additionally, the One Health programme is a global approach to livestock disease and biodiversity health management that drives globalized solutions. Hence, our handling of the current FMD is informed by global obligations that we have signed up to. It’s not a secret. 

Tune in to the WILDBW podcast on YouTube, where we delve deeper into conservation and tourism issues to help you catch up with trends that are rapidly shaping your future