WE agree with President Edgar Lungu that presidential trips undertaken abroad are of great benefit to the country since they provide an opportunity to market Zambia at a global level.
President Lungu said because of this image building gain, he would not bow to pressure from critics who were demanding that he reduces on foreign travel.
True to the President’s stance, we feel what critics of presidential trips fail to realise is that such outings will help Zambia to clinch bilateral and economic agreements, as well as improve the country’s international profile.
It is heartening to note that when President Lungu travelled to China in April this year, he sourced investment pledges worth a whooping US$1.5 billion.
We can also cite several other successes of the China trip like funding of projects such as rehabilitation of the Tanzania Zambia Railway Authority (TAZARA), setting up of milling capacity in all provinces, rehabilitation of Kenneth Kaunda International Airport and the Solwezi-Jimbe railway line connecting Zambia to Angola.
It is, therefore, common sense to note that bilateral agreements could not be reached if the Zambian leadership operated in a cocoon.
In 2010, parliamentary former chief whip Vernon Mwaanga defended the then president Rupiah Banda’s foreign trips arguing that they were aimed at promoting economic development in Zambia and were in line with an international trend of economic diplomacy.
Economic diplomacy is the process through which countries tackle the outside world, to maximise their national gains in all fields of activity, including trade, investment and other forms of economically beneficial exchanges.
Mr Mwaanga said Zambians should be proud that the president was marketing the country at regional and international levels and bringing investment to the country.
Mr Mwaanga’s observation is still valid in view of some sections of people who question such important trips.
Even Western leaders like Barack Obama travel incessantly to market their country and explain foreign policies to other leaders.
The American president’s current visit to his father’s homeland of Kenya marked the 50th he had traveled to as US president.
Among specific places Obama has visited is the Great Wall of China, Nelson Mandela’s former prison cell in South Africa and in Oslo, Norway.
Other places are the Great Pyramids of Giza in Egypt, Stonehenge in England, the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Moscow, Russia, and Germany.
Mr Obama’s recent visit to his father’s homeland of Kenya made him the most travelled president in the world.
It is also sad to note that Zambia is not the only African country where misinformed people are questioning presidential trips.
Last year in June, some Kenyans questioned the frequent presidential trips made by Uhuru Kenyatta as a waste of resources.
Through the Nexus team which is the Government Newsroom that communicates transformation, the government listed the benefits that had been accrued by the President’s foreign trips.
The team informed Kenyans that the country had bagged millions of dollars due to Uhuru’s trips abroad.
The team also disclosed that new multi-billion dollar investments, grants and programmes were some of the benefits Kenya had bagged in presidential visits abroad in the last two years of the Jubilee administration.
These ranged from global institutions setting up their headquarters in Kenya, new jobs for Kenyans, massive investments in fisheries, rail, regional peace, trade, energy, water and air flight rights.
In the United Arab Emirates, for instance, the President successfully pushed for the employment of 100,000 young Kenyans and negotiations are going on to establish the sectors, skills and contracts that will be made available to the youth.
Like in the Zambian case, Kenya has massively benefited from these trips which should be supported by every progressive Zambian who values development.