President Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah’s latest round of ambassadorial appointments has ignited a lively national debate. All of the new envoys are seasoned diplomats, many of them retired, and their average age is noticeably high. For some Namibians, their appointment looks like a closed circle of trusted allies, an old guard rewarding loyalty and preserving networks built during the President’s long tenure as Minister of International Relations. For others, it is simply a pragmatic decision to deploy experienced professionals at a critical time for the country’s foreign policy. Both perspectives hold validity and underscore the intricate balance the President currently needs to strike.
The case for experience
Diplomacy is not a training ground; it is a frontline of statecraft. Ambassadors are the face and voice of the nation, often dealing with complex negotiations on trade, security, and multilateral issues. Seasoned diplomats come with deep institutional memory, established relationships in foreign capitals, and the ability to navigate crises without needing months of orientation. President Nandi-Ndaitwah was explicit: the current crop of appointments does not require commissioning because these envoys already know the terrain.
Given the volatile global landscape, shifting alliances, climate negotiations, and regional security challenges, there is a strong argument for continuity. Namibia’s foreign policy priorities, from economic diplomacy to energy and mining investment promotion, benefit from steady hands who can hit the ground running. In this light, the President’s move is not mere nostalgia; it is a calculated choice to safeguard Namibia’s interests during an era of geopolitical flux.
The call for youth
Yet the criticism is not without merit. Namibia is a youthful nation: the median age is under 25. To many citizens, a diplomatic corps dominated by those who have already served their time sends a troubling message: that leadership abroad is a preserve of the past generation. Young professionals, fluent in the digital tools of modern diplomacy and attuned to the aspirations of a changing society, want, and deserve, a chance to represent their country.
Moreover, the next wave of global engagement will increasingly be about technology, climate action, and new markets in Asia and Africa. Fresh voices and perspectives can open doors and build networks in ways that a purely veteran cadre may not. Diversity of age and outlook is not tokenism; it is strategic renewal.
The President’s tightrope
President Nandi-Ndaitwah’s challenge is therefore twofold. First, she must reassure the nation that this initial slate of appointments is a short-term measure to stabilise foreign policy, not a permanent exclusion of the young. Second, she must prepare a credible pathway for generational transition. Expectations are already high: speculation is rife that a second round of appointments could come as early as the first week of October. If that list again tilts heavily toward retirees, the perception of an old-boys’ club will harden into public disappointment.
Balancing these pressures requires more than public statements. The presidency and the Ministry of International Relations need to outline a transparent plan for cultivating young diplomats: mentorship programmes, competitive recruitment into the foreign service, and clear timelines for when promising younger officers will be considered for ambassadorial posts. Such a plan would show that experience and renewal are not competing values but complementary pillars of national interest.
Beyond patronage and optics
Critics have suggested that the appointments reward loyalty or preserve personal networks from the President’s years in the foreign ministry. Patronage is a common accusation in political appointments worldwide, and it resonates in a society wary of entrenched elites. But the debate should not collapse into cynicism. Loyalty and experience can overlap with merit. The real question is whether the selection criteria, expertise, track record, and ability to advance Namibia’s agenda are clear and defensible. If so, the public can judge each envoy on performance rather than age or personal ties.
Ultimately, generational renewal is not the President’s burden alone. Parliament, civil society, universities, and the private sector all have roles in nurturing the next generation of internationalists. Foreign service training, scholarships in international relations, and internships in multilateral institutions can build a pipeline of talent ready for ambassadorial roles in the next five to ten years. Citizens who demand younger ambassadors must also invest in producing them.
Namibia stands at a crossroads. The current appointments, dominated by veterans, may well provide the immediate stability and skill the country needs. But they also sharpen the nation’s awareness that long-term credibility abroad requires a diplomatic corps that mirrors the energy and demographics of its people. President Nandi-Ndaitwah’s next round of selections will therefore carry weight far beyond the individuals named. It will signal whether Namibia’s foreign policy intends to be both rooted in experience and open to the future.
For now, patience and scrutiny must go hand in hand. The President has chosen experience first; the nation now awaits evidence that renewal will follow.
