Ghana is polarised despite efforts to heal wounds – Ahwoi
Prof Kwamena Ahwoi, lecturer at the Ghana Institute of Management and Public Administration (GIMPA), on Saturday said Ghana was polarised despite efforts by successive governments to heal deep seated emotional and physical wounds.
Presenting a paper on the extent of polarisation of the Ghanaian society, Prof Ahwoi said Ghana was polarised in four different ways.
These are polarisation at the national level, inter and intra party level and interpersonal level.
The paper, which was sponsored by the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), together with Ghana Political Parties Programme (GPPP) was to access the extent of polarization of the country, the factors that led to it and ways of depolarizing it.
At a meeting held on March 16, 2007, by the General Secretaries of political parties with IEA analysts, there was an agreement that Ghana was polarised on ethnic grounds and this could be recipe for conflict if not addressed immediately.
Despite the urgency of the country’s depolarization the paper was shelved until now when the IEA revived discussion on it.
Participants include political party leaders and executives from all the parties in the country including party chairmen, secretaries, chiefs and the academia.
Tracing the historical antecedent of the problem, Prof. Ahwoi said Africa before the advent of the white man was a continent of tribes and different ethnic groupings some of which had highly centralized systems of government.
He stated that the Berlin Conference of 1844 dubbed the Partition of Africa carved out Africa among European powers on the basis of European interests stressing that many African countries today were therefore artificial creations.
He said the “strong man leadership syndrome” advocated by leaders of the immediate post–independent Africa, was an attempt to stamp authority to create a cohesive demand towards the centre as a way of forging nation states.
Ghana under Dr Kwame Nkrumah, he noted, was an excellent example with policies such as second cycle boarding school system as well as his deliberate policy of self denial by putting his own birth place (Nzema and Wasa areas) at the tail of his developmental priority list.
“Nkrumah succeeded in creating a nationalist hero out of every Ghanaian and in making all Ghanaians to think Ghana first, tribe second,” he said.
He argued that the only ethnic claim against Dr Nkrumah was the use of his own people as his personal guards but all governments after independence were said to have bubbled with ethnic flavours, citing the National Liberation Council (NLC) as Ashanti/Ewe conspiracy.
He said the New Patriotic Party (NPP) had always won Akan, especially Ashanti epithet though historically it had strong bases in the Upper West and Northern Regions.
National Democratic Congress (NDC), according to him, was considered Ewe party though the voting fortunes of the party in opposition had compelled a reformulation of the ethnic tag into Ewe/Northern dominance.
Perhaps, he said, the most emotion driven institution was chiefdom and especially when chieftaincy dove-tailed into partisan politics, the product would be volatile power keg that would explode in no time.
“Yet this is the reality that, historically, certain chieftaincy gates have been identified with certain partisan political traditions,” he said.
Prof Ahwoi identified the bombings and the Prevention Detention Act that took place during the Nkrumah era for which some died in prison as a result and the attempts to assassinate Dr Nkrumah were some of the factors that polarised Ghana so deeply.
He said voting patterns in the general elections the country experienced showed compelling evidence of a polarised state adding that the Akan dominated settlements across the country voted for the NPP while virtually the entire Volta Region and parts of the Greater Accra Region which were non Akan settlements all voted for the NDC.
He said for lack of precedent to follow in the 2001 transition because it was the first time one administration was handing over power to the other posed many problems which divided the country along party lines.
Prof. Awhoi identified the revolutions in Ghana and their victims as another source of division among Ghanaians.
“Though there have been several coups and counter coups and attempted coups there is no doubt that because of the nearness in time and the trauma and excesses that were unleashed, the two revolutions of June 4, 1979 and December 31, 1981 had had the most profound effect on Ghanaian politics and have been fundamental causes of the political polarization today,” he said.
Touching on the National Reconciliation Commission (NRC), he said though it helped to bring reconciliation to some, a post–NRC evaluation study may be a good beginning to completely heal wounds.
Prof. Awhoi said ideological differences, ethnicity, financiers of party programmes and generational issues and many others have polarised Ghanaians at the intra-party level.
He stated that the interpersonal polarization existed between former presidents and incumbent presidents.
He called on all the political parties to collaborate to address these problems else the future for Ghana would be bleak.
Daasebre Prof Oti Boateng, Omanhene of New Juabeng Traditional Area, who chaired the function, said there should a permanent think tank for the congruency and accountability on the political scene.
Source: GNA