Monday,
January 12, 2015
Folks, social unrests in Ghana can
be traced to two major factors: chieftaincy and land disputes. We also have
conflicts resulting from ethnic or tribal differences. Anything else sparking
spontaneous unrests may include politically motivated disputes, breakdown of
law and order, or any other spur-of-the-moment or flash-in-the-pan occurrence.
The perennial conflict between
the people of Alavanyo and Nkonya, not to mention the Tsito and Awudome one) in
the Volta Region has bothered the various governments and people, but no
permanent solution has so far emerged to resolve that conflict.
The Mahama-led administration is
particularly noteworthy for attempting to control the situation by imposing a
curfew on the two communities (Nkonya and Alavanyo), which seemed to have
worked for w ahile until the chiefs and people of the affected areas kicked
against it and the citizens defied such a control mechanism. The situation has
defied solution.
The attempt by the government to
solve the problem is taking a new dimension, especially after Vice President
Amissah-Arthur recently admonished the rival factions and warned that the
government won't tolerate their intransigence any more. Some measures have
begun being put in place, but peace negotiation and conflict resolution efforts
seem a long shot away from registering anything substantial.
All of a sudden, the government
has moved a notch higher to flex muscles through the military. We have heard
the news to that effect:
"The Ghana Armed Forces are
moving their shooting range installation and other operation units to the
Nkonya-Alavanyo area in the Volta Region. These installations, currently
located at Bundanse in the Greater Accra Region, are being relocated to the
conflict-prone Nkonya-Alavanyo communities to also make way for the
construction of an airport.
Interior Minister, Mark Woyongo,
says the move by the military is one of the surest ways of restoring peace and
harmony in the two towns.
A permanent military training
school will also be established between Alavanyo and Nkonya in the Biakoye
District of the Volta Region by end of the year.
The two communities have been
involved in bloody conflicts over a disputed land for decades. (See more at:
http://www.myjoyonline.com/news/2015/January-12th/military-moves-shooting-range-installation-to-nkonya-alavanyo-communities-to-end-recurrent-conflict.php#sthash.FzslHOfY.dpuf).
MY COMMENTS
Many issues arising from this new
development are mind-boggling. First, the decision to move the shooting range
installation and other operation units of the Ghana Armed Forces to that area
suggests that the aspect of "jaw-jawing" is over and done away with.
The intimidation characterized by this decision won't solve the fundamental
problems. The military installation will be situated on the disputed land area;
not so? Which should prevent any of the two factions from laying claim to that
land space; right? What happens if a future government reverses this decision?
The point is that the Nkrumah
government (or any other after it) that chose Bundase for whatever it has been
all these years did so on the basis of sound judgement justified by the
objective reality of the time. Has that objective reality changed today to
warrant the relocation? And what happens to the Bundase land (even though there
is the indication that an airport will be constructed on it)?
I hear the chiefs and people have
begun agitating for their land to be given them. Or will the state still own
that land space---and put it to what use for the good of the country (an
airport)? I have very serious doubts about such a project ever materializing in
my lifetime.
Flashback: A similar grandiose
project was announced by Kojo Yankah when he was the Central Regional Minister
that the government was going to construct an airport at Mempeasem, near Cape
Coast; and that land had already been acquired and some level of development
begun to that effect. Many years thereafter, what do we have?
Moving the military away from
there leaves the land open for anything to happen there tomorrow. The seed of
another conflict being sown already?
I have no qualms about the
establishment of a permanent military training school anywhere in Ghana; but
choosing the Alavanyo-Nkonya conflict as the springboard for such a venture
raises serious issues.
Why is it difficult for us in
this part of the world to resolve conflicts provoked by land and chieftaincy
disputes?
Neither the local houses of
chiefs, the regional nor the national ones have made any serious move to help
the government control the situation. Is there no decent and civilized means to
establish a reliable line of succession so the perennial unrests occurring all
over the country can be stopped?
Why is it difficult for the
government to enforce existing provisions on lands in Ghana as state property
vested in the state and only in the various areas with the chiefs as mere
custodians who shouldn't have any right to dispose of those lands as if they
own them as bona fide property?
In civilized societies, every
piece of land anywhere (especially virgin land) is automatically regarded as
the property of the state or the local government that oversees the area. Land
tenure rules and regulations are rigidly upheld and enforced such that no one
can lay claim to any land space without sorting things out with the government
bureaucracy.
It is not only the land but also
any feature on it. For instance, there are limitations regarding how one
handles any feature (including trees). One cannot just fell any tree or do
anything that has an effect on the land or ecology without being taken to task.
Even if the land is genuinely acquired, one has to follow regulations on
developing, using, and maintaining it. The law bites deep!!
Not so in Ghana, where anything
goes. We are so backward in our thinking and use of resources that our acts
eventually end up destroying the system. Why are we like that?
I want to say that the decision
regarding this mililtary "show-of-force" may serve transient purposes
but won't help us resolve the Alavanyo-Nkonya conflict. The best solution is
for those who know the real cause of the problem to be bold enough to sit down
to resolve it. Then, a permanent regime can be established for these neighbours
to live in peace.
My final thought or quip: There
are many hotbeds or storm-centres in the country as far as conflicts bordering
on chieftaincy and land disputes are concerned. Currently, the military have a
presence in the Bawku area, but the conflict still rages on, even if the
internecine attacks by the Mamprusis and Kusasis have subsided. The hot coal is
still burning deep within the ashes of seemingly stable Bawku.
Will the government move the
military around to all those hotbeds and storm-centres as a means to solve such
conflict situations? How much can the military take on, even when complains are
emerging that it lacks resources or that the government hasn't allocated enough
funds to it? And do we think that a military solution is good for a civilian
problem (land dispute) that needs hob-nobbing and not muscle-flexing?
Let us learn how to resolve
conflicts without using force. In a democracy, dialogue and equanimity should be
the main channels for resolving conflicts, not military force (which creates an
unfortunate impression and bolsters the ego of the military—a potential for
confusion, knowing very well how the military have used numerous reasons to
intervene in national politics). The military shouldn’t be used to play this
frontline role. The problem can be solved if the authorities put in place the
appropriate mechanisms. We shouldn’t create the impression that in our
democracy, the military is the first point of call. It should be the last
resort, only after civilians have failed to solve problems that endanger social
cohesion. My take!!
I shall return…
·
E-mail:
mjbokor@yahoo.com
·
Join
me on Facebook at: http://www.facebook.com/mjkbokor to continue
the conversation.
No comments:
Post a Comment