Ghana against forceful removal of Gbagbo?

E. Ablorh-Odjidja, Ghanadot

December 31, 2010

Well, who else could have proposed a legitimate use of force to remove Gbagbo from power, if not ECOWAS?

And now we hear that the Ghanaian government of President Atta Mills is not in full support of the idea. The dissent must come as God sent for Gbagbo. For now, at least, his eastern flank is safe.

“Credible information picked up from the corridors of the ECOWAS Secretariat in Abuja Nigeria indicates that Ghana is strongly against any forcible removal of the incumbent President of Ivory Coast, Laurent Gbagbo.” Reports JoyFM.

Ghana, the news said, “prefers dialogue in the resolution of the crisis.”

The assertion that “war is never the answer” always comes from those who prefer inaction; even though the possibility of war could be the only deterrent for tyrants and despots, time and time again.

So “dialogue” with the Ivory Coast; meaning a policy of "Live and let live" may soon be the answer from Ghana. 

But the same "dialogue" is the rogue code for the sustenance of despots in Africa.  It enables them to remain in the office. Should there be any doubt, look to Zimbabwe and Comrade Mugabe for the true meaning of the word.

It can be guaranteed that Gbagbo will still be the president of the Ivory Coast after the “dialogue" is over.

The proposal has brought suspicion from some quarters in Ghana.  That Ghana would be needing a dialogue of its own soon since it is heading toward what may be considered a heated election in 2012. The lesson from 2008 indicates that Attah-Mills will not want ECOWAS to come messing around in his country in 2012 just in case things don’t go well for his regime.

The 2008 elections in Ghana brought that nation close to the brink of civil war, had it not been for sane heads like President Kufuor.

Some of us have already proposed an aggressive stance against the Ivory Coast. But despite our bias, any suggestion that “dialogue” is the only means for resolution of the conflict in the Ivory Coast is vacuous.

The only intent for Ghana’s “dialogue” for a solution, could be to preserve the status quo and for Gbagbo to continue in the office.  But as sure as darkness comes after daylight, the “dialogue” is going to fail and the failure would spell trouble for the Ivory Coast and the entire region.  The solution for avoidance of this trouble is for Gbagbo to exit, not to engage in “dialogue.”.

We may know what Ghana has told Gbagbo privately.  But with Ghana as an ally, Gbagbo has his eastern flank sealed and his chances for survival assured.  In Gbagbo’s mind, it could mean the fear of civil war has lessened, despite what ECOWAS envoys may have told him.

The advantage of peace on the eastern flank,  a “dialogue” with Gbagbo may end in power-sharing. And should that also fail, Gbagbo can still call himself a president over half or a whole country.  Half a share of rule over the country may be better than going into exile and abandoning power may be a better deal for Gbagbo’s mind even though it could break the unity in the Ivory Coast. This is an outcome that Ghana should fear because a similar split division could also occur internally in Ghana.  The Ivory Coast could provide that bad example.

To preserve unity in the Ivory Coast, threatening force now may be more necessary than pushing for a dialogue that in the long run may lead to a civil war that may impact Ghana severely.

1. Many Ghanaians live in the Ivory Coast with the majority of them said to be residents in the Gbagbo-controlled southern part of the country. A civil war will disgorge the majority of them back to Ghana.

2. Ghana’s nationals could be the subject of attacks in a civil war situation.  But the corollary is also true that there will be Ivorians in Ghana who can be subjected to the same treatment at the same time, highlighting an uncomfortable relationship between the two sister countries. 

3. The possibility that Ghana’s new oil field, on which FPSO Kwame Nkrumah is situated near the border of the Ivory Coast, may come under attack.  Its maritime boundary with the Ivory Coast could become a bone of contention. 

Regardless of whether one is for dialogue or for threatening the use of force, the above threats could always be present.  What would be needed to amend the threat is a firm policy of non-tolerance for misrule.  For this effort, Ghana needs to show support and be committed to peace in the Ivory Coast by any means necessary. 

Ghana’s support should not only be limited to the threat of force.  In the future, it should extend its support for policing activities that affect both countries negatively - criminals who may attempt activities that may not contribute to peace and prosperity in both countries.

The answer is to show strength and not tolerate any lawlessness from the state or individuals on our borders. Ghana must join ECOWAS to reinforce support for the rule of law in the Ivory Coast even if that means the removal of Gbagbo by force from power.

E. Ablorh-Odjidja, Publisher www.ghanadot.com, Washington, DC, December 31, 2010

Permission to publish:  Please feel free to publish or reproduce, with credits, unedited.  If posted on a website, email a copy of the web page to publisher@ghanadot.com. Or don't publish at all.