Subj: Of Eccentrics, Ghanacentrics and Tribalists and Ethno-federalists

Date: 01/02/97

To: Okyeame@mit.edu

CC: okyeame@serengeti.AfricaOnline.com

CC: gr@pbs.port.ac.uk

, Okyeame@mit.edu

Compatriots,

I have now had the opportunity to read Kadzillah’s eccentric postings to myself and others with interest. I have also examined the points which the latter-day ethno-federalists have been making, I will deal with the eccentric Kadzillah first.

So Kadzillah thinks he has the answers to questions posed by myself earlier on this forum. Or does he? What Kadzillah offers is a mishmash of questionable assertions that makes the lowest-ranking sophist seem a supreme rationalist. Worse, he has the nerve to call others tribalists when they question the uses Adu Boahen and others have made of our history.

Wherever I had thought my statements might be open to doubt I had been careful enough to quote from original sources. In order not to appear to be putting words in the mouths of Bowdich, Mensah Sarbah and the rest I had quoted directly from them. Furthermore, where I had made potentially contentious statements regarding Adu Boahen's stand on Ghanaian history I had been meticulous enough to name my source, specifically pointing to the page carrying the offending statement.

Rather than deal with these nuggets of truth Kadzillah chose to attack me on my service with the British Army in Cyprus. In a mind-boggling twist of facts he equates the peace-keeping role of the regiment in which I served with the murderous activities of a company of warring troops. Perhaps Kadzillah knows nothing of the Laws of War, and therefore brackets the activities of an interposed force with the activities of the aggressor.

I might remind him that the Laws of War and the Nuremberg Principles aside, International Law recognises a clear distinction between the role of combatants and the role of peace-keeping troops as in Cyprus. Also, he might notice that even the United Nations Charter (Article 2 (4?) or 4 (2)?) recognises a nation's right to self-defence in combat situations. The upshot is that not all wars can be placed on an equal footing and considered wars of aggression.

On a different note medals are hardly won on a battlefield for mindless slaughter. If Kadzillah, the Pious One, cares to browse through the vast literature on the Vietnam War he will observe that many medals were won for rescuing comrades and saving lives. He accuses others of nitpicking and arguing without checking their facts, and then puts his foot in his mouth by accusing me of having participated in bloodshed simply because I won a military medal.

General JA Ankrah won Ghana's first military cross in the Congo (incidentally a UN Peace-keeping operation). Does Kadzillah know the circumstances under which that medal was won, and would he accuse the late general of participating in bloodshed for joining in a UN peace-keeping operation? All this convinces me that Kadzillah knows little of what he is talking about.

Kadzillah's argumentation is prototypical intellectual rubbish: muddled sequencing, baseless assertions, lack of hard evidence, and merely cottoning on to the points raised by others - nothing original; nothing even by way of decent critique. Kadzillah's word-juggling and other antics have set me pondering anew the term "creative eunuch". It also puts one in mind of a new Don Quixote of cyberspace, chasing issues where all else see none, and doing battle with imaginary windmills.

Kadzillah takes issue with my cautionary description of somebody as being "presumably Asante", the grammarian's classic case of the use of the adverb as modifier. Perhaps confused with the standard legal conventional use of the term "presumed innocent until proven guilty" he concludes that I had rushed to judgment. How on earth did he expect me to describe a man whom I suspected of being Asante while being prudent enough to recognise that I might be wrong?

Your turn, Mr Kadzillah, the pious one. Can we have your true opinion on the atrocities reported by Bowdich?

No hiding behind a wall of words, please. Can you also tell us the extent of the Asante "empire"? What made the Fante part of Asante? Do the Asante even have a word for "empire"? Or would you in response rather indulge in some Boahenesque creative intellectualism? You can either choose to argue in measured, reasonable terms or doggedly stick to your brand of ethnic Utopianism. My previous post offered a melancholy moral for Prof Boahen and his ilk. It is dangerous to attempt to diminish the role of others as a way of raising one's own people.

@@@@@@@@@@

Moving On

@@@@@@@@@@@

One smells fear and defeatism in Kadzillah's recourse to dodgy argumentation. But he needn't worry. As far as I am concerned this particular issue has been over-squeezed; we cannot perpetually dwell on the subject of Asante. It will suffice if the Asante realise that they have been over-playing their hand; and that they need to be sensitive to the concerns of others, and cease adopting a monopolistic attitude to state power and past glory.

For all and sundry the 1996 elections may well go down in history as the moment the wheels fell off the tribal bandwagon in Ghana politics, and the crushing realisation dawned on the chauvinists that accession to leadership should primarily be on the basis of calibre, not ethnicity or Asanteness.

Henceforth I will move on to other pastures. There are far more juicier matters to tackle. Why did we ever expect that the allegedly libidinous Arkaah could together with another ex-member of the Rawlings administration, Kufuor snatch power from their ex-helmsman, Rawlings, without first removing their associative connections with Rawlings?

The Machiavellian schemes of the Rawlings regime never cease to amaze. No sooner had Arkaah's candidacy been confirmed than the NDC tabloids started to dig the dirt with exposés involving exclusives by his alleged lover and victim, Jemima Yalley. From that moment on it was clear that the Opposition had been wrong-footed and that it was going to be out-manoeuvred.

As far as I can tell the Oppostion will continue to have a hard time dislodging Rawlings' and his men; for once they have worked out a way, fair or foul, of hanging to power they can only become more adept at that. Better still they have bags of money too to carry out their nefarious aims. On the other hand, for how long would altruistic individuals pour money down the Opposition's bottomless expenditure pit, knowing that matters might in the end be rigged by government? For this and other reasons the financial problems of the Opposition can only become ever more daunting.

Let us not forget the undeniable fact that there has never been a transfer of power from one civilian regime to another through the ballot box in our country. The wishful thinkers aside, all must realise that it is going to be difficult changing this pattern. A surer bet lies in attempting a change from within the government.

Strategically this offers a better approach; for whether through palace coup or Kulungungu insiders have always been the most effective wreckers of Ghanaian regimes. Indeed, the Akata Pores, Giwas and others who came closest to threatening the regime were all insiders. So indeed were Arkaah and Kufuor, former insiders. The task ahead, in my view, is to perfect the art and to use the democratic mechanism to so infiltrate the Rawlings regime that it is damaged from within. Play them at their own Machiavellian game, employing tactics overt and covert.

@@@@@@@@

Gacentricity ?

@@@@@@@@@

As to the other matters raised in response to my post I respond as follows. Kadzillah has also been vainly attempting to construct a baseless Ga-centric analysis of the posts of others. There is no such thing as Ga-centrism, nor a basis for the same. The Ga have never had a history of tribalism or self-centredness.

The Ga Shifimo Kpee was rebuffed by the Ga Manche, and by the formation of the Ga Ekome Feemo Kpee which stood against everything the former advocated. In addition, the Ga voted massively for Kwame Nkrumah as their MP, rejecting one of their own, Obetsebi-Lamptey who got a meagre vote from even the Ga Mashi of central Accra. The NPP got a handsome vote throughout Accra. And no bunch of Ga intellectuals have, while drawing salary from the national coffers, attempted to project Ga history, religion, philosophy or tradition as the entirety of Ghanaian cultural and related phenomena. On the other hand, the Ga have treated systematic attempts to minimize their role as a mere fleabite on the hide of an elephant. Wherein lies the basis of Kadzillah's accusations of Ga-centrism?

The main point of my argument is that the NPP is widely seen as an Asante-controlled party. Merely responding that a number of non-Asantes hold positions within the NPP is no answer. Abaabasee or the United nationalist Party had Joe Appiah (an Asante) and Modesto Apaloo (an Ewe) as part of its triumvirate of leaders. In addition, it fielded many non-Ga candidates across the country. Yet, it is rightly remembered in Ghanaian political history as a Ga-dominated party. Nor am I impressed with the argument that criticisms cannot be levelled at Adu Boahen because he is allegedly married to a Ga, formerly known as Miss Rawlings.

Co-incidentally a similar argument has been made in the letters column of GRi in relation to Kufuor's marriage to a Fante. Is Jerry Rawlings not married to an Asante? Yet many in Ghana freely accuse him of pro-Ewe tribalism. Indeed, successive broadsides have been launched on Okyeame about alleged Ewe tribalism in Ghana simply because Rawlings is an Ewe. If Kadzillah and the Gri "letter-writer" are taken seriously Rawlings is pro-Asante since he is married to an Asante. It is these sorts of unsustainable adherence to misleading argument that makes some of us despair; a false argument by any other name is still a false argument.

Finally, since Kadzillah questions the basis on which I speak for the Fante I must inform him that I have unquestionable Fante antecedents. My dear departed mother hailed partly from Elmina and partly from Cape Coast, a good Fante woman of the Twidan family of Chapel Square in Edina whose family still own lands up to the banks of the Sweet River. Also, by right of inheritance I qualify as a Saphohin or Supi of the asafo company of Chapel Square, Elmina.

The Cathlines, Baffours, Smiths and Baidens of Elmina belong to my maternal family, as can be confirmed by JR Baiden the ex-trade union activist (Maritime and Dockworkers Union). But as is obvious, I also belong to the Amartse We family of Asere, near Bukom Square in central Accra. Yes, I possess the Fante female blood, and by customary law remain a legitimate member of my mother's family. Kadzillah's questioning of my right to speak about reparations for the Fante is therefore so much tosh.

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Ethno-Federalists Show their True Colours

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

The latter-day enthusiasts of a federal Ghana are almost to a man ( or woman) Asante-centric supporters of the NPP unable to come to terms with the reality that the so-called Danquah-Busia tradition is a consistent loser in elections and that Asantes , as a minority tribe, cannot lay claim to a monopoly of power. At least these people are now showing their true colours . Let us all wait till the year 2000 when , presumably, these same Asante tribalists ( I cannot think of a more apt description for them ) come round to ask the entire Ghanaian electorate to vote for their party .

From the train of postings that I have looked at, one of the first people to cheer on Madam Theresa was the Venerable High Priest of Ashanti Tribalism himself, Otuo Acheampong. I will reproduce his posting of 29 January 1997 in support of Madam Theresa or Mama Tess as he calls her :

"Mama Tess

You can say it again and louder to those who think its a CRIME to be

an Asante because all Ghana's woes begin and end with the Asantes.

Dear Lord have mercy on us all.

Nana"

Now stand up and speak for yourself Otuo ! Madam Theresa does not have to speak for you .

I do not know of anybody who thinks it is a crime to be an Asante. Asantes are rightfully Ghanaians .The trouble is with people like you and your ilk who like to think that Ghana begins and ends in Asante.

IT DOES NOT, NEVER HAS DONE AND NEVER WILL.

Fortunately for Ghana many Asantes do not think like you, Ahenkora , Theresa and others. However tribalists like you and your colleagues must be exposed and confronted at every turn. Let me remind you again that no group in Ghana will ever be allowed to dominate others. If that unfortunate fact makes you want to seek refuge and comfort in half-baked notions of ethno-federalism then that is your own problem.

This ethno-federalist nonsense is the direct result of the bitter disappointment which ,people who are Asante tribalists at heart, have had to live with since they finally realised that they have been once again rejected by the majority of the Ghanaian people. Otuo, please refer to my posting to you and Okyeame some time ago entitled " Of Otuo Acheampong : Myths, Ignorance, Prejudice and Propaganda" in which I pointed out to you role in propagating the myths, ignorance, prejudice and propaganda that helped create the misplaced overconfidence that NPP were going to win the elections and the consequent disappointment which is now being manifested in this new-found enthusiasm for ethno-federalism. Go back and read it and re-evaluate the points that I made directly to you.

Now let us ask ourselves :

If the NPP had won the election and the NDC losers , particularly those associated with a certain region which I do not need to name, started suddenly clamouring for federalism, what would these NDC losers be accused of ?

Do try it out if you wish, Otuo, Theresa, Ahenkora et. Al, if you can persuade if enough people to support your hopeless cause. Try to get the Asante chiefs on your side and start a federalist movement in action. Some of us will sit back and watch the spectacle !

The inevitable misery and blood and tears that will surely flow will mean that you lot will come running back to Mother Ghana with your tribalist tails between your legs.

However Ghanaians ( the patriotic Ghanacentric ones) are known for their hospitality and kindness. So I am sure that , despite the untold pain and grief, which your hopeless cause will have caused , we will welcome you and your fellow prodigal sons and daughters back into the Ghanacentric family where our ethnic and cultural diversity is respected in the knowledge that progress and prosperity can only come to our country in an atmosphere of true democracy, good governance, equality of opportunity and justice for all

Long Live Ghana !

One country, One People, One Great Destiny !

Numo Notse Amartey