The Government of Ghana is taking a new approach to Bawku, a major market town in its Upper East Region. A statement released Sunday, July 27, signals a decisive shift from peacekeeping to “peace enforcement.” The statement explicitly outlines this new strategy, declaring, “The Ghana Armed Forces have been deployed to maintain law and order, as we intensify curfews to ensure public safety.”
The government further assures the public that “the Ghana Armed Forces will take all necessary measures to protect lives and property” in the conflict-hit zones.
This policy change affects ordinary Ghanaians, touches traditional leadership, and brings the constitution and national politics into sharp focus. The international community is aware of the potential for regional destabilization.
Escalation of Violence
Bawku has long been a flashpoint for recurring communal violence. This simmering conflict, primarily between the Kusasi and Mamprusi ethnic groups, stems from a protracted chieftaincy dispute compounded by land issues and alleged political manipulation.
What began as sporadic clashes has, in recent years, escalated into widespread armed confrontations, disrupting daily life and threatening regional stability. The government’s statement signals an urgent response to this deteriorating security situation.
The current wave of violence, intensified since late 2021, has already claimed over 260 lives in the area, leading to widespread calls for decisive state intervention.
Impact on Daily Life
For the majority of Ghanaians, Bawku’s troubles are personal. Families are displaced. Businesses are ruined. The conflict steals futures, especially from the youth. A recent study by the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) highlights that many young people, even those with degrees, struggle to find work. Stores are looted, properties burned, eroding hope and creating a cycle of poverty and desperation.
More than 30,000 people have been displaced in the Upper East Region due to the conflict since January 2024 alone.
The pain extends beyond the immediate violence. Healthcare access is severely impacted. Schools close. Life for many Bawku residents has become a daily struggle for survival. Local markets, once vibrant, are often deserted. Regional trade routes are disrupted, leading to estimated losses of millions of Ghana Cedis in commercial activity and property damage.
Catholic Bishops in Ghana have described Bawku as a “pale shadow of itself.” This immense human cost resonates with Ghanaians at home and abroad, who see their nation’s potential held back.
“We just want to sleep at night without fear. My children deserve to go to school without hearing gunshots. This peace enforcement, we pray it brings real peace, not just silence,” said Fatima Mahama, a mother and displaced resident of Bawku.
“The constant insecurity has shattered our once-thriving community. People are afraid to farm, to trade, even to attend funerals. We welcome any action that genuinely brings lasting peace and allows our people to live without fear,” a local elder said, reflecting the desperate yearning for normalcy.
The government acknowledges the burden this intervention places on citizens, expressing regret for “the inconvenience this peace enforcement intervention may cause to peace-loving people within the affected areas.”
The Shift in Strategy
The government’s decision to shift to “peace enforcement” is a strong one, suggesting a recognition that previous approaches were insufficient. Peacekeeping often involves separating warring factions, whereas peace enforcement implies a more robust, even forceful, intervention. It seeks to compel compliance, as previous attempts at managing the conflict—including numerous curfews and security deployments over decades—have often provided only temporary relief. This is because violence continually resurfaced due to unresolved grievances and the proliferation of arms.”
The “peace enforcement” is presented as a necessary response to the breakdown of previous, promising efforts. The government explicitly states that “The Otumfuo mediation, with the genuine help of Nayiri and Zugraana, had almost brought finality to the conflict until the very recent killings which have necessitated drastic actions to protect all in the interests of the greater good.”
This raises questions: What does “peace enforcement” truly entail? Will it involve disarmament? Will it target specific individuals or groups? The government assures protection of lives and property, but the method of achieving this is critical. It must not alienate the very communities it aims to protect. While many residents desperately desire an end to the violence, there is also a clear apprehension regarding the use of force, given past instances of alleged human rights abuses during security operations.
Constitutional and Legal Considerations
Ghana’s 1992 Constitution empowers the President to deploy the Armed Forces for internal security, as outlined in Article 210(3). Article 37(1) also mandates the state to maintain peace among ethnic groups. The military’s presence is legally sound under these provisions. However, the use of force must always be proportional and respect human rights. There are concerns about potential abuses. Transparency and accountability will be vital. Any actions by the Ghana Armed Forces must adhere strictly to the rule of law. Human rights organizations consistently urge strict adherence to international human rights standards during such operations.
Political Dynamics
The Bawku deadly conflict is complex and it has deep historical roots. These include colonial-era manipulations of chieftaincy. Political interference has also fueled tensions. The conflict has often become intertwined with national politics. Both the New Patriotic Party (NPP) and the National Democratic Congress (NDC) have faced accusations, including politicizing the dispute for electoral gains. The involvement of high-ranking politicians has, at times, further complicated the dynamics, leading to perceptions of bias or partisan influence in local dispute resolution efforts.
A high profile NDC official, who preferred anonymity due to the sensitivity of the operation, stated, “The government has a sacred duty to protect its citizens. This robust approach in Bawku is a clear signal: lawlessness will not be tolerated. We are committed to restoring normalcy, and these measures are absolutely necessary for the greater good.”
The NPP will likely scrutinize the government’s actions. They will watch for fairness and effectiveness. Success could be a political win for the ruling NDC party. Failure could have significant political repercussions for the party, led by president John Dramani Mahama.
An NPP spokesperson, addressing the media, cautioned, “While we support any genuine effort for peace, the government must be transparent. Peace enforcement cannot become an excuse for human rights abuses. We call for a clear strategy, engagement with all factions, and strict adherence to the rule of law to prevent further alienation of the people.”
Traditional Leaders and Mediation
The government explicitly acknowledges the vital role of traditional institutions, commending “His Majesty Otumfuo Osei Tutu II for mediating the conflict and appreciat[ing] all stakeholders who are supporting the peace process.” The statement also acknowledges Nayiri and Zugraana. Otumfuo’s role is particularly noteworthy, having successfully mediated the Dagbon chieftaincy dispute, which offers hope for Bawku. This highlights the importance of traditional institutions, which hold significant moral authority.
The involvement of Otumfuo, Nayiri and Zugraana is crucial, as local buy-in is essential for lasting peace; top-down solutions often fail without local participation. The Mahama administration must continue to support these traditional channels, as enforcement alone will not solve the underlying issues.
International Perspective
Ghana is a beacon of peace in West Africa. This protracted conflict tarnishes that image. There are fears of spillover effects, especially given instability in the Sahel region where jihadist groups are active. Reports of arms flowing into Bawku suggest the town could become an entry point for extremism.
International allies emphasize the need for stability as they signal to offer support. This includes security assistance or humanitarian aid. But they will also expect adherence to human rights as they watch for genuine efforts towards sustainable peace.
Path Ahead
The government’s new stance is a gamble. It prioritizes immediate security, but it must not overshadow long-term reconciliation. The core issues are complex as they involve land, identity, and chieftaincy. A sustainable solution needs dialogue, justice and equitable development.
Dr. Kwesi Aning, a security analyst at the Kofi Annan International Peacekeeping Training Centre, noted, “The shift to peace enforcement is a high-stakes gamble. It signals the failure of previous diplomatic efforts to fully contain the violence. For it to succeed, it must be accompanied by robust demobilization, disarmament, and reintegration programs, alongside sustained political dialogue to address the root causes.”
Ghanaians, both at home and abroad, yearn for peace in Bawku, desiring to see progress and their fellow citizens thrive. Military intervention is a necessary step, but only one step. The government’s statement indicates a dual approach, appealing directly for cooperation: “Government urges all parties to refrain from violence and support the peace process. Residents are advised to fully cooperate with the Ghana Armed Forces to ensure peace.”
The true test lies in building lasting peace, which requires sincerity from all parties, a commitment to shared nationhood, and a future where Bawku’s children can grow up free from fear. Despite the anticipated inconvenience, the government unequivocally affirms its commitment to “restoring peace and stability in Bawku and other affected areas and is taking every necessary measure to ensure the safety and security of all residents, including students.”
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
