Fueling Bawku’s Pain: The Dangerous Symbiosis Between Conflict Entrepreneurs and Power Structures

We constantly talk about conflict entrepreneurs and, ironically, agree that they are the primary forces fueling the Bawku conflict. Yet, we cowardly refuse to name and expose them. The truth is, most of these conflict entrepreneurs are the very individuals we see parading as security experts and analysts on our TV shows and media platforms. These individuals remain locked up in their offices until the Bawku issue resurfaces. Then, they suddenly appear on screens to deliver commentary. These self-proclaimed “experts” make up what I classify as Group One.

This first group includes analysts who often lack lived experience or credible, on-the-ground data. Most of their commentary is built on second-hand information fed to them by factions with vested interests, yet they speak authoritatively and are paraded across media stations to boost their careers. Their analysis, in reality, does more harm than good. They frame narratives that deepen divides, drawing inaccurate parallels with other conflicts that do not match the unique, deep-rooted complexity of Bawku.

Group Two, arguably the most dangerous, comprises the six Members of Parliament (MPs) and District Chief Executives (DCEs) within and around the Bawku enclave. Their role as conflict entrepreneurs is well-known yet conveniently ignored. These political actors will go to any length to retain their seats and consolidate power, even if it means purchasing arms, manipulating truths, or using their influence to push decisions that serve their electoral base. It is no secret. They say what their people want to hear, not what the region needs to hear. Their silence or selective speech on the crisis is a calculated move designed to score political points while innocent lives are lost. We all know this, yet we refuse to speak up.

The third group, perhaps the most cowardly of them all, are the media houses, particularly the national TV news outlets. These institutions have evolved into key conflict entrepreneurs because of their symbiotic relationship with sensationalism. They thrive on “hot” news stories, and Bawku gives them just that. Rather than practice ethical journalism, these media houses sit comfortably in Accra and invite Group One and Group Two figures to speak on matters they barely understand. What is worse, these media platforms often fail to verify the facts and recklessly attempt to relate other regional conflicts to Bawku, completely ignoring the fact that the Bawku conflict has outlived and, in many cases, overshadowed many of those so-called comparable conflicts in terms of its intensity and impact.

These media outlets rarely, if ever, send credible, neutral reporters to Bawku. Instead, they rely on second-hand, easily influenced journalists, many of whom, out of fear for their lives or political bias, cannot gather balanced, on-the-ground information from both factions. As a result, we are bombarded with one-sided reports, mostly from a single group, which the media then presents as the voice of “Bawku youth” or “the people of Bawku.” But this is deceptive. These individuals only represent their respective factions, either Mamprusi or Kusasi, and not the entire multi-ethnic community of Bawku.

Let’s not forget that Bawku is home to multiple tribes, many of whom remain neutral and yet suffer the most in this ongoing war. These groups are often caught in the crossfire simply for being in the “wrong” area. A Mamprusi will not enter a Kusasi area, and vice versa, because of the violent divide. But what about the Dagombas? The Busangas? The Frafras and other minority tribes living in Bawku? The media rarely gives them space or voice. These neutral tribes are often left out of the discourse, even though they endure the daily consequences of a conflict they did not create.

The media’s bias, negligence, and hunger for “scoops” have created an ecosystem that fuels the conflict rather than informing or helping resolve it. If the media houses were doing a proper job by offering balanced coverage, uncovering the truth, and holding the political elite accountable, the government would have been forced to prioritize the Bawku conflict a long time ago. But instead, we’re fed half-truths and manipulated narratives.

Let us not overlook the national security implications either. Bawku’s proximity to the Sahel makes it a potential gateway for jihadist infiltration. There have already been confirmed reports by border security services of jihadist arrests at the Bawku border. In fact, photographic evidence exists showing armed jihadist militants embedded within the conflict. Yet, this barely makes headlines.

Until we collectively muster the courage to name and expose these three groups of conflict entrepreneurs, namely the so-called experts, the opportunistic politicians, and the sensationalist media outlets, Bawku will never know peace. The cycle of misinformation, manipulation, and militarization will continue. And the blood of innocent civilians, people who simply want to live in peace, will remain on the hands of those who choose to look away, or worse, benefit from the chaos.