Ghanafuor: Can We Defend Our Ubuntu Republic Without Losing Our Humanity?

Ghanafuor, the armed Islamist terrorist groups destabilising our sister nations across the Sahel should concern every nation to their south. Ghana cannot assume that violence beyond its northern borders will always remain someone else’s problem.

It’s crucial, however, that our considered response to that threat be neither panic nor reliance on the comforting belief that military force alone can keep an Ubuntu society safe. Our response as modern-day Africans blessed with ancestral wisdom is to prepare early, cooperate intelligently and remain faithful to the principles that give security its purpose.

Our neighbours are not a distant buffer between Ghana and danger. They are sister nations whose stability matters in its own right. When communities are exposed to violence, displacement and fear, the consequences do not respect borders. The precise forms those consequences take may differ from one place to another; the responsibility to think ahead does not.

Yooooooooooo…
Simply put, Ghanafuor, that means strengthening Ghana’s ability to protect its people, support regional stability and contribute to international peace. It means capable armed forces, sound intelligence, effective border management and close cooperation with neighbouring countries. It also means investing in the civic trust and local resilience that make communities less vulnerable to intimidation and recruitment.

Above all, we should speak carefully about the threat. Armed groups that invoke Islam to justify violence do not speak for Islam, any more than violence by people who invoke another faith speaks for that faith. Confusing a religion with the extremists who exploit its language is both unjust and strategically foolish. It alienates the very communities whose knowledge and trust are essential to keeping people safe.

The proposal for a permanent United Nations peacekeeping force on standby deserves serious thought. A capable force that could deploy quickly to help uphold ceasefire agreements might strengthen the international response to crises. But peacekeeping and counter-terrorism are not interchangeable tasks. A force created to monitor or enforce a ceasefire would need a clear legal mandate, credible international authority, disciplined command and safeguards for civilians. A counter-terrorism partnership would raise its own questions of consent, accountability, intelligence-sharing and the use of force. Calling both “security” does not make them the same mission.

That distinction matters when considering cooperation between the Ghana Armed Forces and the Israel Defense Forces. The IDF may offer training and experience relevant to particular capabilities, including counter-terrorism and special operations. But no foreign military should be declared the perfect partner by slogan alone. Any such cooperation must be judged by its specific contribution, its compatibility with Ghanaian needs, and the standards governing how that training is used.

Perforce, Ghana, a leading non-aligned state, must remain in command of its own doctrine and decisions. Training should strengthen professional skill, respect for civilian authority, the rule of law and the protection of non-combatants. It should be transparent enough for Parliament and the public to understand its purpose. A partnership is worthwhile only if it leaves Ghana more capable of defending its people and more accountable for the power exercised in their name.

Nor can security be built in military training establishments alone. A state may improve its equipment and tactics while leaving the conditions that extremists exploit untouched. Communities need credible public institutions, fair treatment and confidence that the law protects them. Young people need reasons to believe their future lies within the peaceful political order. Security planning that ignores these realities may suppress a threat for a time without reducing its appeal.

Preparedness is not warmongering. It is the sober recognition that a government’s first duty is to protect its people, and that foresight is cheaper than helplessness. Yet preparedness must be governed by restraint. A state that defeats violence by abandoning justice has weakened the very republic it meant to defend.

Our Ubuntu Republic should therefore prepare with our neighbours, work through legitimate regional and international arrangements, and build a disciplined armed force capable of acting under civilian authority. We should welcome useful partnerships, including training from abroad, but assess them without flattery or fear. Above all, every security decision should answer a simple question: will this make people safer while preserving their dignity and rights?

Ghanafuor, the Sahel’s troubles are a warning, not a prophecy about our beautiful and bountiful country. We still have choices. We can wait until danger is at the gate, or prepare while cooperation, trust and good judgement can still do their work. The strongest defence of our republic will be a force capable of protecting it, guided by institutions and values that make protection worth having.