News

Sports

Business

Entertainment

GhanaWeb TV

Africa

Opinions

Country

Akufo-Addo Is Rather Ghana's Hosni Mubarak!

Mon, 7 Feb 2011 Source: Mensah, Nana Akyea

A Rejoinder To:

'“Osagyefo Dr.” Hosni Mubarak'

| by Kwame Okoampa-Ahoofe, Jr., Ph.D. | Feature Article of Sunday, 6

February 2011

*

"Anyway, throughout his adult career as a journalist with an axe to grind

with the perceived opponents and detractors of his father and his

neo-Fascist CPP government, Mr. Nkrumah has preponderantly highlighted the

pan-Africanist credentials of “Osagyefo-Dr.” Kwame Nkrumah. So, logically,

one begins to wonder why the younger Mr. Nkrumah has, this time around,

conveniently chosen not to equally highlight the positive aspects of the

Mubarak government which, fundamentally, is not very different from that of

the CPP."

*

- Kwame Okoampa-Ahoofe, Jr., Ph.D., '“Osagyefo Dr.” Hosni Mubarak', Feature

Article of Sunday, 6 February 2011

It is very strange, even by the decadent Okoampa standards, that of all the

monumental, unprecedented, and historic events currently unfolding in North

Africa and the Middle East, his first shot at it is to disturb our sense of

what is proper, by once more launching into yet another diatribe against

Kwame Nkrumah and his family.

There is however a very simple explanation to this rather bizarre attack on

Gamal. The puppets of US imperialism in Africa are having sleepless nights

in the wake of what is happening in Egypt today. What better way of damage

control than to deflect the puppet status that Akufo-Addo shares with

Mubarak and replace that with the great Osagyefo himself? I am sure I am not

the only person who is seeing through this. That is why we have so many

people in Tahrir Square today! People are smarter than they look!

*

In the first place, what is wrong with what Gamal said?*

Okoampa opens his latest attack on Nkrumah and Gamal thus:

"I was quite amused to read about the recent interview that Mr. Gamal

Nkrumah granted Mr. Paul Adom-Otchere of Ghana's Metro-TV (See “Gamal

Nkrumah: Mubarak Must Go…But Power Should Not Be Given to ElBaradei”

(Peacefmonline.com 2/2/11). What particularly amused me was the following

quote from the half-Egyptian son of Ghana's flamboyant first president and

self-knighted “Life-President”: “The West should…accept [the fact] that the

people of North Africa and the Middle-East desire more democracy and desire

to elect leaders of [their own] choice [choosing?] and not leaders that suit

Israel or leaders that serve Israel's interest.”'

Gamal was expressing his personal opinion on what was going on in a country

he knows well and loves as much as he loves Ghana. Indeed, the news story

Okoampa is referring to, Gamal Nkrumah backs Mubarak's exit but not

ElBaradei, begins this way:

"Gamal Nkrumah, son of Ghana's first president Osagyefo Dr Kwame Nkrumah,

has backed calls for Egypt President Hosni Mubarak to resign but insists

that the reigns of Egypt should be handed over to a more youthful person and

not ElBaradei."

Strangely enough Okoampa did not give any explanations which made what Gamal

is saying wrong! He rather resorts to a puerile character assassination in

order to counter the political opinions of Gamal. J. B. Danquah used the

same technique to a dramatic effect in the course of the Akyea Mensah Murder

Trial. I know Okoampa is aware of the tactic because he has written

extensively about it.

And before anyone is left with the impression that the criticism of

ElBaradei, the man the US is probably hoping to take over from Mubarak, is

only a forlorn thought by Gamal Gorkeh Nkrumah. it is because they have not

been following what is going on very closely!

He was under tremendous pressure before he decided to leave Vienna for

Cairo. Those who watch Aljazeera are aware of the sentiments that are coming

from the people in Tahrir Square even before he addressed them a few days

ago. Democracy Now!'s senior producer Sharif Abdel Kouddous is in Egypt.

According to Amy Goodman, his "round-the-clock tweets are being read around

the world. Last night, CNN International highlighted one of them.

CNN INTERNATIONAL: Let's go to a trends map here that we're looking at to

see the trending topics out of Cairo on Twitter. Now, still at the top here

is Mubarak. But what's interesting to note is how ElBaradei has come up in a

popularity so much in the last few hours. That's referring to Mohamed

ElBaradei. Now, let's see what some Twitter users there are saying about

him.

"Baradei seen as non-corrupt, is respected. But he lived away too long,

didn't join earlier protests & this revolt was done w/o his help."

AMY GOODMAN: That was CNN International last night reading one of Sharif's

tweets. Sharif grew up in Mubarak's Egypt. He was only three years old when

the current regime came to power. He comes from a prominent Egyptian family

with a long history in the arts, literature, film and politics."

I am personally very comfortable with these views! These are two young

Egyptians that I personally admire a lot. I have Gamal on my mailing list,

and I do follow Sharif on twitter. And they are very good examples of young

and extremely brilliant and principled Egyptians untainted by imperialist

flirtations that can rise to the occasion!

*

"If You Cannot Deal With The Testimony, Destroy The Witness":*

Instead of dealing with the message Gamal is presenting, Okoampa resorts to

invectives, name-calling, and character assassination, just as his mentor,

Dr. J. B. Danquah, had done before him. It is a tactic Okoampa is very

familiar with. He has even written about it concerning how Danquah used it

to destroy the witnesses to the case in which Nana Akyea Mensah was believed

to have been ritually murdered by eight of his own relatives. This is

Okoampa's own account of the silly tactic:

"Consequently, it appears that the first major, modern Ghanaian playwright

was forced by circumstances other than purely legal to proceed with his

Herculean role as a Defense Maestro or Conductor, for Danquah does not

appear to have personally mounted a spirited challenge against the

prosecution. And, indeed, as Rathbone wanly recalls: Danquah, who watched

the inquest proceedings which usefully rehearsed the prosecution evidence

for the defence as they were also implicitly commital proceedings, wrote to

the Okyenhene [- Nana Ofori-Atta II -] on 27 September 1944: The evidence

against the accused is very strong particularly the evidence of Botwe, Fosu,

Gyekye and Mireku. But I feel certain that very conclusive evidence is

available both at Kibi and in Ashanti against all these witnesses (Murder

And Politics 98; Ellipses appear in the original)." See: "The Enduring

Legacy Of Dr. J. B. Danquah PART 9", Feature Article of Sunday, 8 May 2005,

by Okoampa-Ahoofe, Kwame.

If you cannot deal with the message, destroy the messenger. It did not work,

even though Danquah tried very hard to destroy the reputation of many decent

Ghanaians in order to save his brothers from the gallows! And it is not

going to work today, simply because it is Okoampa and not J. B. Danquah

doing a mischievous character assassination! I wish someone would be kind

enough to help this tormented soul wake up from his self-inflicted

nightmare, and smell the coffee! He must abandon the character assassination

tactic.

Just as it did not save Asare Apietu, Kwame Kagya, Kwaku Amoako Atta, Kwadwo

Amoako, Kwasi Pipim, Opoku Ahwenee, A. E. B. Danquah and Owusu

Akyem-Tenteng, from being sentneced to death by hanging on the neck until

pronounced dead, it will not help in distancing an imperialist puppet like

Akufo-Addo from Mubarak.

*

I think it is about time that I take my grandson through some history

lessons.*

To begin with, I shall want to point out that there are significant

differences that even a mentally retarded individual could see between

Osagyefo Dr. Kwame Nkrumah of Africa and Mr. Hosni Mubarak of Sharm

el-Sheikh! What we see in Nkrumah, his life, political career, his goals for

the rapid development of Africa, as well as the very manner of his overthrow

are all very much different from the jaundiced picture my grandson Kwame

Okoampa wants us to believe!

1966 Coup:

My grandson points out that the overthrow of Nkrumah was executed by "the

gallant men of the Ghana Armed Forces and the Ghana Police Service, led by

[Messsrs.] Kotoka, Harlley and Afrifa." As to who engineered it, he was very

economical with the facts.

'While charges of U.S. involvement are not new, support for them was lacking

until 1978, when anecdotal evidence was provided from an unlikely source,'

writes Paul Lee, '—a former CIA case officer, John Stockwell, who reported

first-hand testimony in his memoir, In Search of Enemies: A CIA Story.

"The inside story came to me," Stockwell wrote, "from an egotistical friend,

who had been chief of the [CIA] station in Accra [Ghana] at the time."

(Stockwell was stationed one country away in the Ivory Coast.)

Subsequent investigations by The New York Times and Covert Action

Information Bulletin identified the station chief as Howard T. Banes, who

operated undercover as a political officer in the U.S. Embassy"

There is definitely a big difference between a CIA-inspired coup d'etat and

what we are seeing in the streets of Cairo, Alexandria, Suez, and other

major cities of Egypt today! This is not a coup d'etat resulting from a

conspiracy between our security forces and foreign imperialist interests!

Indeed, the Americans were very swift to recognize the National Liberation

Council which replaced the CPP after the coup, and amazingly clueless as to

how to respond to the on-going Egyptian Revolution. So, I am constrained to

diagnose my grandson's problem, within a severely limited range of

possibilities, as either as a result of political mischief, misanthropy,

ignorance, naivety, and or he is probably writing in his capacity as a

genuine fool.

What do we see as the US response to the will of the Egyptian people? We

know from declassified documents such as the one compiled by Paul Lee. He

talks about preparations that lasted for years! Here we are nine months

before the coup:

'As it turned out, the coup did not occur for another nine months. After it

did, Komer, now acting special assistant for national security affairs,

wrote a congratulatory assessment to the President on March 12, 1966

(Document 260). His assessment of Nkrumah and his successors was telling.

"The coup in Ghana," he crowed, "is another example of a fortuitous

windfall. Nkrumah was doing more to undermine our interests than any other

black African. In reaction to his strongly pro-Communist leanings, the new

military regime is almost pathetically pro-Western."

In this, Komer and Nkrumah were in agreement. "Where the more subtle methods

of economic pressure and political subversion have failed to achieve the

desired result," Nkrumah wrote from exile in Guinea three years later,

"there has been resort to violence in order to promote a change of regime

and prepare the way for the establishment of a puppet government."' See:

Documents Expose U.S. Role in Nkrumah Overthrow, By Paul Lee, Special to

SeeingBlack.com.

"Mubarak Is Not A Dictator"!

It is clear Mubarak is not only their man, but their main man in the Arab

world. His dictatorship has been plodded on by a massive life-support of

almost two-billion dollar aid each year, for the past thirty or so years he

has been in power. Democracy Now! has an interesting interview with Chomsky.

When asked about President Obama's remarks the other night, February 02,

2011, on Mubarak, Chomsky said: "Obama very carefully didn't say anything...

He's doing what U.S. leaders regularly do. As I said, there is a playbook:

whenever a favored dictator is in trouble, try to sustain him, hold on; if

at some point it becomes impossible, switch sides."

"NOAM CHOMSKY: Well, Obama very carefully didn't say anything. Mubarak would

agree that there should be an orderly transition, but to what? A new

cabinet, some minor rearrangement of the constitutional order—it's empty. So

he's doing what U.S. leaders regularly do. As I said, there is a playbook:

whenever a favored dictator is in trouble, try to sustain him, hold on; if

at some point it becomes impossible, switch sides.

The U.S. has an overwhelmingly powerful role there. Egypt is the

second-largest recipient over a long period of U.S. military and economic

aid. Israel is first. Obama himself has been highly supportive of Mubarak.

It's worth remembering that on his way to that famous speech in Cairo, which

was supposed to be a conciliatory speech towards the Arab world, he was

asked by the press—I think it was the BBC—whether he was going to say

anything about what they called Mubarak's authoritarian government. And

Obama said, no, he wouldn't. He said, "I don't like to use labels for folks.

Mubarak is a good man. He has done good things. He has maintained stability.

We will continue to support him. He is a friend." And so on. This is one of

the most brutal dictators of the region, and how anyone could have taken

Obama's comments about human rights seriously after that is a bit of a

mystery. But the support has been very powerful in diplomatic dimensions.

Military—the planes flying over Tahrir Square are, of course, U.S. planes.

The U.S. is the—has been the strongest, most solid, most important supporter

of the regime. It's not like Tunisia, where the main supporter was France.

They're the primary guilty party there. But in Egypt, it's clearly the

United States, and of course Israel. Israel is—of all the countries in the

region, Israel, and I suppose Saudi Arabia, have been the most outspoken and

supportive of the Mubarak regime. In fact, Israeli leaders were angry, at

least expressed anger, that Obama hadn't taken a stronger stand in support

of their friend Mubarak."

The current US Vice President, Mr. Joe Biden, even went as far as to say, in

the face of the massive opposition to Mubarak's rule, that "Mubarak is not a

dictator"! Here are his own words: "Look, Mubarak has been an ally of ours

in a number of things that he's been very responsible on relative to

geopolitical interests in the region, Middle East peace efforts, the actions

Egypt has taken relative to normalizing relationship with Israel. And I

think that it would be—I would not refer to him as a dictator."

I watch Amy Goodman's Democracy Now! every working day, and so naturally, I

did not miss the brilliant comments of Professor Juan Cole, professor of

history at the University of Michigan. Professor Cole writes regularly about

Middle East issues on his blog, "Informed Comment," which is found on-line

at JuanCole.com. His most recent book is Engaging the Muslim World. So, I

believe he has one or two things to say the people like my grandson need to

know:

"SHARIF ABDEL KOUDDOUS: That was Vice President Joe Biden. Juan Cole, your

response?

JUAN COLE: Well, Vice President Biden seems to be wanting to define a

dictator not with regard to domestic policy, but with regard to the

responsible role the regime plays in the international world system, you

know, from Washington's point of view. But certainly, from the point of view

of human rights activists in Egypt, there are strong dictatorial tendencies

in the Egyptian government. It's seen a lot of phony elections. It's used

repressive techniques..."

Indeed, the tergiversative proclivities being displayed by the Americans,

the White House and the State Department is a clear indication yet, that far

from being the instigators, the US has not even managed to have a clue, as

to how to even respond to the popular demands of the Egyptian people. That

in itself is no surprise at all. What is surprising is any comparison with

Kwame Nkrumah!

Within a space of a week, the US policy on the Egyptian crisis has been

nothing but pussyfooting. First, the only thing they could find to say was

that there should be no violence on both sides. Then they quickly replaced

that with "Time for Mubarak to initiate reforms". Then came the talk of the

need for Mubarak to consider an orderly transition. If you add "Mubarak is

not a dictator", we have four in a week!

**

One-Party State:

Okoampa writes as though the Danquah-Dombo-Busia puppets of imperialism and

neo-colonialism played a passive role towards the evolution of one-party

democratic centralism in Ghana. I once had the occasion to explain to him,

that a political party is very different from a political army. Political

Parties win votes. Political armies win wars. Ghana's constitution has never

had a place for political armies. The United Party which was the mother of

the Afrifa-Busia-Kufour tradition, also known as the "Mate Meho" meaning "I

have broken away [from Ghana]". That was how they called themselves!

With the "Mate Meho" colonialist zombies throwing bombs day and night, they

abondoned their role as a political party and became a political army. They

transformed themselves into a political army after failing to win votes even

when their colonialist owners had imprisoned Nkrumah and given them a free

range to campaign with cash and logistics.

To win a war that they themselves had declared, Nkrumah had no choice other

than chasing the elephant into the bush! Thus putting all the blame of Ghana

becoming a one-party state on Nkrumah's CPP is a completely insane

distortion of our history. In fact, in other West African states, just like

their support for Mubarak, the US support for the one-party states was very

strong, especially the over one hundred years old one party state of William

Tubman of Liberia.

Their current darling of West Africa, Alassane Ouattara was the last Prime

Minister in the 33-year one-party rule by Houphiet-Boigny of the Ivory Coast

which ended with his death in 1990! Mrs. Sirleaf Johnson was also a Minister

in the 100-year old one-party state of Liberia by the True Whig Party!

These, of course, in Joe Biden's words, were not dictators simply because

they were US allies! This is a history of an injustice that Liberians have

paid dearly for and continue to pay to this day.

It takes two political parties to make the two-party state that Ghana was on

the eve of the First Republic. Just as if you are lucky enough to have a

life-partner, you cannot be called "a single man", even though your partner

might not necessarily be a man, you cannot call a state a two party state

when one political party has vacated its post and turned itself into a

political army! In other words, if your partner leaves you, you can then

call yourself, a "one-party state", sorry, a single man!

This is what happened to President Nkrumah when the United Party abandoned

all civilities and embarked upon a campaign of deadly hostilities, including

bomb throwing, against a democratically and popularly elected President of

the Republic of Ghana. The verandah boy who warned the chiefs they would

"run away and leave their sandals behind" was not called "Osagyefo" for

nothing. If you ask for it, he would give it to you roundly and squarely. He

urgently had a nation to build. He did not have the time nor the choice.

Hence the One-Party state!

The reason he would not tolerate such thugs was clear:

“We in Africa who are pressing now for unity are deeply conscious of the

validity of our purpose. We need the strength of our combined numbers and

resources to protect ourselves from the very positive dangers of returning

to colonialism in disguised forms. We need it to combat the entrenched

forces dividing our continent and still holding back millions of our

brothers. We need it to secure total African liberation. We need it to carry

forward our construction of a socio-economic system that will support the

great mass of our steadily rising population at levels of life which will

compare with those in the most advanced countries” - Kwame Nkrumah, "Africa

Must Unite!", 1960.

The Osagyefo had the same dreams we see in the eyes of the demonstrators!

And we hear them say just that! Mubarak and Akufo-Addo represent some of the

"entrenched forces...

still holding back millions of our brothers"! Did you see the alacrity with

which he was supporting the US-France led war effort on La Cote d'Iviore

recently?

I rest my case!

Please let's stay in touch and on top of the NPP! Give me a follow on

twitter! I shall give you a follow! Twitter: /twitter.com/TheOdikro

"To all men of goodwill, organize, organize, organize! The struggle is far

from over! We need Tahrir Squares in all our cities to make them world banks

for the Asomdweehehe! We prefer self-government in danger, to servitude in

tranquillity!

Forward Ever, Backward Never"!

--

Nana Akyea Mensah, The Odikro.

Columnist: Mensah, Nana Akyea