Author, Arthur K
In the last few weeks, former President Rawlings has been in the headlines quite a bit.
He was at the Special Congress that endorsed President Mahama as the NDC flag-bearer in Kumasi as well as the launch of the NDC Manifesto in Ho. A few days later, he hosted the NPP Presidential candidate, Nana Akufo-Addo. Then last week-end, he stood by his wife, Nana Konadu Agyeman Rawlings as she accepted the NDP nomination and he predicted a revolution in the NDC.
At this stage, I and indeed many Ghanaians are not sure whether Mr. Rawlings is dazzling the nation with some exceptional political moves or is confused himself. Regrettably, the certainty and clarity that has been a defining characteristic of the former President appear to have deserted him.
Is he for the NDC and John Mahama as he seemed to imply by praising the President while urging prayers for him?
Is he suggesting that he takes the election of Nana Akufo-Addo as given by asking him to forgive the real and imagined sins of the NDC?
Is he for the NDP by standing by his wife last Saturday?
Whatever the import of these dizzying and sometimes contradictory moves, they have excited speculation.
First, the NDC celebrated his appearances in the hope that the Former President would campaign for them after all. Next, the NPP celebrated the apparent blessing of its candidate by His Jerryship.
Then finally, the NDP showed that love conquers all by finally locking him in. But even now, have we heard the final position of President Rawlings on the 2012 elections?
As expected, the potential targets of his endorsements have bent themselves out of shape to curry his favor.
First, the NDC tried to convince all of us that the former President’s blistering attacks on corruption in the ranks of the NDC was indeed an endorsement. Since he had been singing the same song over the last four years, elaboration would be unnecessary. If the remarks to the NDC were open criticism, the remarks to Nana Akufo- Addo, while milder, was equally astonishing. It bordered on hilarity. The former President stated, “While we expect either John Mahama or Nana (Mrs. Rawlings) to win the election, can the NDC supporters enjoy the same degree of security and freedom under your government as the NPP have enjoyed under the Mills-Mahama government because they have been very nervous and I know what a good deal of them went through under the Kufuor regime?”
Now, that is a loaded paragraph!
First, it suggests that NPP members have enjoyed a high degree of freedom and security under the Mills-Mahama administration.
Second, it asserts that the level of freedom and security enjoyed under Mills-Mahama was higher than that enjoyed by NDC members under Kufuor.
Third, it states that NDC members are nervous about their fate if they should lose the elections.
The suggestion that the Mills-Mahama administration has provided more freedom and security to NPP members than the Kufuor administration provided for NDC members will be news to many NPP members, including President Kufuor, Mpiani, Asabe and many others. Unfortunately, these assertions were not challenged. In addition to this, what makes Mr. Rawlings’ assertions baffling is that he has consistently called for tougher action against supposedly corrupt NPP functionaries by the Mills-Mahama administration. Indeed, that point, together with supposed corruption by NDC functionaries have been at the heart of Mr. Rawlings’ quarrels with the Mills-Mahama administration. Given these circumstances, how could the former President, in good conscience, ask for assurances that amount to a blanket pardon for these same “greedy bastards” that he has been condemning? Upon reading the former President’s request, my initial reaction was: WHO BORN DOG!!
To be candid, the former President’s visitor, Hon. Nana Akufo-Addo would have done the cause of democracy and his candidacy a world of good if he had declined to give the assurances that the former President had asked for. As a candidate who had described himself as “incorruptible” and even warned his own party members admirably that the corrupt would have no place in his government, he would have been on solid ground to insist that the corrupt would have something to fear, not from him personally but from our laws. Then he should have added the coda that he, as President, would neither pursue the innocent nor shield the guilty. Unfortunately, his response was, “There is nothing for anybody to be afraid of.” While I believe that many NDC officials are not corrupt, my conviction is that those who are corrupt should have reason to be afraid that the long arms of the law will get them.
As for the former President’s endorsement of his wife, I am sure many who are married will understand. Every married person can recall a moment when his or her spouse has taken a position or course of action that he or she has had to support knowing it is imprudent.
Indeed, my wife remembers more than a few. Mr. Rawlings is experienced enough to know that his wife, despite her considerable strengths, will not be elected President of Ghana this year or anytime soon. This is because he has the “Addo Kufuor” problem. To those who need reminders, in 2008, Dr. Addo Kufuor, who was perhaps the most successful Minister in the Kufuor regime, was seeking to succeed his brother as President. Despite his outstanding qualifications and stellar record, not even his brother President Kufuor thought it was a good idea. Most Ghanaians felt that eight years under a Kufuor—any Kufuor was enough. In the same vein, many feel that nineteen years under a Rawlings—any Rawlings is more than enough. Many Ghanaians feel that it is long past time for Mr. Rawlings to take his wife into his bosom and tell her firmly that it is time move on to other things.
With the benefit of hindsight, it is clear that Mr. Rawlings, given his wife’s ambitions and his justifiable frustrations with the NDC, was never going to support the NDC. Given these, a more honourable course would have been to skip the NDC events and the Nana Addo summit.
The assurances he sought from Nana Addo should not have been sought and should not have been given. In the same vein, the NDC should either have sought guarantees that Mr. Rawlings would be with them or declined to offer him platforms to attack them at their events.
Sadly for his admirers and well-wishers, as the former President has gone through those contortions and distortions, his credibility has dropped, not just by the day but by the hour.
The Rawlings-Nana summit has been hailed by the punditocracy as significant and transformational. While the pictures were good and talking certainly is better than fighting, this assessment is a little over-blown and premature. If a summit is needed, why not have one between Nana Akufo-Addo and President Mahama?
It is surprising that the punditocracy has not descended on the former President for his inconsistencies and his abandonment of cherished principles.
A point that needs to be taken seriously is that despite the confusion and inconsistency, one thing seems clear. President Rawlings, in his own flawed way, is still trying to save the party he created, the NDC. It is obvious that he sees the NPP and its candidate as well as his wife and the NDP, as weapons in that struggle to save the NDC. Only time will tell whether that struggle will succeed.
Unfortunately for President Rawlings, this election appears to be perhaps, the last one in which he and the parties formed by, for or against him will have primacy.
While he has done and continues to do his part, the torch is passing on. Even as we celebrate the good things he did, we must, of necessity move beyond him.
Over the horizon, new men and women, new parties or movements and new ideologies are forming that will change the old order—for better or for worse.
May our democracy and institutions grow from strength to strength—even as we move away from strong men.