Executive Director of the Ghana Institute of Governance and Security, David Agbe has accused President Akufo-Addo of inciting Americans against Ghanaians in the latter’s address regarding the Military pact between the country and the United States of America.
President Akufo-Addo in his address to the nation indicated that “…how else would we have exposed the unspeakable hypocrisy of the fraternity of some frontline politicians, who make a habit of running with the hares and hunting with the hounds, who secretly wallow in the largesse of the United States of America, whilst, at the same time, promote anti-American sentiments to a populist constituency?…”
David Agbe chided the President for lashing out at his critics in his speech on the Ghana-US Military deal.
“Have you ever heard any President in the world inciting against his own citizens who have voted him into political power before,” he quizzed.
“Even in authoritarian systems of governance…. They don’t say those things. They don’t incite their citizens against a foreign country. So for your President and my president to incite Americans against Ghanaians, it tells you clearly that the President has even violated the constitution.
Several people have criticized President Akufo-Addo following his stance on the Ghana-US Military agreement which was presented to parliament to be ratified.
Concerns have been raised on the state of the country’s sovereignty after the document signed by the two parties. Many commentators have described the action as one which sells Ghana’s sovereignty.
Former President John Rawlings has however indicated that the President’s televised address on the Ghana-U.S. military deal was hard “it was important and timely”.
The former President had cautioned against the 2018 Defence Cooperation Agreement (DCA) that will allow the US military troops an unfettered access to facilities in Ghana.
He said although Ghanaians may have love for Americans, they will not be happy to have “foreign troops on such a scale” living among them.
The former President is not the only one concerned about a purported negative national security implication of the agreement.