If you examine the period there was an organised concerted effort preparing the grounds to justify a regime change intervention. And this destabilisation was also at a time when Nkrumah was going to assume the OAU chair after Nasser. You will recall how every mud was thrown at the Nkrumah regime and obstacles placed to prevent Ghana from hosting the 1965 OAU summit. You will remember also how the summit had to be postponed and also the lampooning of “Job 600”. And eventually the OAU summit was held with several African countries intimidated to boycott it.
The period between 1963 and February 24, 1966 was a tumultuous one for the Nkrumah regime with the benefit of hindsight. Ian Smith had declared UDI. Harold Wilson became the Prime Minister and Nkrumah implored Wilson to intervene. Wilson will not intervene to kill his ” kith and kin”. Nkrumah threatened to organise an Africa-wide military intervention in then Rhodesia. He pulled Ghana out of the Commonwealth and Tanzania followed. Tremors in the Gulf between Egypt and Israel. Nasser, OAU chair then mobilising and with Nkrumah the next chair also organising to end a “settler” regime in Rhodesia.
All “settler” regimes were placed on high alert from Israel to South Africa to Australia and the US by the momentum of Nasser and Nkrumah with Sekou Toure (having booted out the French), Ben Bella (defeating the French in Algeria) and in the US with Martin Luther King, Malcolm X and Stokely Carmichael mobilising against the white supremacist Federal government. Added to this was the indomitable Vietnamese peasants disgracing US in the battlefield. We must not forget Castro and Cuba snapping at the legs of imperialist bald eagle. What a period with the confluence of the influence of the force of personalities of Nkrumah, Nasser, Toure, Ben Bella, Ho Chin Min, Sukarno, Nehru and Tito on the world stage charting a new path? Nkrumah and Nasser had to be removed and the narrative was as clear as the assigned role of the Matemeho.
I must end emphatically asserting that without the Eyadema regime the Matemeho ethno-hegemonists would have succeeded in breaking up the secular and unitary foundation of the state of Ghana. But the relentless assault on the secular and unitary foundation of our nation continued with the failed One-Man-One-Machete ethno-hegemony operation. But when this phalanx ethnocentric mindsets came near state power following the June 4th uprising they saw the political-economy landscape and the possibilities of “state capture”. These micro-ethnic politicians reluctantly yielded to Rawlings to hand over state power to President-elect, Hilla Limann. They went to the drawing board and struck on 31 December 1981 and successfully captured the throne of state.
With the state of Ghana in their hands these quislings realised the asset value of Ghana and the iconic image Ghana enjoyed as bequeathed by Nkrumah. They abandoned their Greater Ewe Hegemony dreams to hold on to prized Ghana. These throne thieves, prompted by their external partners, crafted the 1992 Constitution to legitimise their “state capture” and by this enabled Rawlings to convert from military ruler to mufti president.
As ethnocentrism is polarising so has been the mindset of the Tsikatas/Rawlings/Ahwois Mafioso Cabal in their purpose. Cast in the image of their colonial master, Sir Frederick Lugard, the cabal employed the Divide and Rule Machiavellian tactics of Lugard and polarised Ghana along tribal identity lines for ultimate political gain. Their (P)NDC regimes effectively undermined the secular and unitary foundation of our nation in their narrow-minded interest. To think that in Ghana in order to win elections you need a “world bank” and in order to hold some positions you must “hail from” is a testimony of the Lugardian mindset of the ruling elites of the Dukadaya.
The fact now is that if you are secular and unitary in thinking and outlook you can never win state power and under the 1992 imperial constitution. Such is the Dukadaya noose around the necks of Ghanaians. And this noose can only be removed through organised mass action as Nkrumah did against the British colonial noose. The British sat on our necks and now we have their incarnate in the Dukadaya who are now our neocolonial superintendents “appointed” to extract resources to the “metropole” in their exercise of power or “state capture”. Simply put, the Dukadaya have no loyalty to the nation. Their only loyalty is to themselves and their service to the metropolis they borrow inflated US dollars from to trap the nation in an unending state of inflation and monetary crisis…for the value of the inflammatory US Dollar lies not in Gold, Oil, Timber or Cocoa but in the bullying might of the Bald Eagle called the United States. There is a reason why Kwame Ture (aka Stokely Carmichael) labeled the US as United Snakes.
In the same manner should you, the reader, pause and reflect on why the Western Togoland separatists are openly saying that Tsikata and Rawlings have betrayed them. What is the underlying premise?
GHANA UNDER THE DUKADAYA IS RESTING ON A QUICKSAND OF CORRUPTION, TRIBALISM AND RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY. We must take our country back from the Dukadaya and restore the discipline of a secular order in celebration of our rich diversity.