The current leadership pressure in Ivory Coast demands not just the attention of international community but also a careful approach in handling the crisis. As an analyst or social critic, one is expected consider both sides a story before drawing judgment. In this case, neither Gbagbo nor Quatara’s side of the coin will count in this case. Rather, my concern is more on the current approach by the international communities (UN, AU, EU, and indeed ECOWAS) in terms accepting or not accepting who is being declared a winner in a given election. From the look of things the ongoing crisis in Côte d'Ivoire, if well settled with Quatara as the president, will redefine as well as set a pace in future election matters in other countries in Africa. But the current trends of issues especially the reactions as well as the position of some international bodies like UN and ECOWAS involves one of two things: War or peace. It will push Cote d’Ivoire into an anguishing civil war which will have an unforgettable ugly mark on the history of the country.
The point is that, UN, AU, and ECOWAS as well as other related international bodies by all standards can be regarded as institutions were full fledge diplomacy is being practiced. Again, one of the objectives or the common goal on which all these bodies were formed is to promote peace on the globe using their various member nations. This means that all member countries of such bodies are under certain regulations or a set of rules governing the general operation of the body which can be referred to in terms of any misconducts by any of its members. But it appears there are loose ends in laws of such bodies which reduced their powers and make them ineffective in times of serious need. The idea of non-interference on internal issues as often opted by these bodies (UN, AU, etc) has been one of the reasons why most diplomatic peace missions have failed. It should be noted that a country is formed by a collection of individuals/groups, and internal peace of a particular nation propels external peace between that country and her neighbours. AU, UN, ECOWAS and the likes all have peace keeping forces which are usually send to war zones to manage crisis using arms to mend issues after things have fallen apart. What Africa needs is peace building, not ‘peace keeping’ using guns and bullets.
Peace building is what I refer as “The art of Peace”. If these international bodies have good peace initiatives which can not only build but also sustain internal peace in their member nations, it will go a long way in promoting international peace than it ordinarily happening in most countries. The art of war on the other hand is situation where by a particular society is ruled by different factions with their leaders claiming as well as imposing leadership on the entirety of that society. In this way, arms or bullet dictates the pace of the game. The issue here is that, we have the guns and bullets to give troops for peace keeping operation but we do not have the diplomatic ingenuity to help countries to solve their internal issues and prevent internal crisis.
When Kibaki and Raila Odinga had serious dispute over the winner of the December 2007 presidential election in Kenya, the mediation team (which was headed by Kofi Annan) displayed a high-level of diplomacy to forestall peace not only between the two but in Kenya as a whole by favouring a power sharing agreement. In doing this, Odinga was asked (if not pressurized) to drop his claim to the presidency and, for the sake of peace, accepted the newly created position of prime minister. Although, the fracas led to weeks of bloodshed and destruction ensued by Kibaki’s and Odinga’s supporters and eventually damaged Kenya’s long-standing reputation for stability, they Kenyans are experiencing peace today.
Today, Odinga is sent to Cote d’Ivoire as head of the AU peace mission team which is going to talk to Gbagbo on the need to handover power to Quatara. If Gbagbo eventually accepts this, it will signify that Odinga was cheated since he too claimed he won in Kenya but was highly pressurized to drop his claim and accept the power sharing deal for the sake of peace. Although, Kenya is in East Africa while Cote d’ Ivoire is in West Africa which shows their differences in terms of regional politics, the all exist on the same land mass called Africa and dwell under the umbrella called African Union (AU). This means that Africa is one. The international communities should employ a holistic approach in viewing the issue in Cote d’Ivoire rather than just base on common factor in who wins election and who did not.
