A Comparative analysis of the United Nations Peacebuilding Architecture and Ghana’s Peace Architecture under the Fourth Republican Constitution

Abstract

Following the United Nations (UN) declaration of An Agenda for Peace in 1992, a notable description of ‘Peacebuilding’ by the UN included the concept of ‘Structures’: “action to identify and support ‘structures’ which will tend to strengthen and solidify peace in order to avoid a relapse into conflict”. Similarly, academic contributions introduced the notion of ‘Architecture’ in the peacebuilding lexicon and another related metaphoric concept of ‘Infrastructures for Peace’ (I4P) as a fair representation of external and internal peacebuilding institutions. Yet, a comprehensive comparative approach is often missing in existing analysis. This study employed a global I4P approach within the UN's intergovernmental system and a national equivalent within Ghana's sovereign state system to examine the strengths, limitations, and remedies in peacebuilding processes in Ghana. Relying on an interpretive philosophy, a qualitative inquiry strategy, and a comparative peacebuilding theory, key findings came to light. A nationally-mandated eminent-led institution defines the strength of Ghana’s I4P. This provides a proactive approach to peacebuilding. However, this differs from the global I4P approach within the UN system, which has applications in post conflict African projects, such as deepening the avoidance of a relapse into national civil war, armed national conflict, and mass civil violence. Conversely, based on the dynamics of different conflict cases in Ghana, overarching peacebuilding mechanisms have been facilitated through national and local I4P platforms, including limited peace education, inter-communal dialogues, trauma healing, chieftaincy succession plan, pre-election peace accords, during-election observation, and post-election dialogue towards the eradication of political vigilantism. Nonetheless, the proactive work of eminent peace architects in Ghana is largely defined by relationship building among social and political conflict parties in the country. This defines a limited low-level dimension when compared to the UN’s liberal dimension on achieving a broader and sustainable post-conflict peacebuilding project in Africa relative to addressing democracy, security, and development deficits. As a sustainable remedy, Ghana’s I4P processes can be strengthened when local peacebuilding efforts are facilitated through a conscious hybrid partnership that addresses structural and developmental challenges. That will mean, collaboration with a broad set of developmental stakeholders at both local and international levels, including government, private, and business organisations, to channel development-oriented resources into areas that through empirical research have been deemed to serve as an easy and potential mobilising factor towards violence. Further research can concentrate on the crossing points between national I4P and other equivalent sub-regional and regional structures in Africa.