In the past weeks, I have been deeply troubled and consumed by thoughts surrounding the concept and definitions of terrorism, specifically home-grown or domestic terrorism. This reflection took me back to a question I posed to my lecturer, Prof. Maura Conway, earlier this semester during one of her lectures on Political Terrorism. At the time, I asked whether the situation in Bawku could be classified as terrorism. Based on how I framed the question then, Prof. Conway rightly pointed out that it did not fit the criteria and proceeded to give classical examples to clarify.
Fast forward to recent events in Bawku, there has been a disturbing escalation of violence that appears to build on prior similar occurrences. One tribal faction has been violently attacking both on-duty and off-duty security personnel, including the military, police, immigration, and customs officers, as well as unarmed civilians. They have launched assaults on military installations, government vehicles, and infrastructure such as health facilities. There was even an attempt to use a rocket-propelled grenade (RPG) to bomb a fuel station, which was only thwarted by military intervention. Live grenades and dynamite were used to destroy a bridge. Military escorts accompanying unarmed civilians have been shot at on multiple occasions.
Additionally, this faction has created illegal markets separate from state-designated ones and established illegal border checkpoints in an effort to cut off food and essential supplies, preventing the movement of people irrespective of their tribal affiliation or nationality, all under the pretext of an ongoing conflict. I have listened to numerous debates on national media where the Mamprusi faction’s claims and actions have been discussed, with some arguing that these acts amount to terrorism or home-grown terrorism.
Based on the knowledge I gained from my Political Terrorism module in Semester 2 and an extended literature review, I revisited key definitions of terrorism. The U.S. State Department (1983) defines terrorism as:
“Premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.”
It further states that this includes civilians as well as
“military personnel who at the time of the incident are unarmed and/or not on duty.” It also includes all attacks on “military installations or on armed military personnel when a state of military hostilities does not exist at the site.”
Similarly, the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation defines terrorism as:
“The unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”
Based on these definitions alone, the acts occurring in Bawku clearly meet the criteria for terrorism. These are premeditated, politically motivated violent acts targeting non-combatants, including unarmed civilians and off-duty security personnel, military and government installations, and civil infrastructure, all taking place in areas where no declared state of military hostilities exists. The use of explosives such as RPGs and grenades, the destruction of infrastructure including bridges and fuel stations, and the establishment of coercive structures such as illegal borders and supply blockades show an intent to intimidate or coerce the government and the broader population toward political objectives. The repeated and strategic nature of these attacks aligns with the FBI’s definition of terrorism as unlawful violence used to further political or social aims.
Given this context, and after thorough reflection and further research, I now strongly assert that what has been occurring in Bawku since the reignition of the conflict approximately four years ago is a classic example of home-grown terrorism. This situation has been worsened by the actions and inactions of both the previous and current governments, who have politicized the issue and exploited it for electoral gains while countless lives have been lost.
What transpired in Bawku in just the past five days is particularly alarming. A tribal faction has openly brandished weapons in front of police stations and military barracks, burned down nearly all police stations in and around the Bawku enclave, set fire to the homes of top security personnel, and even burned the house of the Member of Parliament for Bawku. They also attacked the Member of Parliament for Pusiga in her private residence, riddling her home with bullets while she was inside, forcing her to flee for her life. A heavy gun battle ensued, resulting in the deaths of two security personnel and one civilian, and leaving several others, both civilians and security officers, injured.
The Inspector General of Police (IGP) visited the area in an attempt to restore calm, only to make a series of loose and questionable statements. In what seemed like a poorly thought-out gesture, he offered the very individuals responsible for the violence the promise of prioritizing their recruitment into the police service on the condition that they lay down their arms. This raises serious concerns: Is the state now effectively granting licensed firearms to these individuals without any structured Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration (DDR) process? Or was the IGP simply making hollow promises in the style of political appeasement? It would not be surprising, given that he was appointed by the same political establishment that has consistently failed to address the crisis. Ultimately, just hours after meeting with these tribal bandits, the IGP’s convoy came under direct attack as he attempted to leave the town. His vehicle sustained bullet holes, and several members of his police escort team were injured in the ambush.
This has largely happened due to the state’s leniency, which many perceive as the over-pampering of this particular tribal faction simply because of their supposed electoral influence. Their numerical strength is seen as significant enough to determine election outcomes, and this political leverage has allowed them to act with near impunity.
This same kind of violent behavior, when exhibited by other tribes or communities in Ghana, has often been met with swift and brutal military and police reprisals, frequently indiscriminate in nature. We have seen this in Ashaiman in the Greater Accra Region, where an entire military battalion invaded and beat up civilians indiscriminately following the death of a soldier. A similar response occurred in Kasoa. Most recently in Walewale, the burning of a passenger vehicle resulted in a mass beating of residents, leading to the death of two men.
In sum, the disproportionate state response, the politicization of the Bawku conflict, and the pattern of violent, coordinated attacks all underscore the reality that what is happening in Bawku should no longer be viewed as merely a tribal conflict but rather as a manifestation of domestic terrorism. This is a growing threat, emboldened by political indulgence, with deadly consequences for national peace and stability.
