By Ahmed M. Gedel
IN AN era where global politics increasingly rewards ideological conformity over cultural authenticity, Ghana has chosen a path that is both courageous and principled.
The country’s recent abstention from a vote at the United Nations Human Rights Council has sparked debate but more importantly, it has revealed the thoughtful and measured diplomacy that underpins the Mahama-Ablakwa foreign policy vision.
The abstention was not, as critics claim, an evasion of duty. It was an act of conscience. According to Ghana’s Foreign Affairs Minister, Hon. Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa, the resolution in question was not simply about protecting human rights, but about extending the mandate of an independent expert whose scope includes affirming orientations and identities that contradict Ghana’s cultural and constitutional identity.
In other words, the vote was wrapped in moral ambiguity, and abstaining was the only position that neither compromised our commitment to dignity nor betrayed our national values.
Let’s be clear: Ghana is not, and has never been, a nation that endorses discrimination or violence against any human being. Our Constitution guarantees the dignity of every citizen. However, this does not mean we must subscribe wholesale to global ideological trends that challenge our traditional definitions of gender, family, and social harmony. Ghana abstained not to dodge responsibility but to uphold responsibility: to our people, our values, and our future.
The foreign minister’s explanation was transparent, intelligent, and statesmanlike. And in affirming that position, former President John Dramani Mahama has signaled that under his leadership, Ghana will remain engaged on the global stage but never at the cost of its sovereign moral compass.
This, in itself, is diplomacy at its best. It is not reactive but reflective. It does not seek global validation at the expense of domestic conviction. As Hon. Sam George rightly echoed, Parliament must now take swift and clear legislative action to preserve our moral architecture while ensuring no Ghanaian suffers exclusion or violence. It is not a zero-sum game; human dignity and cultural preservation must coexist.
It is worth noting that Ghana’s abstention sent a powerful message to the global diplomatic community: that Africa will no longer be lectured into ideological submission. That we can be partners in global governance without being pawns of foreign paradigms. That we can protect rights while resisting redefinition.
Those who criticize Ghana’s decision must ask themselves: what is democracy if not the right of a people to define their own path? What is sovereignty if it collapses under international pressure? And what is leadership if it fails to defend the values of the very people it represents?
Ghana’s position at the UN was not an act of silence,it was an act of strength. It was not a betrayal it was a bold declaration of belief. It was the voice of a nation that listens to its people and stands by its principles, even in the face of global scrutiny.
Let this moment stand as a rallying point. Let Africa rise not as a continent ashamed of its culture but as a dignified partner in a world of diverse civilizations. Under the renewed leadership of John Mahama and the diplomatic craftsmanship of Okudzeto Ablakwa, Ghana is on course to redefine not only its foreign policy posture but also its moral legacy.
And for that, we must not only support that we must salute.
Source: Nationaltymes.com
