Cote d'Ivoire: no peace, no war; Efforts to put the fragile Ivorian peace pact back on course have taken the key stakeholders to Accra, the Ghanaian capital, for the third time. The question is, will the Accord work this time? Josephine Akarue reports from Abidjan.

Hope is beginning to wane. Over a month after the 29 July "Accra III" peace meeting presided over by the UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, and 12 African heads of state, the peace process has once again hit the buffers.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

So far, only one of the several key issues, the re-installation of the suspended ministers, has been addressed. The other issues, such as Article 35 on citizenship, land ownership and the establishment of an independent electoral body, remain untouched.

On 9 August, when the cabinet ministers met for the first time in four months with the suspended ministers in attendance, hopes of a renewed commitment to lasting peace were high. There was an atmosphere of sweet comradeship. Now, many are not so sure.

The opposition feels betrayed and fears that the Marcoussis Accord Implementation Committee (MAIC) lacks the political will or muscle to enforce the adoption of the Accra III accord. These worries may not be unfounded. In a bid to maintain its neutrality, MAIC has often taken a non-confrontational posture which its critics deem as a weakness.

In a press release at the end of August, Albert Tevoedjre, MAIC's president, expressed concern over the delay of implementing the Accra decisions. "Contrary to commitments made following the Accra meetings," he said, "certain texts concerning the resolution of the crisis in Cote d'Ivoire through credible elections are yet to be adopted as at 31 August."

The committee called on all stakeholders to seek a constructive solution to the impasse while maintaining the 15 October date for disarmament.

But Djedje Mady, secretary general of the Democratic Party (PDCI) and president of the curiously-named G7 Group (made up of representatives of 7 of the 10 signatories of the Marcoussis Accord), is unimpressed. "I find the [MAIC] statement rather lax. It calls for a new negotiation as if the Accra III meeting has already failed. This statement is premature, negative and contrary to the committee's mandate," he said.

Mady fears that this not only smacks of loss of confidence but may open the doors for disorder likely to affect credible elections in October next year.

Yet, the ruling party, Front Populaire Ivoirien (FPI), is adamant. Its MPs insist that without a referendum, the country's constitution cannot be altered. For Affi N'guessan, the FPI president and former prime minister, a referendum is non-negotiable. "In Accra, a referendum was accepted. So who is afraid of a referendum, who is afraid of the people?", he asked in early September.

In principle, Article 48 empowers President Laurent Gbagbo to make constitutional amendments if the nation's institutions or judicial system is in peril. But the president says so far both conditions do not exist.

In July, when the Gabonese president, Omar Bongo, became a peace-broker in the Ivorian conflict, he emphasised the need for a quick resolution and an early disarmament to move the country forward. "I am very hopeful that the next meeting will be the very last because we do not have the time to always meet in Paris or Marcoussis or anywhere else," he said. But it will take more than mere hopes to bring the conflict to a determined end. Beneath the growing calls for disarmament, is a lingering insecurity and distrust on both sides and an unwillingness to concede an inch of their demands. For long, the government's position has been quite clear--disarm and we can take the lead from there. At a meeting with some members of the G7 before the Accra III meeting, President Gbagbo said those who had taken up arms had not shown enough evidence that they appreciated the amnesty granted them.

Yet, the opposition is asking for more than an amnesty. Among other issues, they are calling for an amendment of Article 35 of the constitution as well as the full implementation of the Marcoussis Accord which grants more powers to the prime minister, Seydou Diarra, and the creation of an atmosphere of security.

In an interview with the national newspaper, Fraternite Martin, Col Soumaila Bakayoko, chief of staff of the New Forces, blamed the politicians for the current impasse on disarmament, saying: "When a soldier under my authority who is ready to carry out this instruction on disarmament asks me, 'my colonel, I am willing to lay down my arms, but am I an Ivorian?', I cannot answer that question."

Underneath this question, is the issue of citizenship which has become a make or break point for Ivorian sovereignty? Article 35 of the constitution, for instance, demands that both parents must be of Ivorian parentage for a candidate to be eligible for election as president. Simply put, he or she must be a third generation Ivorian. This, for the opposition, is a catch net to stop them from nominating Allassane Ouattara, former prime minister and leader of the Republican Party (RDR), as presidential candidate. The Marcoussis Accord, just like Accra III, they insist, demands the amendment of Article 35 as a panacea to the root cause of the present impasse. They believe the president has the power to implement this change.

For President Gbagbo, the answer is simple: Let the citizens decide through a referendum. This, he argues, can only be done after an effective disarmament.

So opinions are sharply divided over the feasibility of changing the constitution under these circumstances. For the majority in the government-controlled South, nothing short of a total disarmament can bring about any concession.

Today, however, the army seems to be more eager than the politicians to put the past behind them. The people also appear to be tired of the neither-peace-nor-war situation. But unless something drastic is done, the country might slip into bad times again.