The violent conflict in Cameroon, still rarely discussed in Washington, is becoming increasingly dire. Both President Paul Biya’s Francophone regime in Yaounde and the Anglophone separatists in the southwest region are accused of brutal human rights abuses, including the burning of villages, attacks on schools, and the killing of men, women, and children. Despite mediation attempts by the Swiss government and sanctions by the Trump administration, there are no signs of any progress towards a negotiated settlement.

In 1991, I mediated an end to a different African conflict with some striking similarities: the Eritrean war of independence, which raged for nearly three decades. Lessons from that precedent offer clues to a potential endgame in Cameroon.

Colonial-style takeovers

Both Eritrea and Cameroon’s Anglophone regions were engaged in governing federations with more powerful nations, then lost autonomy when their counterpart took over after deciding the relationship no longer suited them.

The Federation of Ethiopia and Eritrea was inaugurated in 1952, with two separate governments having their own legislatures, internal controls, and flags, while sharing foreign policy, defense, and currency. Ten years later, the Ethiopian Emperor Haile Selassie I unilaterally dissolved that arrangement and annexed Eritrea, sparking the long and bloody war.

In 1961, Cameroon’s Anglophone region voted in a UN-sponsored referendum to join Francophone Cameroon in a very similar federal arrangement. Eleven years later, then-President Ahmadou Ahidjo defied the UN to hold his own referendum on whether to effectively annex the Anglophone areas by unifying the two regions, while conveniently providing Ahidjo with expanded powers. Officially, the vote tally was 99.99 percent to dissolve the federation, with 98.2 percent turnout. 

A crackdown by the Francophone authorities immediately ensued. Widespread discrimination against Anglophones was compounded by a takeover of the education and judicial systems to abolish the English language. Like the Eritreans subjected to sudden Ethiopian subjugation, this move to consolidate power understandably upset Cameroon’s minority Anglophone population.

What do these parallels tell us about the crisis in Cameroon?

Paul Biya cannot expect to win through war

Unlike in Eritrea, tensions grew slowly in Cameroon over decades, before boiling over into the open violent conflict of the last several years. But the twenty-nine-year length of the Eritrean war indicates that bloodshed is likely to persist as long as Anglophone Cameroonians feel their culture and autonomy is being stolen by the Yaounde regime (and as long as they have friendly neighbors on their side of the border.) Prolonging this conflict will not lead to a resolution.

A mediated negotiation is the only realistic solution, and the United States can lead it

The Ethiopia-Eritrea war ended rapidly after the U.S. became the official mediator. In Cameroon, the lack of progress in Swiss mediation does not simply mean the conflict is unsolvable for now. The responsibility to engage in serious negotiations must be made clear to both sides. They will feel comfortable in offering concessions to an influential mediator like the United States that they would not offer each other.

Despite the Trump administration’s supposed neglect of Africa, it has in fact been heavily invested in conflict resolution there: currently it is working to end saber-rattling between Egypt and Ethiopia over the latter’s move to dam the Nile river. President Trump has appointed a highly capable U.S.-Africa diplomat, Tibor Nagy, to the assistant secretary position I once held. Ambassador Nagy is an excellent choice to oversee this process.

There are additional incentives for President Trump to pursue peace in Cameroon. The administration’s efforts to resolve the Israel-Palestine conflict are likely to be met with failure. By contrast, ending the Cameroon conflict, while difficult, is within this administration’s grasp, and it would do far more to improve U.S. standing in Africa than John Bolton’s aggressive anti-China, anti-Russia campaign there.

The longer the conflict lasts, the less likely that Cameroon will remain a single nation

Eritreans refused to accept any federation with Ethiopia after three decades of war. There was simply too much bitterness. Even after the independence accords, a two-year border war in 1998 killed hundreds of thousands; it did not officially end until Ethiopia’s new premier Abiy Ahmed made an unexpected, unilateral peace overture last year.

It may not be too late to return to the UN-approved federation between Anglophone and Francophone Cameroon that existed prior to 1972. That arrangement would provide Anglophones with the autonomy they deserve. But time is running out.

Genuine democracy is a requirement for post-conflict stability

For decades, Ethiopia’s domestic politics relied on a coalition of ethnic parties, the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF), which originally fought the military dictatorship of the 1970s and 1980s. Consternation over the dominance of one small ethnic group, the Tigrayans, eventually led to deadly protests and the ouster of Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn last year. In November, Prime Minister Abiy moved to merge the EPRDF parties into a single unit, but this was met with protests by the Tigray constituency, and may ultimately lead to further destabilization just as ethnic tensions in the country are especially inflamed.

The weakness of Cameroon’s democratic institutions is aggravated by the monopoly of Paul Biya’s ethnic group, the Beti, over political and economic power. Many of the non-Beti French speakers feel just as marginalized as Anglophones. Ethnic domination within a putative democracy is inherently unsustainable. And after thirty-seven years of autocratic rule and fraudulent elections under Biya, Cameroon’s problems may not end with any resolution of the Anglophone crisis.

 Written by Herman J. Cohen the former assistant secretary of state for African affairs (1989–1993), the former U.S. ambassador to the Gambia and Senegal (1977–80), and was a member of the U.S. Foreign Service for thirty-eight years.

Culled from Council on foreign relations

The video of Success Nkongho and Nyambere’s schemes with the terrorist genocidal regime of Paul Biya, should be watched very carefully to gather intelligence, away from emotional rants and reactions. When I watched people like this in action, I put on my clinical forensic professional cap and listen and watch very carefully. For instance, Nyambere is very scared and very uncertain of himself. He might have genuinely joined the fight initially without full assessments. Part of him being where he is today is a reflection of the state of the revolution and the ways in which it is being managed. The noise, the toxicity, the scamming, the blackmail, the hate, the smears, are all making room for some weak minded people to be victims to temptations and to reassess their future when they see hopelessness and uncertainty in and within the revolution.

 As for the man Success Nkongho, he is a seasoned scammer, conman, a fake and a thief. He knows the risks he is taking because he has been down this lane before many times. People like him work on the pleasures of instant gratification. As he is there he knows that he is a target of both Ambazonia and terrorist la republique. He knows la republique is using him and he can even be killed by them once they get all they want from him. He will work very quickly to outsmart them and get as much from them before they get him. As for the dangers of his betrayal to Ambazonia, he has that at the back of his head and eventually he will have a good plan for that if the Ambazonians dont get to him before he is able to work out a good plan. The danger he faces is that his current betrayal is in Plainview for all to see. He may have taken too much for even the blind to see. In the views of C. Achebe, he steals so much so that he has stolen the walking stick of the blind man to make magic to be richer.

One point or information on intelligence Nyambere gave away is the fact that la republique is sending spies into the refugee camps to misinform and recruit or convince our people. That is a very significant piece of information. Unfortunately we have allowed ourselves and our revolution to fall victims to a leadership system where those who say they are leaders can bask in the glories of any inch of inroads or success registered by our brave ones on the ground but do not take any responsibilities for theirs deaths, their increased exposure to risks, their wellbeing and for creating an atmosphere where fighters like Nyambere can even dare to use as excuses to justify doing what he has just done. It is because of the rogue and visionless leadership that we enable to be part of this revolution,  that the revolution is fast becoming a basking ground and comfortable haven for criminals, borderline civilized village champions and adventurers.

By Christmas Ebini

There have been mixed reactions in Cameroon to President Paul Biya’s renewed threat to crush separatist fighters in the country’s two English-speaking regions. Many Cameroonians were expecting Biya to announce new peace measures in an end-of-year message.

President Biya said the security problems in the Northwest and Southwest regions remain the most urgent issue to be tackled in the new year.

He said he had taken several measures allowing armed groups and fighters to lay down their weapons, but said the fighters, who are mostly youths, have been brainwashed by Cameroonians in the diaspora.

Biya said his military will henceforth show no mercy for those who continue to refuse to surrender and be forgiven.

“We will have no other choice than to combat them in order to protect all our fellow citizens,” he said. “Our Defense and Security Forces will, once again, perform their duty with restraint, but without weakness. I wish to reassure them of my full support and high esteem.”

Biya accused Cameroonians in the diaspora of funding violence back at home by continuing to buy weapons and said they should, out of patriotism, refrain from destroying their country.

The comments drew immediate criticism from opposition leaders. John Fru Ndi, leader of Cameroon’s opposition Social Democratic Front party, says he was scandalized that Biya did not announce measures to stop the separatist crisis that is in its fourth year.

He says after the national dialogue Biya held in October, Cameroonians expected him to free separatist leader Ayuk Tabe Julius and his collaborators to allow peace to return.

“I expected that in a speech like this he would say Anglophone activists, I pardon you. Now with this olive branch that I have extended, can all those in the bushes {fighters} come out let us talk,” he said. “But Mr. Biya said if you want peace be prepared for war. I saw in him then that that was somebody who wanted to fight under all costs before his term comes to an end.”

Maurice Kamto, leader of the opposition Cameroon Renaissance Movement, said Biya is deceiving himself and the world that he is resolving the separatist crisis.  He said the president should convene what he called a sincere dialogue.

“The broad inclusive national dialogue must deal with among other issues, including particularly the reform of the electoral system, the guarantee of fundamental human rights and public freedoms and the guarantee of the independence of justice,” he said.

Cameroon is scheduled to hold local and parliamentary elections next month. Fru Ndi said with the current tensions in the English speaking regions, it will be difficult to conduct any elections successfully.

Violence erupted in the two regions in 2017 when teachers and lawyers protested alleged discrimination at the hands of Cameroon’s French-speaking majority. The crisis has killed at least 3,000 people and displaced over 500,000, according to the United Nations.

Separatist leaders on social media described Biya’s message as a non-event and said they will continue to fight until they have their independence.   

Source: VOA

For some three decades, Cameroon’s president, Paul Biya, has gone down in the estimation of many of his compatriots due to corruption and incompetence that have become the hallmark of a country that was known by many across the globe as a country of the future.

In the seventies and the early eighties, Cameroon was admirably zooming towards a bright future, especially as the country’s pioneer president, Amadou Ahidjo, had laid a solid economic foundation for the country with his five-year development plans that were delivering better living conditions to the people.

Ahidjo’s education was limited, but he quickly learned the ropes and surrounded himself with honest and hardworking Cameroonian technocrats whose love for the fatherland was never in doubt.

Though ruthless when it came to dealing with the political opposition, the country’s pioneer president ensured that corruption was kept very low and any government official caught toying with state funds had to face the music.

He was merciless with government officials who dared to think that occupying a high position was a sign of superiority.

His insistence on using the youths to manage the affairs of the country was his way of ensuring continuity in the country even after him.

This explained why many of those in government today were granted top positions when they were either in their late twenties or thirties, including Mr. Biya who became the Secretary General at the Presidency at less than 35 years.

Under Mr. Ahidjo’s political program, every administrative division in the country was represented in his government.

Though he dishonestly lured the country’s English-speaking minority into a lopsided political union, he always ensured that the post of vice-president went to someone from Southern Cameroons, including the post of speaker of the National Assembly.

Mr. Ahidjo kept unemployment very low and he established a solid private sector that could help hire many young Cameroonian graduates, especially as the civil service could not hire everybody.

Under his economic program, every administrative division had an administrative headquarters endowed with all the services that could make life easy and beautiful to Cameroonians.

But this has not been the trend since 1982 when Mr. Ahidjo handed over power to the country’s current president, Paul Biya, who has ruled the country for 37 years through presidential decrees that have only delivered death and destruction to the citizens of Cameroon.

A country that was once considered as an oasis of peace in a desert of military and political chaos has now become home to many armed groups.

For three years now, Cameroon has been caught in an armed conflict that has pitted the country’s English-speaking minority against a government that has no emotional attachment to its citizens.

As the conflict progresses, light weapons are spreading like ragweed and criminal gangs that are feeding from the government’s failure to restore peace and security in those regions are sprouting and blighting the lives of ordinary citizens, especially in rural areas where the government is conspicuously absent.

The conflict has affected the country’s economy and, over the last couple of years, it has been in a free fall, with unemployment reaching unprecedented levels.

Graduates have become criminals and odd jobs, once done by the uneducated Cameroonians, have become very popular among highly educated Cameroonians.

Recruitment into the civil service has become very unreliable. Regional balance that was a reality under the country’s first president, has been swept under the carpet.

Today, most government ministers are from Mr. Biya’s region of the country, although that region constitutes less than 10% of the country’s population.

Senior administrative officers are also mostly from Mr. Biya’s region and the objective is for them to implement a vicious policy of intimidation and fear-mongering given that most Cameroonians are against a regime that has divided them and robbed them of their dignity.

Today, tribalism and nepotism have replaced competence and regional balance. Mr. Biya’s ministers have become very arrogant. They have no respect for their compatriots and this has eroded whatever respect and emotional attachment the ordinary citizen had for the government.

Cameroonians have been intentionally pauperized by their government. Many are dying of preventable and curable diseases and this has only stepped up opposition against a government run by ailing Octogenarians.

Given this appalling and unsettling economic and political picture, many observers are asking if today’s end-of-year speech by Mr. Biya will deliver any hope to a people who are already indifferent to all government actions.

The government seems to be tone deaf. The people are sick and tired of complaining. Even the international community is losing hope.

The international community has been calling on the government to organize an inclusive dialogue that will deliver peace to the country, but these calls have all fallen on deaf ears.

Instead of organizing a genuine inclusive dialogue, Mr. Biya and his cohort hastily organized a major national dialogue that has not produced any real results.

The war is still going on and without an honest effort and dialogue, the English-speaking minority may walk away from a union that was hastily stitched together by the country’s first president; a union that has spread pain and frustration among the country’s English-speaking minority.

Today, the government has hastily brought home some refugees to demonstrate that the rebellion is dying and that Mr. Biya’s strategy is working.

But observers have already qualified this as a charade that will not address any real issues. This is more of a publicity stunt by the government and this will be a key focus of Mr. Biya’s speech today.

The world is watching and it believes this is an opportunity for the 86-year-old Biya to reach out to the English-speaking minority so that a real and genuine dialogue can start.

If he changes his tone and approach, he might win lots of hearts and minds, but will that be possible, especially as Mr. Biya has a mindset that belongs to a different epoch? To him, only military violence and manipulation can achieve anything meaningful.

He is frozen in time. He has to walk away from his old mentality if he wants peace to return to Cameroon. The ball is in his court.

The Cameroonian government does not intend to participate in talks with the Ambazonians until local elections have been held.

A delegation from the Center for Humanitarian Dialogue (HD) was to go to Cameroon at the end of November to meet the government, but the government canceled the meeting without re-scheduling.

According to our sources, Yaoundé does not intend to participate in talks with the Ambazonians until the implementation of the measures emerging from the Great National Dialogue in October (in particular the special status for the region’s English speakers) and until local elections – slated for February – are held.

Two opposing camps at the presidential palace

Even after these deadlines, the holding of talks remains uncertain.

The separatists themselves are divided.

And, at the presidential palace, two camps clash.

On the one hand, the supporters of a hard line, rather opposed to dialogue and represented by Samuel Mvondo Ayolo, the director of the civil cabinet, and by Joseph Dion Ngute, the Prime Minister.

On the other, a more open-minded group, embodied by Ferdinand Ngoh Ngoh, the secretary general of the presidency.

Abroad, mediation also has its supporters and its detractors: the United States is very favourable, while France is more opposed to it.

By Besong Eunice Nchong