There is a deadly bug spreading across Africa like wildfire. And this time, it is not the coronavirus. It is military coup d’états which have been designed to take down monarchies or incompetent African leaders.

This contagion has moved from Sudan to Mali, spreading to Chad, Guinea, Burkina Faso, Niger, and recently to Gabon.

The question now is who is going to be the virus’ next victim; the bug which is causing ineffective African leaders to tremble in their pants?

The bug is relentless in its attack and giving its mutatinality, it has struck fear in many. It is a matter of when it next gets a victim, not if it will attack those who have made themselves unpopular due to their economic and political reasons.

With flu and other contagious infections, people take vaccines to protect themselves, but this new infection in Africa has prompted the leaders of Rwanda, Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea, and Congo Brazzaville to take proactive measures to keep themselves safe by restructuring their security and defense teams.

Following the recent military coup in Gabon, where the reign of the Bongo family was ended after 56 years, President Bola Tinubu of Nigeria declared that this is “a contagion of autocracy.”

President Tinubu is only half right. The men in military fatigues who now occupy some presidential palaces in Africa through coups are not democratically elected, have seized power through arms, and are autocrats. But for President Tinubu to consider Omar al-Bashir, Ali Bongo, Ibrahim Boubacar Keïta and some deposed leaders as representatives of democracy is outright incorrect.

Democracy is more than just elections. Most of the elections held on the continent of Africa are sham elections designed to keep the international community and donors off the backs of African leaders.

In a democratic polity, the government must be created and maintained with the people’s consent, with a clearly defined system of conducting free and fair elections with the citizens encouraged to participate in the political process.

Genuine democracies have a separation of power where authority is not concentrated in the hands of a single individual.

A genuine democracy must have a mechanism for protecting Human Rights and guaranteeing freedom of speech.

Finally, a proper democratic system embodies the rule of law or due process of law where all citizens are accountable to laws publicly passed and equitably enforced by an independent judicial system.

John Stuart Mill argued that democracy gives each person a share of political power, forcing leaders to consider the rights and interests of the wider population.

But this cannot be true of the people in Niger, Gabon, Mali, Burkina Faso and most African countries. In politics, we learn that coups will likely happen in unconsolidated democracies where leaders abuse the state apparatus for personal gain. 

One doesn’t have to be a genius to identify the problems facing the countries that have recently had military coups and most of Africa– poverty, inequality, lack of basic infrastructure, non-existent healthcare systems, corruption, poor educational set-up, hopelessness, sky-high youth and adult unemployment, unaffordable food prices, illiteracy, high fertility rate, food insecurity, insecurity, bad governance, frequent power cuts and much more.

 If democracy is a government of the people and for the people, as Lincoln stated, its purpose must be to provide economic benefits, development, and human dignity to its citizens.

Despite the obvious failure of the recently deposed leaders and the political class in Africa to live up to what democracy stands for, some are calling for ECOWAS to intervene in Niger to restore a version of democracy that doesn’t consider the best interests of citizens.

The people clamouring for ECOWAS to intervene militarily in Niger to restore “democracy” are not doing that for Niger or Africa’s interests. A war to restore what ECOWAS and France call democracy in Niger will be a monumental error of judgment and a failure of diplomacy by Nigeria, the regional powerhouse.

President Bola Tinubu has more than enough on his plate in Nigeria and should not fall into the trap of playing to the gallery of the world stage. He has access to a sea of gifted IR scholars and historians in Nigeria; he should listen to their wise counsel.

The imminent challenge for President Tinubu and a few other decent African leaders is to design an immediate and binding architecture for good government in Africa.

Civilian coups through sham elections and presidencies for life through constitutional amendments must be frowned upon and discontinued.

This move will restore confidence in the state governing structure. Until the AU gets member states to sign up to a binding architecture on government for the people, coups will be more frequent in the foreseeable future.

According to Schmitter and Karl, modern political democracy is a system of governance in which citizens hold rulers accountable for their actions in the public realm.

But most African presidents are civilian coup leaders who have never won genuine elections and treat the state as their private property.

Most of them are accomplished kleptocrats who are not responsible to anyone. The celebration of coup leaders in many countries is a massive indictment of the quality of democracy in Africa.

President J F Kennedy observed “that those who possess wealth and power in poor nations must accept their own responsibilities. They must lead the fight for those basic reforms which alone can preserve the fabric of their societies. Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”

The tyranny of the minority at the top of governments in Africa is irresponsible and a catalyst for coups. Africans want good infrastructure, education, sound healthcare systems, food and energy security and a responsible state.

Democracy is a fantastic and non-negotiable political concept when appropriately practiced. But Africans must look at the infrastructure miracle, economic development and progress in China over the last 30 years and contemplate that despite the absence of democracy in that country, anyone who can deliver such improvement for Africa would be welcome.

Until democracy is defined and practiced to benefit the people of Africa, military coups are here to stay.

By Isong Asu

London Bureau Chief, Cameroon Concord News Group

Asu is a researcher and columnist with interests in Public Policy, Economic Development, and Institutions of Democracy in the Developing World. He is a Department of Government, University of Essex graduate, earning a BA in Politics and International Relations, and is pursuing an MA in Public Policy. He is researching and writing his maiden book on Politics in Sub-Saharan Africa and lives in London, UK. Talk back at asu.ashu@yahoo.co.uk

At the heart of democracy is the premise that the governors are accountable to the governed. Harris Soche defines democracy as the people’s government, where the population is the power holder. With this power, the population defends and protects themselves from the tyranny of those in power. This concept underpins liberal democracies around the world. As many African countries gained political independence in the 1960s, the founding fathers had democratic governance at the forefront of how they intended to rule their new nations.

As Nkrumah, Nyerere, Ahidjo, Ahmed Ben Bella, Lumumba and the other giants of Africa were planning to build a united and prosperous Africa with accountability at the heart of it, the colonizers who had been kicked out against their will were plotting to wreck their lofty dreams. The dream of government for the people was killed in Africa after the golden ’60s and ’70s when, one after the other, the colonialists used strongmen to eliminate the founding fathers. From Nkrumah to Lumumba, from Ahmed Ben Bella to Agostinho Neto, through violent coups and dubious and brutal assassinations, politicians who had the best interest of their nations and Africa in mind were replaced by political strongmen.

These strongmen are bloodthirsty and experts at projecting fear. Terror is their tool. They are incredibly clever at their game; hire political consultants to run their machinery and work to design more effective instruments of control while acting like people who love democracy. Strongmen are manipulators who pretend to be humble servants of the people, while their main goal is to exploit political power for their gains. Strongmen ruled their countries uninterrupted with blessings from Western capitals for decades with nothing productive to show. Mobutu Seseseko ruled Zaire with an iron fist and without sentiments for 27 years. Before he was deposed in 1997 during a civil war, he had more money in his private Swiss bank accounts than his country’s official reserves.

Omar Bongo was another strongman who ruled oil-rich Gabon for over 42 years from 1967 till his death in 2009. Like all strongmen, Bongo was a crude and malicious political operator who tolerated no opposition and bled the oil-rich country’s treasury dry to enrich his 54 children. Today, Paul Biya of Cameroon and Teodoro Obiang Nguema are two strongmen who have ruled for 41 and 44 years, respectively, with citizens of both oil-rich countries poorer now than when these leaders came to power more than four decades ago.

As the world changed politically and economically in the 1990s, Western nations and others benefitted from globalization and the internet miracle. Consequently, the drums for multiparty politics around Africa were louder, and strongmen became imaginative and accepted multiparty politics in their countries. This move was designed to keep international aid agencies and institutions like the IMF and the World Bank quiet as foreign aid was now linked to democratic reforms.

Since the 90s, strongmen have claimed to accept democracy as a system of government in their countries, but their instincts and actions have been otherwise. These leaders profess democratic norms but preside over oppressive and unaccountable regimes. They organize elections to keep the eyes of international donors away from them. These elections have all fallen short of democratic standards, and these countries’ constitutions have constantly been amended to suit the demands of these political entrepreneurs.

Strongmen never leave the political stage alive. Consequently, as they die in power, they leave leadership vacuums. And nowhere is that more profound than in Gabon, where yesterday, August 30th 2023, the army launched a successful coup that ended the Bongo family clamp on power. Ali Bongo became president in 2009 after his father died. His election in 2009 was rigged, and his reelection in 2016 against Jean Ping was substantially disputed as he won with less than 5,000 votes. The post-election violence saw many people killed by the security forces. In 2018, President Bongo suffered a stroke and has been going around his business with a walking stick to support his paralyzed frame. However, he was a candidate in the recent presidential election on August 26th, 2023—the coup leaders point to this disputed election as their motive to restore democratic and constitutional order in the country.

The story of Gabon, like many countries in Africa, is one that strongmen have destroyed. According to the World Bank, Gabon has a population of 2.5 million, and the real GDP per capita is 20% lower in 2020 than in 1990, and 30% of its citizens live below the $5.50 per day poverty line. This is astounding as the country is extremely rich in natural resources, and the soil is fertile with excellent weather for agriculture. Still, poverty is an unwanted and ever-present companion of the population.

Today in Gabon, Mali, Niger, Burkina Faso, Guinea and many parts of Africa, thousands celebrate with the army after coups not because they despise civilian rule and don’t want democracy. Democracy is not a perfect experiment and has flaws. Around Africa, people are acutely aware that despite its flaws, a government of the people is better than men in military fatigues. Still, the reign of strongmen in Africa over the last six decades has brought more misery than happiness. And at this juncture, anything is better than civilian strongmen. These are sad days for Africa, but the future can’t be bleaker than the past.

By Isong Asu

London Bureau Chief

Cameroon Concord News Group

Many renowned academics have opined that criminal states are a new form of dangerous state developing at catastrophic rapidity in the Sub Saharan Africa region.

While state failure, military takeover and oligarchic regimes are emerging in the ECOWAS bloc, the Biya Francophone regime in Yaoundé, Cameroon which never had its origins from jihadi insurgency or lawless zones is now undeniably the biggest mafia state in the CEMAC area.

For 40 years, the Biya Francophone regime has successfully put an end to rule of law in Cameroon and its elite force known as the Rapid Intervention Battalion (BIR), with a modus operandi similar to a criminal organization is monopolizing all the tools of political, military and economic power.

The Rapid Intervention Battalion was constituted predominantly with young men from the Beti-Bulu tribal extractions and the force only receives directives from a small group of individuals close to the 90-year-old President Paul Biya who consider the ownership of all the individual and collective affairs of the Cameroonian society as their inherent right and have no responsibility toward society and no obligation to be accountable.

Perhaps we can arrive at a more accurate understanding of the nature of the Biya Francophone regime if we examine calmly and honestly the prominent men and women of the regime who are currently being held at the Kondengui Maximum Security Prison in Yaoundé and also the abduction of the NERA 10 in Abuja, Nigeria, the Captain Guerandi affair including the brutal murder of His Lordship Bishop Balla of the Diocese of Bafia and the recent assassination of journalists Martinez Zogo and Samuel Wazizi. It is evident that Cameroon is a state in which criminal gangs have taken over key parts of the system of government.

However, when you mention the description mafia state, many Cameroonians are quick to look at only the executive and sometimes the military. But there exist a criminal super-organization that controls the legislative power of the two houses: the National assembly and the House of Senate.

So in Cameroon, we are not dealing with the ruling CPDM party as the main criminal organization which is hiding behind the façade and the machinery of a constitutional state but with a Francophone dominated government that has been using some mushroom political parties in French speaking Cameroun to seize and control power at all governmental levels.

There are Beti-Bulu gangs in Yaoundé who are hiding behind the fight against corruption and Francophone politicians who pretend to obey the rule of law and are arresting their competitors and opponents and punishing them through legal channels like the Yaoundé Military Tribunal and the Special Criminal Court.

In Cameroon under Biya, the consortium of CPDM crime syndicates have abandoned all legitimate tools of political control and, like many criminal gangs, are  working hard with celebrated criminals like Ministers Paul Atanga Nji and Laurent Esso to keep control on society through threats, extortion, kidnapping, terror and by showcasing cruelty and torture.

We of both the Cameroon Intelligence Report and Cameroon Concord News believe that the purpose of this Biya Francophone endeavor is not to administer Cameroon and Cameroonians but only to obtain money from the poor masses and expand their money-making power. A government that for over six years has been using its troops to kill innocent civilians and spread terror among a marginalized people in Southern Cameroons, must be viewed not as a nation-state but only as a criminal super-organization that has captured the instruments of government.

Biya’s foreign policy of developing and hastily improving relations with the Russian Federation at a time when the Russian Czar is destroying Ukraine cannot be understood even by its backers in Paris. The Yaoundé pro Russia stance can only be understood from the point of view of a criminal organization that controls the instruments of government and its focus on the interests of a particular group, (Beti-Bulu) and only thinks about expanding the sphere of influence of this group and enriching it.

In the face of such a criminal model of governance in Yaoundé, it is abundantly clear that the European Union is not serious about the war in Ukraine. The EU’s   political, economic and military relations with the Biya regime practically means empowering a mafia state that naturally seeks to replicate itself by connecting with other criminal organizations in the world including the one Vladimir Putin is heading in Moscow.

By Soter Tarh Agbaw-Ebai

The wealthiest square mile in Africa is hosting a big international summit this week with a mixture of pride, relief, and a hint of unease.

Sandton – a glitzy banking district on the outskirts of South Africa’s increasingly dilapidated city of Johannesburg – is the venue for the latest meeting of the Brics group, an ambitious but amorphous bloc of countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa), united by a desire to challenge perceived Western dominance in global affairs. Dozens of other nations are queuing up to join.

The current wave of relief felt here in South Africa in relation to Brics can be explained by President Vladimir Putin’s recent decision to stay away from the summit.

Had he insisted on coming, South Africa would have finally had to clarify its position on whether it would carry out its international obligation to arrest Russia’s leader for alleged war crimes in Ukraine.

Spared that awkward challenge, South African officials are now revelling in their role as host – proudly filling journalists’ inboxes with a flood of emails about Brics breakfast meetings, trade fairs, township dialogues and the like.

This unusual degree of official enthusiasm serves, to some observers, to underline quite how far and fast this country appears to be steering away from the West, not just towards a more multi-polar world, but firmly into China and, to a lesser extent, Russia’s orbit.

At a recent pre-summit meeting of Brics foreign ministers in Cape Town, a Russian journalist leant over to me in a news conference and declared: “You can keep your human rights paradise [in the West]. We are remaking the world.”

Brics may still be in its infancy, but it is generating – at least in some quarters – a genuine and disruptive sense of energy and excitement.

A colleague who attended a foreign policy workshop organised by South Africa’s government told me of an overwhelming consensus there that China was the future, and the West was in decline.

Which is where South Africa’s unease comes into the equation.

The country’s President Cyril Ramaphosa – a wealthy businessman – will be acutely aware of the fact that the local economy, hit hard by Covid and grappling with the world’s highest levels of unemployment and inequality, desperately needs more foreign investment if it is to escape a spiralling crisis.

Russia is certainly not the answer. Its trading relationship with South Africa is almost non-existent.

China is an increasingly important player but is, nonetheless, overshadowed here by longstanding trade with, and investment from, the European Union (EU) and the US.

So why would South Africa jeopardise those key Western relationships – already strained – at a time of profound economic uncertainty?

The answer, at least in part, appears to lie within the country’s increasingly weary and erratic governing party.

After three decades in power, the African National Congress (ANC) is struggling to rid itself of infighting, corruption and administrative chaos.

Confronted with the war in Ukraine, for instance, South Africa’s government has offered a muddled grab-bag of responses – first condemning the invasion, then pointedly refusing to condemn it, then blaming Nato, praising Mr Putin, offering itself as a peace broker, hosting Russian naval exercises, rushing to explain itself to Washington, and casually repeating Kremlin talking points.

Then there is the still lingering mystery of whether South Africa supplied arms to Russia last year – as alleged by the US.

There is little doubt that President Ramaphosa is deeply uneasy about Russia’s invasion and anxious to portray himself as a wise and neutral advocate for a more multi-polar world.

But many in his government and party routinely undermine that stance – often citing nostalgia for Moscow’s support during the anti-apartheid struggle and a more general suspicion of US foreign policy.

The haphazard messaging has managed to irritate all sides in the conflict and succeeded only in making South Africa appear weak and indecisive.

Nelson Mandela’s “rainbow nation” is certainly struggling right now – with some even warning that it could soon become a “failed state”.

But this week’s Brics summit will, by contrast, provide the Kremlin with a useful platform to showcase its own, far more strategic and effective diplomacy.

Recent headlines from the continent may have been dominated by the coup in Niger, and the potential for Russia’s thuggish, opportunistic, Wagner Group mercenaries to exploit the chaos for their own benefit, as they have already done in Mali and the Central African Republic (CAR).

But at least as significant is the success with which Moscow, through its hard-travelling Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, and through canny media messaging, has managed to present itself – after decades with almost no presence on the continent – as a credible alternative to “colonial” Western influence in Africa.

In countries wrestling with poverty, the impact of climate change, increasingly youthful populations, and growing unemployment, frustration with the status quo has left many people open to new alternatives.

Which begs the question – what have Western nations been doing to challenge Russia?

It is, of course, dangerous to make generalisations about this continent, and both wrong and offensive to suggest African governments are merely pawns in a reviving Cold War.

But where is the Western version of Brics? The UK has a “minister for Africa” – but almost no-one has ever bothered to stay in the job for more than a year.

A preoccupation with development projects, strict conditions and cherry-picked foreign invitations for favoured African leaders, has fuelled the claim that France, the UK and other former colonial powers are still treating the continent as a tiresome crisis to be managed, rather than a partner to be supported.

This may be unfair. After all, Western nations have, for decades, devoted significant energy and cash towards supporting health services, businesses and governments across the continent.

But the role of Western armies – French troops and American drones in particular – in places like Niger and Somalia, has provoked strong backlashes.

Which may help to explain why Brics’s alternative vision is gaining traction on this continent, and why the bloc will be making its case, loudly and confidently, in the conference halls of Sandton this week.

Source: BBC

Since 2016, the conflict in Cameroon between armed separatists and government forces has killed more than 6,000 people and displaced over 500,000 in the country’s north west and south west regions, where 2.2 million people need humanitarian assistance. The government’s hybrid approach to the crisis, combining political and security measures, has failed to appease local aspirations for autonomy, federalism, or even secession.

Compounding the problem, Cameroon – which has long been a stable authoritarian regime – looks poised to enter a process of leadership change that will make it more challenging to find a negotiated solution for the conflict.

Breakdown of federalism

English-speaking Cameroonians make up approximately 20 percent of the country’s population. To understand the causes of the conflict with the predominantly Anglophone population of the country’s Northwest and Southwest, one must examine both remote and immediate causes.

The crisis, like most similar clashes across the continent, is a product of the artificial borders drawn by colonial powers, along with the failures of decolonization and post-independence state-building. In Cameroon, as elsewhere, these failures were exposed by ethnic, tribal, and cultural cleavages that fueled resistance to a centralized state – making ethnicity a root cause and accelerator of political conflict.

The situation became clear in the 2018 presidential campaign, when incumbent President Paul Biya defeated Maurice Kamto in a free but not fair election. The ballot’s aftermath exposed the ethnic dimension of tensions between the Bamileke and Bamoun, who inhabit western Cameroon, and the Bassa, perceived by many as the country’s hegemonic ethnic group, buttressed by a centralized political structure viewed by much of the populace as illegitimate.

In the 19th century, present-day Cameroon was a German protectorate. After World War I, it was divided by a League of Nations mandate into two unequal parts – British Cameroon and French Cameroon – under the administration of those two colonial powers.

By the late 1950s, as decolonization in Africa accelerated, the newly independent states tried to use these inherited administrative structures to forge national identities in a continent fragmented along multiple ethnic, religious and geographic divides, and constrained by the arbitrary colonial-era borders.

French Cameroon gained independence in 1960, becoming the Republic of Cameroon. Inhabitants of the Trustee Territory of Southern Cameroon were given a choice: they could join recently independent Nigeria as a federated state or combine with the Republic of Cameroon, also as a federation. In a United Nations plebiscite organized in 1961, the latter option was chosen, transferring sovereignty to the Federal Republic of Cameroon. Many in the Anglophone states, however, accused French Cameroon of ignoring the principles of federalism, instead maintaining the centralized practices set forth by the unitary Constitution of 1960.

Escalating crisis

Federalism was formally overturned in 1972, under President Ahmadou Ahidjo, who changed the name of the country to the United Republic of Cameroon. In 1984, President Biya went one step further and truncated the official designation to the Republic of Cameroon, reverting to the original term under French administration. Anglophones reacted by challenging the decision in the courts.

Resentment and grievances generated by the failure of the federal principle resurfaced in 2016, triggered by the imposition of French as the language of education, the courts and administration. Since the Constitution grants equal status to the English and French languages, Anglophones perceived the imposition of French-speaking teachers, lawyers and judges as a form of marginalization. Initially, discontent came in the form of peaceful protests and strikes, with calls for the restoration of federalism.

The turning point in the crisis, starting its inexorable escalation into an armed conflict, came in January 2017, when the Cameroon Anglophone Civil Society Consortium, an umbrella of civil society organizations, started to organize a stay-at-home boycott campaign called Operation Ghost Town Resistance. In October, secessionist groups declared the independence of the Federal Republic of Ambazonia in Cameroon’s Northwest and Southwest regions. The declaration stated that Anglophone Cameroon had been recolonized rather than decolonized and was a case of black-on-black colonization.

The declaration started a shift in which civil society actors were replaced by political actors, demands for autonomy were dropped in favor of independence, and armed struggle became a viable option. The Ambazonia Defense Forces, as the armed wing of the separatist movement called itself, took control of portions of the territory. President Biya deployed the army in the Anglophone regions, promising to crush the rebellion.

Hybrid approach

To overcome the crisis, the Cameroonian regime has resorted to a mixture of political and security measures. The strategy is to appease groups demanding more autonomy, while militarily defeating the separatists.

After the 2017 strikes, the government established a National Commission to promote bilingualism and multiculturalism. In 2019, President Biya launched a national dialogue on unity and peace. More importantly, at least from a formal standpoint, in 2019 the parliament granted the Northwest and Southwest special status. Based on “their linguistic particularity and historic heritage,” these areas were given more autonomy to run local affairs, while receiving funds earmarked from the central government for local and regional governments.

In theory, the devolution of more power, responsibility and resources to regional bodies could be a remedy for the crisis. In practice, however, the decentralizing initiative failed. Firstly, the central government did not follow through on its 2019 promise to provide the funds and autonomy for real local government. Spending decisions still depended on approval from the capital, while centralization continued to rule even mundane aspects of people’s lives (for example, students completing their degrees claim they are forced to travel to Yaounde to get an official certificate).

Secondly, a political radicalization had taken place, as many Anglophones internalized secessionist denunciations of Yaounde’s “annexationist” impulses and came to believe that autonomy was no longer enough, leaving formalized federalism or independence as the solution.

The Cameroonian regime also took hard measures to address the crisis. In 2017, the government imposed a 90-day internet ban on the Anglophone region, which bruised an already fragile economy and inflamed feelings of marginalization. The government also deployed the Rapid Intervention Battalion – an elite internal security unit of the Cameroonian army that reports directly to the president – to fight the separatist forces.

Crisis accelerators

A convergence of factors suggests that finding a negotiated, sustainable solution to the current crisis may be difficult.

The first is that Cameroon’s Anglophone regions are endowed with significant natural resources, including timber, oil and fertile land. While the competing political claims for autonomy and independence are historically rooted, the competition for resources often acts as a grievance “accelerator,” as can be seen in other separatist regions in Africa where economic self-determination is salient.

A second factor is the political and regional divisions within the Anglophone regions themselves. While in 2016 various groups united behind the goal of defending their common Anglophone identity against the central state, differences regarding the means and ultimate ends are now evident. While some would accept the autonomy granted under special status, others want a return to the two-state federation and a third group insists on the armed struggle to win independence. Moreover, there are now multiple separatist militias operating in the region, feeding an escalating spiral of violence against civilians by both militias and security forces.

Paul Biya

During his 41 years in power, authoritarian President Paul Biya has moved the country toward further centralization, despite promises of autonomy for Anglophone minority regions. He is now 90 years old, and the transfer of power to his successor is likely to be bumpy. © Getty Images

A third factor is the regional context. The security outlook in West Africa has deteriorated over the past decade, amid a vicious cycle of terrorism, organized crime, food insecurity and displacement. In Cameroon and Nigeria, terrorist groups are active in the northern regions, while separatist militias operate in areas immediately to the south. Some have begun to cooperate among themselves, as seen by the 2021 alliance between the Ambazonia Defense Forces and the armed wing of the Indigenous People of Biafra, a Nigerian-based separatist movement.

Finally, social media are playing a growing role in the conflict, as parties turn to the digital sphere to air their grievances and spread information or disinformation. Digital platforms are particularly important for the interaction they allow with diaspora communities, which are key sources of intellectual and financial support. However, social media should be treated as a vehicle or medium, rather than as a root cause of conflict.

The end of stable authoritarianism

The Anglophone crisis must also be analyzed in the context of Cameroon’s political system, which is a case study of stable authoritarianism. Since winning independence more than six decades ago, the country has only had two presidents. President Biya, who came to power in 1982, is Africa’s longest-tenured leader after Teodoro Obiang, who has ruled Equatorial Guinea since 1979.

As in other African countries, Cameroon’s authoritarianism survived the so-called third wave of democratization, which took place in the 1990s. While the country formally adopted multipartyism, the Cameroon People’s Democratic Movement (CPDM) retained its hegemony and Mr. Biya has continued to win every presidential ballot since he came to power.

Not surprisingly, the consolidation of personalized and resilient authoritarianism went hand in hand with centralization. In 1982, as mentioned, the president used his power to establish a unitary and more centralized state. At the epicenter of power was the presidency, where President Biya exercised the direct power of appointment for all senior posts. Presidential term limits were removed from the Constitution in 2008, a year marked by violent protests over high food and fuel prices, which Mr. Biya seized upon as a pretext to stay in power indefinitely. A clause granting regions the power to elect governors was also deleted from the country’s constitution.

Even had President Biya behaved more moderately, the very nature of Cameroon’s regime – especially its dependence on dense patronage networks – was not conducive to decentralization, let alone federalism. Decision-making powers and funds have been tightly concentrated in national governing bodies, to the detriment of regional and municipal governments.

Scenarios

The Anglophone crisis is a cautionary tale about the centralized state model that has prevailed across Africa since independence. That model often ignores the importance of ethnic, cultural and religious identities. When these identities are perceived as being threatened – in Cameroon’s case, through fears of cultural marginalization in the educational, judicial and administrative systems – they generate local resentment of central authority and autonomic or separatist claims, which in the Anglophone regions are based on historically rooted notions of a common identity and territory.

Moreover, Cameroon’s regional crisis of legitimacy is now being reproduced at the national level. President Biya is 90 years old. Whether or not he runs for another term in 2025, succession is clearly an inevitable question. This outlook makes it more challenging to find a negotiated and peaceful solution to the Anglophone crisis. Periods of leadership transition (and the struggles they trigger) under resilient and personalized authoritarian regimes are often unpredictable. Given the several failed attempts at international mediation, and in light of widespread Anglophone skepticism about the government’s commitment to decentralization, the conflict seems bound to continue.

Source: gist report online

The Yaoundé initiative that was designed to resolve the crisis in Southern Cameroons, officially known as the Grand National Dialogue, is now, for all practical purposes, dead. Just like the Tripartite in the days of the late Ni John Fru Ndi and the SDF, this deal is no more. It has gone to meet its maker. This is a former deal.

To be sure, the undertaker, significantly, was none other than the senile character currently impersonating as father of the Cameroonian nation.

His name may be Paul Biya, but the 90-year-old Francophone dictator is in fact a combination of different things whose only job is mimicking the words whispered to his earpiece by his young and inexperienced wife Chantal Biya.

Biya’s acolytes say the Grand National Dialogue deal is dead and gone with Cardinal Tumi but Yaoundé is not willing to announce it!  

When he was relatively less senile in the 90s, on his campaign trail, Biya promised that he would personally supervise the construction of the Bamenda ring road.

But the prominent and successful failure has played the spoiler role to perfection and today Cameroon is in chaos.

Now with the numerous coups in Francophone Africa, it is evidently clear that only an intense and productive discussion with the NERA 10 headed by President Sisiku Ayuk Tabe will guarantee peace and prosperity in the Sub Saharan geopolitical chessboard. Russia’s Wagner has reduced France in Africa to an outsize satrapy.

Correspondingly, Dion Ngute’s recent trip to Buea is simply La Republique playing for time before coming up with renewed mischief. Ferdinand Ngoh Ngoh, Minister-Secretary General at the presidency himself has revealed, on record, that the Grand National Dialogue in Yaoundé was nothing but a gigantic farce.

The Ambazonia Interim Government though never fell into the trap. President Sisiku Ayuk Tabe and Vice President Dabney Yerima saw through it from the start: never trust La Republique du Cameroun.

Sisiku Ayuk Tabe and his deputy Dabney Yerima intuitively knew that no one deep within the Francophone dominated government in Yaoundé would respect the outcome of the Grand National Dialogue.

Biya and his gang have never made an effort to implement anything positive that came out of the Grand National Dialogue.  The unspoken mantra was to keep the Ambazonia Interim Government down.  

If Biya and his Francophone Beti Ewondo government were really interested from the start in achieving peace with the people of Southern Cameroons, the straightforward path would have been to ditch the current fake unitary system of government and go for federalism.

Instead, they have been using their corrupt pro Yaoundé Southern Cameroons political elites to demand more troops’ deployment to Ambazonia and making a mockery of the Canadian peace initiative.

Ngute’s latest trip to Buea without any Francophone CPDM baron in his delegation is an indication that the Grand National Dialogue is not a priority anymore.

Hence the Blame Ambazonia Game reaching a fever pitch all over in La Republique du Cameroun: Amba Boys are killing innocent people, Amba Boys are involved in kidnapping and extortion and Amba Boys are responsible for the suffering in Southern Cameroons. 

At least now it’s in the open: the only thing that matters for the Biya regime is to dish-out bribes to weak Southern Cameroons leaders and fighters and also to bribe as many traditional rulers as possible forcing them to denounce the Ambazonia uprising.

Nobody will miss the Grand National Dialogue. But what we of the Cameroon Concord News Group want the people of Southern Cameroons to take home is that the decaying Biya regime is an eminently untrustworthy entity.

By Soter Tarh Agbaw-Ebai

For over two years now, western media and human rights organizations have alluded without convincing evidence that the continuous hosting of entertainment and sporting events in Saudi Arabia is an attempt by the Kingdom to “sportswash” its negative human rights reputation.

While these unproven allegations are being made in the West about the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, a man in Buea, Cameroon, with a questionable character, has been engaged full-throttle in “imagewash“.

This man is Rev Fonki Samuel Forba, the moderator of the Presbyterian Church in Cameroon who has been burning through money like wild fire.

Rev Fonki has been the moderator of the PCC since 2014 and has just over a year left in his official tenure, and his job description designates him as the spiritual leader of the institution he presides over.

The consensus among PCC Christians is that he has wrecked the church by robbing the institution’s finances with no limits and possesses no fear of God.

He has been accused by those close to him of possessing no iota of spirituality, and he has appointed, without justification, his henchmen to positions they are ill-equipped for.

Cameroon is a country not renowned for keeping statistics on anything. Still, a recent survey of PCC members in the Northwest and Southwest regions of the country returned that the moderator has an approval rating of 9.3%. Even in Akwaya, where he says he comes from, his approval rating was 16.9%.

With such dismal approval ratings, Rev Fonki is working hard to restore respectability to his battered image before he exits the stage next year.

A recent video which went viral on social media with Rev Fonki dancing and spraying cash around like a Nigerian scammer in a Lagos nightclub did not help him.

So, last week, the ‘chief scammer of Buea’ arranged with some like-minded crooks in a mushroom institution which has distinguished itself for shady academic quality to confer on him an honorary PhD.

The Protestant University of Central Africa in Yaoundé is one of Cameroon’s many institutions of higher learning, with lecturers and administrators who know little about academics, honesty, spirituality and humility.

This institution has never had a credible reputation, and it surprises no one with brains that they followed Rev Fonki’s wish to grant him his questionable degree.

The Reverend brought a few clowns to the sham ceremony dressed in Manyu traditional regalia claiming to be notables from Akwaya—a sad joke of a spectacle.

Watching a short clip of the charade unfold on Facebook invokes rage and many other strong emotions.

Apologists for Rev Fonki are now forwarding the video of the shameful commemoration stating that he is now an academic and honorary doctor.

No amount of “imagewash” by a man with no integrity and academic standing will change the facts.

In biblical days, Rev Fonki would have been sentenced by the highest court of the land to death by stoning and would have earned it for his contribution to wrecking the PCC, using exaggerated thievery as a weapon.

Today, people are required to address him as Rev Dr Fonki Samuel Forba. The world has changed for the worse. The “imagewash” Gospel, according to Rev Fonki, is here.Hallelujah!!

By Soter Tarh Agbaw-Ebai

This year, precisely from the 20th to 22^nd of October 2023, SOBA UK will bring the world together again at Celtic Manor Resort, Newport in Wales.

SOBA UK’s innovation theme has been revealed to both Cameroon Intelligence Report and the Cameroon Concord News.

“Empowering for Success: Unlocking the potential of the boy child” is the theme that will be executed by renowned academics and business leaders. Cameroon Concord News Group is proud to have been invited for this event.

Each year, SOBA UK creates immersive experiences where guests feel like members in the UK House of Lords!!  This particular year, guests will feel like Royals!!

We of the Cameroon Concord News Group understand that the exquisite Celtic Manor Resort, nestled amidst the enchanting Coldra Wood in Newport is a model that engages your senses, surprises you throughout the convention, excites you to interact with hands-on activities, and takes down barriers so guests feel comfortable to network with everyone at the event.

As Chairman and Editor-In-Chief of the Concord Group, I have requested our London Bureau to visit the Celtic Manor Resort!! We’ll give you a hint after the visit!!

To this I put my name:

Soter Tarh Agbaw-Ebai

He went to Russia to beg as usual, using the Russia-Africa Summit as an excuse or a pretext, but Cameroon’s President, Paul Biya, also known as the Lion man, will be leaving the Russian capital, Moscow, with a bloodshot eye.

Russia may be in need of allies but it does not have money to give to irresponsible governments like the Yaoundé regime which has been on a begging spree for decades.

Russia has already forgiven some of the continent’s debt but this does not imply it has money to distribute to African leaders who have clearly demonstrated that their relationship with money is causing death and destruction in their countries.

The Yaoundé government, led by the country’s collapsing president, Paul Biya, is an example of a government which cannot use in a responsible manner, any money given to it by its allies and international organizations.

If Mr. Biya will have anything of import, it might be assurances from the “Russian Czar” that it would not overthrow the corrupt and moribund Yaounde government which has been in power for over four decades and has nothing to show for its existence.

Russia has been the brain behind the anti-French sentiments across West Africa and these sentiments are resulting in the overthrow of pro-French and incompetent leaders in French-speaking West African countries, with Mohammed Bazoum of Niger Republic being the latest victim.

For some years now, Yaoundé has been the target of Wagner Group forces and this has rattled the beleaguered Yaoundé government which has been weakened by corruption, Boko Haram and Ambazonian fighters who are regrouping to finally take back their beloved Southern Cameroons.

By Soter Tarh Agbaw-Ebai

President Biya’s end is very near and his fall will be sudden, swift and bloodless. It is more than a month ever since the 90-year-old travelled to France from where he reportedly fired General Ngambou Esaïe after the soldier man warned Minister Paul Atanga Nji that he was walking on broken bottles.

We of the Concord Group can now reveal that a new president is in the making. In the nation’s capital Yaoundé, Biya’s acolytes both within his ruling CPDM party and the military are claiming that he is still in charge and that it is business as usual.

But there is still much they in Yaoundé don’t know. And one of such is simply that, you cannot remain head of state forever!

There are under-the-table talks that the army may intervened due to the sacking of General Ngambou Esaïe which is widely seen as clearing the way for Franck Biya, President Biya’s eldest son to succeed the father.

Cameroon Intelligence Report understands Biya and his men are in Geneva planning a massive purge deep within the ruling CPDM party with prominent CPDM barons being targeted.

According to Cameroon Intelligence Report sources, plans are being made to arrest top figures both in government and in the military.

Where is Paul Biya?

Mr Biya has been conspicuously absent since he travelled to France a month ago. The 90-year-old president is now at the mercy of his young and foolish wife who is keeping him under guard at the InterContinental Hotel in Geneva. He only reads prepared statements and talk to cabinet ministers who speak his native tongue.

But he has not been seen by the Cameroonian people since his recent trip to France. So, who actually fired General Ngambou?

It is clear that Chantal Biya and her relations are now in charge of state affairs in a country that is disintegrating! The ruling CPDM party should disown Biya and if they do—- A new president is indeed in the making

By Soter Tarh Agbaw-Ebai