Politics

1, April 2019

SDF’s agony as parliamentary group leader dies ⁰

Joseph Banadzem Lukong, a prominent Southern Cameroons Member of Parliament and senior political figure of the Social Democratic Front-the so-called main opposition party is no more! The MP reportedly died on Saturday morning at the Yaoundé General Hospital.

Cameroon Concord News gathered from SDF sources that the MP’s health had deteriorated ever since the beginning of the crisis in Southern Cameroons. SDF propaganda minister, Jean Robert Wafo who confirmed the news late on Saturday did not make public any funeral arrangements.

Elected from the Bui County in the Northern Zone, Joseph Banadzem Lukong was the chairman of the SDF parliamentary group at the National Assembly. His teaching career took him to all the nooks and crannies of the Ambazonian territory including a brilliant period in Government High School Mamfe.

By Rita Akana

31, March 2019

Arab League expected to oppose US decision over Golan Heights ⁰

Arab heads of state, long divided by regional rivalries, are expected to unite at a summit on Sunday in the Tunisian capital to oppose a US decision recognising Israel’s annexation of Arab lands captured in 1967.

Arab leaders are already grappling with unrest in Algeria and Sudan, international pressure over the war in Yemen, regional splits over Iran’s influence in the Middle East and a bitter Gulf Arab dispute.

They face a new challenge after US President Donald Trump signed a proclamation last week recognising the Golan Heights as Israeli, less than four months after recognising Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. Palestinians want East Jerusalem as the capital of a future state.

Arab officials said the summit would be dominated by the Golan Heights and Palestinian demands for an independent state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, areas also occupied by Israel in the 1967 war.

Lebanese Foreign Minister Gebran Bassil said on Saturday Arab ministers had expressed support for a proposal to declare that the US move violated the UN charter against acquiring land by force.

They also agreed to back Syria’s right to regain Golan and Lebanon’s right to the Shebaa farms, a small strip of land next to the Golan claimed by Beirut, he tweeted.

Call for peace with Israel

Summit spokesman Mahmoud Al-Khmeiry said Arab leaders would repeat an Arab call for peace with Israel in exchange for occupied Arab lands and would reject any initiative not in line with UN resolutions.

Khmeiry appeared to be referring to a still-unannounced US peace plan by White House adviser Jared Kushner and Trump son-in-law that Palestinians have refused to discuss.

Trump’s aides have said his moves have drawn a less severe private reaction from Arab states than experts had predicted.

While opposition to Israel and its actions can unite the 22-member Arab League, Arab states remain divided over a range of other issues, including pro-democracy protests that have erupted in the region since 2011 and over Iran’s Middle East influence.

Ibrahim al-Assaf, foreign minister of Sunni Muslim powerhouse Saudi Arabia, said on Friday that Shi’ite Muslim rival Iran remained the biggest threat to the region.

The Tunis summit will be the first time the rulers of Saudi Arabia and Qatar have attended the same gathering since 2017, when Riyadh and its allies imposed a political and economic boycott on Doha. Saudi Arabia and its allies accuse Qatar of supporting terrorism and cosying up to Iran, a charge Doha denies.

The leaders of Sudan and Algeria are not expected to attend, with both nations roiled by anti-government protests.

Abdelaziz Bouteflika, Algeria’s ailing, 82-year-old president who has ruled for 20 years, and Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, in power for three decades and wanted by international prosecutors for alleged war crimes in his country’s Darfur region, are both facing calls to step down.

Syria has been suspended from the Arab League since 2011 over its crackdown on protesters at the start of the civil war. The League has said there was still no consensus to allow Syria’s reinstatement.

(FRANCE 24 with REUTERS)

28, March 2019

Could Nigeria’s court ruling ease the conflict in southern Cameroon? ⁰

On 1 March, in the case between 12 Cameroonian separatist leaders and the Federal Government of Nigeria, Justice Anwuli Chikere of the Federal High Court in Abuja ruled that the forced deportation of the 12 leaders and 39 other Anglophones from Taraba State was illegal and unconstitutional.

The judge said that irrespective of whether they posed a threat to the Nigerian state or not, the Federal Government did not follow due process and thus violated both the Nigerian constitution and articles 32 and 33 of the UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees.

Stating that their human rights were violated, Justice Chikere ordered their return to Nigeria. He also decided the government should pay compensation of ₦5-million each to the 12 and ₦200 000 each to the 39 other deportees. The 12 are leaders of the self-proclaimed independent territory of Ambazonia, an outlawed territory in Cameroon’s mostly Anglophone regions, where some English-speaking residents seek to restore what was formerly British Southern Cameroons.

While seeking refuge in Nigeria, the individuals, including their leader Sisiku Julius Ayuk Tabe, were seized in January 2018 at the Nera Hotel in Abuja and extradited to Cameroon. The UN, particularly the UN High Commission for Refugees, which had records of the 12 as refugees and asylees, strongly condemned the act and called for their return. After being held incommunicado for over 10 months in Cameroon, they are now on trial before a Yaoundé military tribunal for terrorism-related crimes.

The ruling has given new impetus to the hotly contested issue. Legally, justice seems to have been served but politically, the implications are unclear. There is a need to closely examine the legality of the court’s ruling, to ascertain what it means in practice. Can the court compel the Nigerian government to enforce the ruling? Will the Cameroon government heed the court’s decision by releasing the leaders?

As it stands, there is no extradition treaty between the two countries. This is contrary to Cameroon’s communication minister Issa Tchiroma’s argument that the arrest and transfer of the 12 from Nigeria to Cameroon conformed with the law. He cited three security accords signed by Cameroon and Nigeria in 1963 and 1972 which, although not extradition treaties, define rules of cooperation in matters of security between the two countries.

Inasmuch as the ruling censures the Federal Government of Nigeria, it does present options to resolve the deepening armed conflict in the two English-speaking North West and South West regions. Anglophone militias in these areas are battling pro-regime soldiers in their quest to separate and establish a new country. These Anglophone separatists want emancipation from the French-dominated Cameroon.

The separatists will no doubt expect some reaction from the government of Cameroon to the court’s ruling. If the Paul Biya administration were to ignore an overture from the Nigerian government to return the deportees, and find the deportees guilty of terrorism – which could include the death penalty – this could escalate tensions. It would mark a turning point for the conflict and a missed opportunity for restoring peace in the country.

Although capital punishment is a far-fetched outcome, a guilty verdict is not an unlikely scenario. This is a country where state authority remains heavily centralised in the executive branch, and legislative decision making is often opaque and without consultation. This is evident in the government’s unilaterally designed conflict mitigation strategies, such as the creation of a Bilingualism Committee in response to the perceived linguistic marginalisation of the English-speaking regions.

Similarly, government created the ill-fitted National Committee for Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration. The committee has been unable to make inroads in disarming militants, many of whom have shown no signs of surrendering their arms without dialogue.

These government initiatives don’t reflect a real analysis of the root causes of the current crisis. Linguistic marginalisation is a simplistic explanation that belies the decades-long exploitation of citizens by the ruling elite, who depend solely on patronage. Even more troubling have been government actions to vilify Anglophone communities in the wake of the crisis, and the failure to hold security services accountable for attacks on civilians.

Cameroon’s government could instead use the Nigerian court’s ruling as an opportunity to start a process of national reconciliation. Having suffered setbacks in its legitimacy, government could restore trust and social cohesion with citizens by prioritising peace building rather than state-building.

By heeding the Abuja High Court ruling and repatriating the 12 leaders who are seen by their followers as the legitimate brokers of peace in any dialogue process, chances are the Cameroonian leadership can set a new course towards stability.

It could capitalise on the faction of Anglophone ‘federalists’ who hope for a return to the former federal system of government without the structural exploitation and under-development of the two Anglophone regions by the Francophone political centre of power. This has been at the heart of the ‘Anglophone problem’.

The process of finding a durable solution would ideally be facilitated by the international community through the UN. Central to such a dialogue and reconciliation process will be a commitment to holding both separatists and security forces responsible for crimes committed against innocent civilians. It must also provide justice for the thousands who have been killed, and redress for those rendered homeless due to the burning of their villages, resulting in the massive exodus into Nigeria in the first place.

Source: Polity.org

28, March 2019

United States sanctions on the Paul Biya regime: A good move though coming late ⁰

Paul Biya remains one of the few “sit tight” leaders in Africa. He has been in power for close to 37 years. And at 86 years, he has not thought it wise to quit the political stage and make way for the younger generation. Who knows if he intends to die in office like the late Gnassingbe Eyadema of Togo or he is waiting for the military to topple his government as it was done to Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe. Whatever his intention may be, power does not last forever. If he does not leave power, power will definitely leave him.

Because of the atrocities committed in the ongoing war in Southern Cameroon, the United States government has sanctioned Paul Biya’s regime. What these sanctions mean is that, 20 military personnel, civilians, and ministers cannot travel to the U.S. – they have been banned. Added to this, the US will also withdraw all promised aid and security programmes, including an offer to provide training to the Cameroonian military. Importantly, the US gives a total of 17 million dollars annually to the Cameroonian government as aid. All of this will be forfeited due to the sanctions.

Even though the United States government sanctions are coming late, it is a welcome development. Since the conflict started in 2016, Washington is the first foreign government to condemn Paul Biya’s regime with sanctions. And without any iota of doubt, these sanctions will affect the US-Cameroon relations but it may force Paul Biya’s regime to minimize the use of force in the Anglophone region.

Again, Yaoundé may want to be desperate to regain the favour of the white house, hence, it may release the detained opposition leader, Maurice Kamto, whose arrest and detention also contributed to the sanctions.

Now that the United States has sanctioned Paul Biya’s regime, it will be wise for the European Union (EU) including France to do the same in order to intensify the pressure and force Yaoundé to negotiate with the Ambazonia leaders. It will not make any sense if the EU especially France takes steps that will thwart the US sanctions or embolden Paul Biya’s regime to continue to perpetrate atrocities in Southern Cameroon.

As a matter of fact, no fewer than 2,000 people have died with another 170,000 displaced since the conflict began. Despite this, it is very shameful that no African country has suspended its relationship with Cameroon. Even Nigeria, the big brother of Africa, reportedly arrested and deported Julius Ayuk Tabe the self-declared president of Ambazonia in 2018.

And to worsen the matter, the African Union (AU) has not taken drastic steps to at least restrain Paul Biya from killing Southern Cameroonians and burning down villages even though it does not have the power to interfere in Cameroon’s domestic affairs. And I hope none of the African countries will give Cameroon a hand by the time the sanctions begin to bite her hard.

Everyone not the United States government must take a stand against Paul Biya’s regime until he negotiates with the separatist leaders.

Source: Qwenu.com

27, March 2019

Algeria: Army chief calls for President Bouteflika to be ‘ousted’ ⁰

Algeria army chief says the presidency should be declared vacant the latest move in efforts to get ailing president Abdul Aziz Bouteflika to leave office.

Chief of Staff Gaid Salah’s call is thus seeking the application of article 102 of the constitution which stipulates that a president can be removed from office if he is unable to execute his duties.

His address was carried by the El-Bilad TV network as he addressed top military officers. Political watchers hold that it could be the main reason that Bouteflika could be forced to resign.

“The solution that must be adopted to end the crisis and answer the legitimate demands of the Algerian people is the solution that guarantees the sovereignty of the constitution and the continuity of the state,” Gaid Salah stressed.

The North African country has for months now been roiled by anti-government protests demanding the immediate resignation of Bouteflika at a time he was preparing to contest in April polls.

Under mounting pressure, the president announced earlier this month that he was not going to contest in the polls but that he was going to remain in charge till his successor was chosen.

Source: Africa News

26, March 2019

US will not ‘stand idly’ as Russia dispatches troops in Venezuela ⁰

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned Russia Monday the United States will not “stand idly by” as Moscow inserts military personnel into Venezuela to support the regime of President Nicolas Maduro.

In a phone call with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, Pompeo denounced the growing Russian military reinforcements as prolonging the political crisis in the South American country.

Pompeo told Lavrov “the United States and regional countries will not stand idly by as Russia exacerbates tensions in Venezuela,” the State Department said in a statement.

“The continued insertion of Russian military personnel to support the illegitimate regime of Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela risks prolonging the suffering of the Venezuelan people who overwhelmingly support interim President Juan Guaido,” he said.

Sergei Lavrov reacted later on Monday by releasing a statement accusing the United States of plotting a “coup” against Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.

Guaido is supported by the United States and most Latin American and European nations but he retains the support of Russia and China, US rivals who have offered political and economic support to him.

Pompeo urged Russia to “cease its unconstructive behavior” and support Guaido.

(FRANCE 24 with AFP)

26, March 2019

UK: House of Commons finally takes control of Brexit ⁰

British lawmakers have voted in favor of taking control of Brexit, undermining the government of Prime Minister Theresa May.

MPs voted 329 to 302 late on Monday to give the House of Commons more authority in handling the country’s possible exit from the EU.

They also rejected a personal plea by the British premier to stop the measure.

Brexit will not liberate UK from EU

Introduced by Conservative MP Oliver Letwin, the amendment would enable the MPs to bring forward their own Brexit motion and indicative votes for alternative Brexit paths Wednesday.

The move could bring about a soft Brexit customs union compromise, or even a second referendum on the UK’s decision to leave the European Union.

According to a spokesperson for the Department for Exiting the European Union, it “upends the balance between our democratic institutions and sets a dangerous, unpredictable precedent for the future.”

UK Chancellor backs second Brexit referendum

“While it is now up to parliament to set out next steps in respect of this amendment, the government will continue to call for realism,” the spokesperson said, calling for MPs to choose options that were “deliverable in negotiations with the EU.”

Source: Presstv

26, March 2019

Southern Cameroons War: Citizens are losing hope that their country can remain united ⁰

For the past three years, civil strife has been tearing Cameroon apart. New public opinion data from Afrobarometer suggest serious — and widening — rifts in fundamental perceptions and attitudes between the country’s Anglophone and Francophone regions.

A snapshot of Cameroon’s turmoil

For more than half a century after independence in 1960, Cameroon’s Francophone majority (formerly ruled by the French) and Anglophone minority (ex-British colonial subjects) lived in uneasy, but largely peaceful, union.

In 2016, occasional protests against what many English-speaking citizens see as discrimination and exclusion intensified and turned violent. Now, militant Anglophone separatists skirmish with government forces almost daily. Human Rights Watch and other observers have accused both sides of killings, kidnappings and other abuses.

According to the United Nations, the violence has displaced hundreds of thousands of people, including thousands who have fled to neighboring Nigeria. In October, English-speaking Cameroon boycotted the presidential election en masse; Paul Biya, who has held that position since 1982, won — but many observers declared the election marred by irregularities and violence.

How deep is the divide between English- and French-speaking Cameroon?

Pulling farther apart on fundamental questions

Public-opinion data show that the Anglophone and Francophone regions have moved quite far from each other since 2016 on fundamental questions of democracy, trust in the state and national identity.

Afrobarometer has interviewed nationally representative samples of 1,200 adult Cameroonians in 2013, 2015, and May-June 2018, producing results with a margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points at a 95 percent confidence level. We did our analysis based on region, rather than primary language.

Here’s what we found. Most Cameroonians living in Anglophone regions no longer view their country as a functioning democracy. That’s a drastic shift from four years ago — and contrasts sharply with the views of their compatriots in Francophone regions. The proportion of Anglophone residents who consider Cameroon “a full democracy” or “a democracy with minor problems” dropped from more than half (52 percent) in 2015 to just 1 in 8 (12 percent) in 2018. Among those living in Francophone regions, the proportion of those who agree has slowly increased from 36 percent in 2013 to 45 percent, as you can see in the figure below.

Cameroon is a democracy | Anglophone vs. Francophone | Cameroon | 2013-2018

Respondents were asked: In your opinion, how much of a democracy is Cameroon today? The graph shows the percentage who say “a full democracy” or “a democracy with minor problems.” (Mircea Lazar /Mircea Lazar)

Similarly, as you can see in the figure below, satisfaction with the way democracy is working in Cameroon has plummeted among Anglophone citizens, from 43 percent who said they were “fairly” or “very” satisfied in 2015 to just 7 percent in 2018. Among Francophones, meanwhile, satisfaction remains low but fairly steady, at 33 percent.

Satisfied with democracy | Anglophone vs. Francophone | Cameroon | 2013-2018

Respondents were asked: Overall, how satisfied are you with the way democracy works in Cameroon? The graph shows the percentage who say “fairly satisfied” or “very satisfied.” (Mircea Lazar/Mircea Lazar)

Fewer than half (45 percent) of Anglophone Cameroonians now say they prefer democracy to any other political system, a sharp drop from 64 percent in 2015. Among Francophones, support for democracy has remained steady at two-thirds, or 66 percent. Popular support for elections as the best way to choose leaders shows a similar pattern.

Political scientists often consider popular trust in the police and the army to be a core indicator of broader support for the state — and so here, too, our survey findings may trouble policymakers. As you can see in the figure below, almost 6 in 10 Anglophone citizens, or 58 percent, say they do not trust the police “at all,” up from 39 percent in 2015 and more than double the proportion of absolute distrust among Francophones, at 24 percent. The divide is even greater when it comes to the army: The proportion of Anglophones who say they don’t trust the military “at all” has nearly tripled since 2015, from 22 percent to 62 percent, compared to just 13 percent of Francophones who say the same thing.

Don’t trust police and army ‘at all’ | Anglophone vs. Francophone | Cameroon | 2013-2018

Respondents were asked: How much do you trust each of the following, or haven’t you heard enough about them to say: The police? The army? The graph shows the percentage who say “not at all.”

Another key indicator of a growing chasm is identity: Do citizens identify more with their nation or with their ethnic group? If it’s the former, a fundamental national unity may exist that can help prevent civil conflict. Until recently, in Cameroon only small minorities — between 6 percent and 12 percent — of both Anglophone and Francophone citizens identified more closely with their ethnic group than with their nation. But as you can see below, since 2015, the proportion of Anglophones who identify more strongly with their ethnic group than their nationality has quadrupled, to almost one-third (31 percent). Among Francophones, the increase was from 7 percent to 13 percent.

Ethnic over national identity | Anglophone vs. Francophone | Cameroon | 2013-2018

Respondents were asked: Let us suppose that you had to choose between being a Cameroonian and being a ________[respondent’s ethnic group]. Which of the following statements best expresses your feelings: I feel only [ethnic group]? I feel more [ethnic group] than Cameroonian? I feel equally Cameroonian and [ethnic group]? I feel more Cameroonian than [ethnic group]? I feel only Cameroonian? The graph shows the percentage who say they feel “only [ethnic group]” or “more [ethnic group] than Cameroonian.. (Mircea Lazar/Mircea Lazar)

The results reveal that Cameroon’s national unity is fragmenting

These growing divides between Anglophone and Francophone Cameroonians suggest that beyond the headlines, some citizens may be starting to abandon a belief in the country’s unity. Despite Cameroon’s long history of individual English and French speakers living peacefully as friends and compatriots, these tears in the national fabric will take both time and skilled and inclusive political leadership to mend.

Culled from The Washington Post

24, March 2019

Algeria: Hundreds of thousands battle rain to protest President Bouteflika ⁰

Hundreds of thousands of Algerians took the street of the capital Algiers on Friday, to demand the immediate resignation of President Abdelaziz Bouteflika.

Algerians take part in a demonstration against ailing President Abdelaziz Bouteflika in the capital Algiers on March 22, 2019. (AFP)

The protesters are taking a stand after the country’s president announced that he would withdraw his bid for a fifth term in office but stopped short of stepping down, delaying the country’s presidential elections slated for April 18.

Bouteflika’s announcement came following weeks of mass demonstrations against his re-election bid and alleged plans to extend his 20-year rule.

Presstv

22, March 2019

EU gives UK two more weeks to sort out Brexit impasse ⁰

European Union leaders have given Prime Minister Theresa May two weeks’ reprieve, until April 12, before Britain could lurch out of the EU if she fails to persuade lawmakers to back the withdrawal treaty she concluded with Brussels.

But after seven hours of summit brainstorming on Thursday, her 27 peers kept a host of options open, ramping up pressure on parliament to support May, giving Britain an outside chance of staying in for much longer – but also preparing to deflect blame for the chaos of any no-deal Brexit.

May had wanted to be able to delay Britain’s departure until June 30 to tie up legislative loose ends, and tried to reassure the EU that she could overturn two heavy defeats to clinch a last-gasp parliamentary ratification of her deal next week, so allowing a status-quo transition period to come into effect.

EU leaders had planned to endorse a shorter extension, to May 22, the eve of EU parliamentary elections, and leave any discussion of how to deal with May losing until next week. But diplomats said the prime minister singularly failed to reassure them she could win. Some sensed she did not believe it herself.

After May left the room, and with French President Emmanuel Macron pitching a surprise ultimatum for Britain to be out, deal or no deal, by May 7 — the eve of a summit on the EU’s post-Brexit future — the meeting plunged into frantic debate.

PressTV-British PM seeks short Brexit delay: Spokesman

The outcome, with which May declared herself satisfied, was that the May 22 date will apply if parliament rallies behind her next week. If it does not, Britain will have until April 12 to offer a new plan or choose to quit without a treaty.

That date corresponds to the six weeks’ legal notice required for the EU election – which the Union would insist Britain hold on May 23 if it remains a member. If it does not hold the election, leaders said, the very last date Britain must leave would be June 30, before the new EU parliament convenes.

‘Options remain open’

Until April 12, said summit chair Donald Tusk, “all options will remain open and the cliff-edge date will be delayed”.

“The UK government will still have a choice between a deal, no deal, a long extension or revoking Article 50 (the withdrawal notice),” he told a news conference.

If Britain decides by April 12 against holding the EU election, it could then leave the EU without a deal at any time up to May 22.

May said she would not cancel Brexit or seek a long delay that would mean asking people to vote in EU elections three years after voting to leave. She insisted she could secure a deal next week.

Many in London doubt that, not least after she offended many lawmakers on Wednesday by publicly blaming them for the deadlock. She tried to soften those remarks somewhat on Thursday.

“What this decision tonight does is show the clear choice that is open to MPs,” May said. “I think the choice is clear for people.”

But May’s stated belief in her strategy of a third vote did not communicate itself to the summit table.

“It did not go well,” said one EU official familiar with the talks. “They basically realized that she doesn’t really believe it herself. They don’t want to be seen to be forcing the Brits out now. But they are looking for ways to end the agony.”

While some brinkmanship from Brussels may be part of a strategy to bounce reluctant British legislators into backing May, there is also a growing impatience that efforts to avoid a messy Brexit are bogging the EU down when it has other priorities, from a weakening economy to rising nationalism.

‘We have bought two weeks’

Macron has led the charge, calling for Britain, long a thorn in France’s plans for deeper European integration, to put up or shut up on Brexit.

“We have come up with a response that protects our interests,” he said. “It is up to the British to sort out their own internal contradictions. As for us, we don’t have any.”

May’s opponents at home range from hard-core Brexit supporters who say her deal gives the EU too much influence in Britain to others, inside and outside her own Conservative party, who would prefer to stay much closer to the EU or cancel Brexit.

Voicing the fears of business that a “no-deal” Brexit would hurt economies across the continent, German Chancellor Angela Merkel argued for caution, saying she would “work to the last minute” to avoid a disorderly departure.

By pushing the Brexit crunch toward Britain’s April 12 deadline to declare its decision on holding an EU election, EU diplomats said, the leaders also dodged potential blame if they had simply allowed Britain to crash out next Friday.

“That way, Merkel and the rest of the EU can avoid blame for forcing the British out,” one EU official said. “It will be up to the British themselves to say they are leaving with no deal.”

The basic problems of Brexit remain, however. Britain could still crash out without a transition, disrupting business and souring relations before the sides sit down to negotiate a trade pact and decide how to manage their politically sensitive land border in Ireland.

“Today was a long seven hours that bought us two weeks,” another EU diplomat said. “It just lets us say with a clear conscience that we didn’t throw them under the bus on March 29 … But before April 12, we will face the very same questions as now.”

(Source: Reuters)