The points presented here are historically based. They are drawn from recorded history and eyewitness accounts. Disputes can be verified or referred to the author and relevant references will be provided. For constraints of length references are not included here.
Background
The Portuguese docked on the river Wouri in 1472, and named it “Rio dos Camarões (the River of Prawns)”. “Camarões” will later morph into the name Cameroon. 386 years later in 1858, Alfred Saker, the British Missionary landed further north at Victoria with 200 freed slaves, thereby initiating British presence in the territory. 26 years later in 1884, during the Conference in Berlin to partition Africa, Germany was allocated the territory which they called Kamerun. Germany then proceeded to sign a “Treaty” with Douala Chiefs and administered Kamerun as a German colony from 1886 – 1916 (30 years). After losing WWI, the territory was shared between Britain and France, with Britain holding the Western parts and naming them Northern and Southern Cameroons which she administered as a region of Nigeria until 1960 (44 years). In 1961 following the UN organized Plebiscite, Northern Cameroons chose to return as a part of independent Nigeria, while Southern Cameroons voted to achieve independence from British colonial rule and UN Trusteeship, by joining already independent Republic of Cameroon.
British attitude towards Southern Cameroons: Colonial Insensitivity or Foresight?
Was it really necessary for Britain, already having the huge territory of Nigeria in 1916, to also acquire the Cameroons? Why did the British who should have known better not simply kept big Nigeria, leaving all of German Kamerun to become French Cameroun? Surely the so-called “Anglophone Crisis” would never have happened in an all-French Speaking country had Britain done so. The British have been present in this territory since Alfred Saker, then until 1961 (103 years) administering the colonial affairs; influencing the politics, language, culture, attitudes and behaviors of the citizens. Despite all the acquired practices; educational systems, judicial system, law and order, local development; other attitudes and behaviors, why did Britain and some members of the Commonwealth (for instance India) still sponsor a 26 to 6 vote at the United Nations to ensure Southern Cameroons become a small part of the then larger and more populous, Independent French Speaking Cameroun? Whether this British attitude towards Southern Cameroons can be described as colonial insensitivity or foresight, only Cameroonians and posterity will ultimately determine.
Poor stewardship, a Historical Injustice or Fait Accompli?
Is the “Anglophone Crisis” then partly based on poor British stewardship, a historical injustice or a subjective interpretation of the Plebiscite process - a fait accompli? What legitimate historical injustice can pundits of the “Anglophone Crisis” subscribe to and ignore the unsustainability of British stewardship? An important characteristic of an injustice is that, its victims may have had limited or no power to have controlled the act considered to be unjust. The citizens of former Southern Cameroons, now Northwest and Southwest regions did not elect to be included as an administrative region of Nigeria. However, while under British stewardship, they willfully chose to become minority Anglophone citizens of majority French Cameroon. Whereas British Administration set them up for Trusteeship, Southern Cameroonians freely chose through the Plebiscite of 1961 to become a part of the Republic of Cameroon. So, if any injustice can be inferred, it should rather be, the cavalier inclusion and administration of this former German territory as a part of Nigeria for 44 years instilling in them popular British culture and then dropping them like a hot potato. It is definitely not the outcomes and consequences of the Plebiscite, which was campaigned for vigorously, implemented openly, rewarded, later contested and eventually settled. Our current status therefore, based on the 1961 Plebiscite, for better or worse, should be considered in all fairness, a fait accompli. We should therefore, bravely look elsewhere for solutions.
Now, the Responsibility for upholding our Dual Colonial Heritages
A fait accompli, should however, not be equivalent to assimilation which has proven impossible; but should be a process of good-faith social, economic, administrative and political co-existence. If Anglophones in Cameroon continue to entertain feelings of being marginal to mainstream Cameroon, it is too late for them to invoke sentiments of “Benevolent Neutrality” or worse, as adopted by Southern Cameroons politicians in 1953 while they were a part of Nigeria. If there is evidence that Anglophone apathy in Cameroon is leading some to hold extreme views or taking extreme positions, we must be reminded of our different responsibilities.
Firstly, it is of upholding our commitments to our dual colonizing cultural heritages which is the founding basis for the modern Cameroon State. The year 1961 must therefore, remain significant because it is then that the two Cameroons came together, as a functioning State, not a German colony, under a treaty with Douala Chiefs. In this, the first responsibility must lie with the memory of Southern Cameroonians who, although leading a split Parliament (14:12 w.r.t. KNDP and CPNC) opted to continue reunification negotiations without the benefits of CPNC leaders. Their weakened negotiation skills, resulted in a very poor deal for Anglophone Cameroonians. The next level of responsibility must also lie with Cameroonians charged thereafter, with implementing our [now] Unitary Constitution to uphold and reflect our dual cultural heritages in all that we do; Local Administration, Natural Resources, Law and Order, Judiciary and especially the all-important Higher Education, so dear to Anglophones.
Then, why this Escalation of a Conflict of Perceptions?
Since 2016 many people have sadly died, others maimed, many still held captive by armed groups in forests and elsewhere, property destroyed, lives and well-being of many more ruined, populations, displaced and traumatized; economies stagnant, investments dried-up, mainly in the Southwest and Northwest regions of Cameroon and as fall-out, elsewhere in the country.
The exact justifications for this violence and insecurity are yet difficult to establish. Unfamiliar words like “terrorists”, “separatists”, “kidnappers”, “armed bandits and robbers”, “Ambas”, “Ghost towns”, have sadly become only too familiar with Cameroonians when referring to goings-on in the Southwest and Northwest regions of Cameroon. Citizens now questions if what is going on is an out-of-control escalation of a conflict of perception of the history and management of the unification of former Southern Cameroons and the Republic of Cameroon. What then, is the best way forward?
Read the sequels to the “The Anglophone Crisis: A Way Forward” only here on Moneytreeslight. You may wish to support via MoMo +237 653 609 855
Author: Peter Ngembeni MBILE. pmbile@gmail.com WhatsApp: +233552570392. Peter is a Cameroonian and holds a PhD in Forest Policy and Economics. He is a Sustainable Development Specialist, a Southern Cameroons History Enthusiast and a Political Commentator.
Subscribe to receive New Articles in your Inbox at https://www.moneytreeslight.com/ and register
Kommentarer