preface
Since October 2016, a thorny armed conflict has plagued Cameroon, a country straddling the West and Central African region. The conflict, known as the "English Question," pitted government forces against armed English-speaking separatists fighting for an independent English-speaking country. In 1961, the year two Cameroonians who had previously been under French and British mandates were reunited.
Historically, the crisis stemmed from the Anglo-French division of Cameroon after World War I, and the failure of Britain to implement the League of Nations mandate system in Cameroon and its successor, the United Nations Trusteeship System. This article focuses on the root causes of Cameroon's political crisis under British mandate.
Cameroon under colonial rule
The urgency of the British authorities' plan to incorporate the British Cameroonian mandate into the British colony of Nigeria failed to promote the political, economic, social and educational progress of the British Cameroonian population, as well as the progressive development towards independence as provided for in the trusteeship system. The people of British Cameroon were thus denied their right to self-determination.
On May 20, 1972, Cameroon's French-speaking leaders succeeded in transforming the federal state into a single state, much to the dismay of the English-speaking minority. The creation of a unified state opened the door to the systematic marginalization of English speakers. When Paul Biya came to power in 1982, he continued his policy of marginalization, and in October 2016, the situation reached its peak.
The francophone hegemonic regime suppressed the protests through the excessive use of force. In response to the state's terrorist act of shooting and killing several unarmed English-speaking protesters, a significant portion of English-speaking communities began militarizing, retreating into woods and other remote areas to wage self-defensive guerrilla warfare against the country.
Soon, several English-speaking groups began calling for a complete separation from the federation and the formation of a new English-speaking state, which would be known as Ambazonia. In the resulting "civil war", both government forces and English-speaking armed separatists fell into a reign of terror.
The Cameroonian government's response replicated a form of colonial violence as it randomly sent troops to villages and remote areas, killing unarmed civilians. Conflicting statistics, but overall, the crisis has led to thousands of killings, mass funerals, political imprisonment, imprisonment without trial, and hundreds of thousands of Cameroonian refugees entering neighboring African countries and elsewhere.
The origins of the unfolding crisis of English-speaking minorities can be traced back to the First World War, beginning with the post-war partition of Cameroon between Britain and France, followed by the implementation of a mandate system and later the introduction of a trusteeship system in the territory. Cameroon was first colonized by Germany in the Cameroon region in July 1884.
Thirty years later, when World War I broke out in 1914, Cameroon was invaded by a combined army of more than 20,000 African colonial soldiers (assisted by Belgian African soldiers), and by February 1916 the Germans and their Cameroonian soldiers were forced to surrender.
After three decades of injustices and atrocities during German colonization, most Cameroonians supported the Allies, believing that British rather than French colonial rule was preferable to the previous German government. But this is not the case. When the British entered Cameroon, the Cameroonians did not know the true agenda of the aggressor.
First, Britain wanted not another independent West African colony, but Cameroonian territories that could be conveniently incorporated into British Nigeria to clean up Nigeria's colonial borders. This integratist agenda soon reflected how Britain divided Cameroon from France after the war, and then ignored Cameroon's mandate.
Thus, Britain transferred four-fifths of its territory to France. Britain's acceptance of these tiny disjointed parts of Cameroon's territory bordering Nigeria is a clear indication that it is not trying to make these territories operate independently, but needs them so that they can be integrated into British Nigeria.
In essence, this division became the basis for the future collapse of Cameroon's English-speaking minority.
Not knowing or doubting the intentions of the British in Cameroon, the inhabitants of Douala found themselves in the French part of Cameroon and began to protest against the arbitrary division of their territory by Britain and France. They considered signing a document asking diplomats at the upcoming Paris Peace Conference in 1919 to consider their right to choose a ruling country of their choice.
A few days after the armistice of November 1918, Douala leaders gathered together to declare that "the people of Douala refuse to be placed under the protection of a nation until they speak to representatives of the Allied forces who defeated the Germans."
The resistance of the people of Cameroon
Nevertheless, the People's Communist Party, which was responsible for the disposal of the former German colonies, began to support the partition arrangement of 1916. For many Cameroonians, British behaviour was an example of deception and betrayal, and Prime Minister Lloyd George of June 1917 promised that the "aspirations, aspirations and interests" of the people of the former German colonies would be "the main factor in resolving their future government".
Europe implemented a new world order by disposing of the former German colonies without consulting the peoples directly concerned, noting that this action was the height of British "hypocrisy" and laid the groundwork for the future problems of the affected territories. An official at the British Foreign Office replied sarcastically: "We cannot hope to let all those in the world who are undoubtedly willing to enter British territory into British territory."
Not so long ago, apparently, it occurred to him that not long after, when the British had their backs against the wall during the war, they called on "all the peoples of the world" to join the fight against Germany in exchange for British protection.
It was in this context that the Permanent Mandate Committee was born at the Paris Peace Conference. On 20 July 1922, under the new system, British and French territories in Cameroon were classified as "B" missions, respectively. In accordance with article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, the United Kingdom agreed that the main objective of its mandate in carrying out Cameroon was to ensure the well-being and to promote the development and social progress of the population.
However, as a first step towards achieving its integration policy, the UK further divided its mandate in Cameroon into (UK) Southern and (British) Northern Cameroon, and then continued to administer them separately, but as part of Nigeria.
In the years that followed, Cameroonians, as individuals and groups, continued to try to protest to the League against the division of their territories, especially the British policy of trying to integrate southern British Cameroon and Nigeria. The British suppressed and destroyed many petitions, preventing them from entering the Union.
The UK was required to report annually to the League on the management of its mission. However, such reporting systems are weak and do not specify the duration of mandatory controls. Even the process of ending this control has not been spelled out, and it is unclear what the alliance would have done if Britain had not adhered to the principle of mandate by promoting the progressive development of British Cameroon.
However, this is not the case, because it is true that Britain did not in fact adhere to the objectives of the mandate system for Cameroon. While British Cameroon is rich in human and natural resources, coercive authorities allow the territory to stand still. The British ran Cameroon from the beginning, beginning with a formal policy of frugality.
With concerns that the UK is only the custodian of British Cameroon, the government may not be able to protect their investments in the region. As a result, the British resold the plantation to their original German owners at the end of 1924, and by 1936 there were 293,678 acres in German hands, while the British retained only 19,053 acres.
The management of important port facilities in Tico and Victoria went to plantations and into the hands of German companies, which led French officials to bitterly say in 1936 that Britain had apparently ceded Cameroon to the Germans.
Not interested in Cameroon's economy, but in putting the Germans and other Europeans in charge of economic activity there, Britain led to the economic power and impoverishment of these inhabitants.
However, the British government insisted that any attempt to develop the colonial potential of British Cameroon, even British exploitation, as they did with their Nigerian colonies, would be counterproductive to the ultimate goal of their integration mission.
The record on the development of road infrastructure is even worse. Although the cost of road construction was mainly borne by the residents of British Cameroon through labor, by the end of the authorization system, Cameroon province had only 185 miles of driveable roads. Until after 1945, most of the territory was not connected.
Britain's failure to build a road connecting British Cameroon and Nigeria would increase the interaction between the two territories, thus contributing to the UK's own integration agenda, which can be attributed to several factors. First, the British saw road construction as a long-term investment, but they were reluctant to take that risk in Cameroon.
Moreover, they took into account the possibility that, especially before the Second World War, Germany would one day recover its colonies, including Cameroon. In the end, their approach was so stingy that they failed to realize to what extent the lack of a road network connecting Nigeria and British Cameroon ran counter to their eventual integration agenda.
Educational progress, considered an important step towards achieving social progress for the British Cameroonians and people in accordance with the mandate system, remained poor throughout the period. In fact, Britain left education to voluntary agencies, missionary agencies and local authorities. Thus, by 1938, only 11 per cent of eligible schoolchildren had any form of education.
In the same year, the British managed to establish a primary school in Kak, near the town of Kumba, to train primary school teachers. British Cameroonians who wanted to pursue post-primary education opportunities were forced to travel to Nigeria for this purpose. There is a cynical claim that Cameroonians were forced to study integrationist policies in favour of Britain in Nigeria.
This is what happened at the outbreak of World War II, which eventually swept through the Union and its system of mandates. In 1945, with the collapse of the Union and the end of the war, the authorization system became the United Nations trusteeship system. While the United Nations system retains the core procedures and objectives of its predecessor, it differs in that the trustee people must be helped to advance and develop towards self-government or independence in accordance with their freely expressed wishes.
Political crisis in Cameroon
So the British Cameroonians are looking to Britain to help them make that progress. Once again, the political process has begun to slow down. It was not until 1953, with the emergence of political parties and nationalists critical of British rule, that southern Cameroon began to undergo real political change. After 1959, this process accelerated.
When Britain was ready to grant Nigeria independence by October 1960, the leading politicians of British Cameroon had to make some difficult choices. Britain's decision to administer British Cameroon as an integral part of Nigeria led to massive and widespread political controversy and division.
In short, the politicians and people of southern British Cameroon are divided on three key issues: integration, division and unification.
Integration would require British Cameroonians to achieve independence by joining an independent Nigerian state. Partition will allow the people to completely secede from Nigeria and become an independent nation. Finally, reunification would require them to rejoin an independent French Cameroon in order to achieve independence.
While most people chose independence from Nigeria and southern Cameroon by some leading politicians and traditional authorities, Britain and the United Nations chose to ignore the terms of the mandate stating that independence should be in accordance with the freely expressed wishes of the people. Britain's agenda for integrating British Cameroonians into Nigeria seemed to be collapsing, when Britain decided to make it a zero-sum game.
There are only two options: integration with Nigeria or reunification with former French Cameroon. It's a dangerous gamble. It was mistakenly believed that the British southern Cameroonians would never vote for unification.
As political instability and violence weakened the liberation struggle in France and Cameroon, the British saw the referendum issues of "integration" and "unification" as the easiest way to achieve their long-term goal of integration with Nigeria. Thus, in a series of meetings with British Cameroonian politicians, Britain and the United Nations ignored both options to the people.
Author's point of view
Historians tend to explain the present in terms of the miscarriage of history itself. The current crisis in Cameroon has been interpreted as a failure of the mandate enforced by the United Kingdom. Far from suggesting that history should happen or trying to fantasize about a golden future British Cameroon mandates to achieve difference.
My analysis outlines the entanglement of English-speaking Cameroon's past in the empowerment system, in order to better appreciate Cameroon's minority separatist crisis. The decision of Britain and the United Nations to force British Cameroonians to choose between integration or reunification has haunted Cameroon in the 21st century.
bibliography
1. Frank M. Stark, Federalism in Cameroon: Shadows and Reality, 1976
2. Ian Fowler, Vikijika Vanso, People of Cameroon's Western Border, 2009
3. Prosse Gifford, Roger Louis, Britain and Germany in Africa: Imperial Confrontation and Colonial Rule, 1967
4. Susan Pedersen, Guardians: League of Nations and Crisis of Empires, 2015
5. Richard A. Goodrich, Disposal of Plantations in Britain and Cameroon, 1996
6. John Percival, Cameroon Referendum 1961: Choose or Betray, 2008
7. Canadian Journal of African Studies, No. 36, 2002