OUR STUPIDITY, OUR NAIVETY: When Others Define Who We Are

The greatest victory of any occupier is not military conquest. It is convincing the occupied to forget who they are. A people who know their history cannot easily be manipulated. A people who understand their identity cannot easily be redefined. A people who remember their name cannot easily disappear. The struggle for Southern Cameroons is therefore not merely a political struggle. It is also a struggle for historical memory.

By Uchiba Nelson The Independentist News Contributor

There comes a time in the life of every people when they must decide whether they will define themselves or allow others to define them. For the people of the Southern Cameroons (Ambazonia), the time is rife.

Our greatest weakness has not always been military occupation, political marginalisation, or economic exploitation. Too often, it has been our willingness to accept the labels, narratives, and identities imposed upon us by others.

For decades, strangers have told us who we are. They have called us dogs, cockroaches, rats, Biafrans, terrorists, “Anglophones,” North Westerners, South Westerners, and every other name except what history, geography, and international law recognize us to be: the people of Southern Cameroons.

Instead of Southern Cameroons, they give us North West and South West. Instead of a people, they reduce us to administrative regions. Instead of a nation, they reduce us to a linguistic minority. Instead of a historical territory, they reduce us to a colonial afterthought. And many among us accept these definitions without question.

When Occupiers Tell You What You Want

Naivety begins when an occupier tells a people what their aspirations should be. Instead of asking whether they possess any legitimate authority in Southern Cameroons in the first place, our people are invited to negotiate over what concessions they might receive. A Prime Minister. A Special Status. A Ministry. A House of Chiefs. Bilingualism. Decentralisation. Culturalism. DDR programmes. And These are presented as gifts.

Yet the fundamental question remains unanswered: What right does an occupier have to determine the political future of a people whose territory it did not own at independence? When the foundation is wrong, every solution built upon it becomes questionable.

The Anglophone Trap

Perhaps no term has done more damage to Southern Cameroons’ international identity than the word “Anglophone.” Who exactly is an Anglophone? Is a Chinese citizen who speaks English an Anglophone? Is a Russian who attended an English-speaking school an Anglophone? Is an Ewondo, Bulu, Bamileke, Fulani, or Duala who speaks English suddenly transformed into an Anglophone? Yes of course.

Language does not define nationhood. Language does not create sovereignty. Language does not establish territorial identity. Southern Cameroonians are not a people because they speak English. Southern Cameroonians are a people because they possess a distinct historical territory, internationally recognized boundaries, and a political identity that existed before the events of 1961.

The term “Anglophone” transforms a territorial and political question into a linguistic question. That transformation is not accidental. It shifts the discussion away from self-determination and toward language rights. It turns a question of territory into a question of culture. It replaces a people with a minority.

Southern Cameroons Is Not a Direction

We are not North West. We are not South West. We are Southern Cameroons. Those names—North West and South West—are administrative labels created by La République du Cameroun. Southern Cameroons existed long before those labels were invented. Its boundaries were known. Its institutions were known. Its people were known. Its status under international law was known. A people who abandon their name eventually abandon their history. A people who abandon their history eventually abandon their future.

The Great Historical Deception

One of the most successful narratives imposed upon Southern Cameroonians is the claim that there once existed a sovereign country called Cameroun under German rule and that present-day political arrangements merely restored a historical unity. This argument collapses under examination. Germany did not conquer an independent country called Cameroun. Germany established a colony known as German Kamerun.

Like other colonial territories across Africa, German Kamerun was an artificial colonial construct created through conquest, treaties, coercion, and military domination. It assembled numerous kingdoms, chiefdoms, fondoms, ethnic groups, and communities under German colonial authority. A colony is not a sovereign country. A colony does not possess independent statehood. A colony exists under the sovereignty of another power.

If German Kamerun was truly a sovereign country, where were its elected representatives? Who was its president? Who were its ministers? Where was its independent army? Where was its sovereign parliament? The answer is simple. They did not exist. Because German Kamerun was not an independent country. It was a colony.

The Birth of La République du Cameroun

The sovereign state known as La République du Cameroun came into existence on 1 January 1960. It emerged from the French-administered portion of the former German colony and became one of the independent states of Africa. At the moment of its independence, neither Southern Cameroons nor Northern Cameroons formed part of La République du Cameroun. Those territories remained under British administration as separate United Nations Trust Territories.

Likewise, La République du Cameroun cannot claim all territories that once formed part of German Kamerun. Parts of the former German colony are today located within Chad, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, the Central African Republic, and Nigeria. No serious government in Yaoundé claims sovereignty over those territories. Why then should colonial boundaries inherited by one successor state automatically confer ownership over territories administered separately under another authority?

Two Cameroons, Two Histories

History records that there were two Cameroons at the end of the colonial period. One emerged from the French-administered territory and became La République du Cameroun on 1 January 1960. The other remained the British-administered Southern Cameroons Trust Territory until 1 October 1961. They possessed different colonial experiences, different legal systems, different educational systems, different administrative traditions, and different political cultures. To acknowledge these realities is not extremism. It is history.

Know Who You Are

The greatest victory of any occupier is not military conquest. It is convincing the occupied to forget who they are. A people who know their history cannot easily be manipulated. A people who understand their identity cannot easily be redefined. A people who remember their name cannot easily disappear. The struggle for Southern Cameroons is therefore not merely a political struggle. It is also a struggle for historical memory.

The choice before every Southern Cameroonian is simple: Either you know who you are, or someone else will define you. History teaches that no people who allow strangers to define them remain masters of their own destiny for very long.

Uchiba Nelson The Independentist News Contributor.