The lesson is clear: decolonisation is not complete when a colonial flag is lowered. It is complete only when the political future of a people is settled with clarity, legitimacy, and consent. In Southern Cameroons, that settlement remains unfinished. And for many of its people, the unanswered questions of 1961—and Britain’s silence thereafter—remain among the most enduring legacies of empire.
By Dr. Martin Shutang Mungwa contributor The Independentist News.
Beyond the Narrative of Colonial Neglect
The story of British Southern Cameroons is often told as a tale of colonial neglect, economic underdevelopment, and political marginalisation. While these criticisms contain elements of truth, they do not fully explain the roots of the conflict that has haunted the territory for more than six decades. Britain’s greatest failure in Southern Cameroons was not merely administrative neglect. It was its failure to secure a clear, lawful, and sustainable political future for the people of the territory before withdrawing from its responsibilities.
Unlike many British colonies, Southern Cameroons was not British sovereign territory. It was a United Nations Trust Territory administered by Britain under the Trusteeship System established after the Second World War. Britain therefore carried international obligations that went beyond ordinary colonial administration. Its primary responsibility was to guide the territory toward self-government or independence while protecting the political aspirations of its inhabitants.
Today, many observers focus on the actions of Yaoundé after reunification. Yet the deeper question remains whether Britain fulfilled its own obligations before leaving. A conflict that has endured for generations cannot be understood without examining the decisions made by the colonial power that supervised the territory’s transition.
The Successes Britain Left Behind
To be fair, Britain did not leave Southern Cameroons empty-handed. The territory developed a functioning parliamentary tradition, representative institutions, an independent judiciary, local government structures, and a vibrant educational system. Southern Cameroons produced respected political leaders and public servants. The Cameroon Development Corporation became one of the largest agricultural enterprises in West Africa. Local councils functioned effectively, and the territory enjoyed a democratic culture that distinguished it from many newly independent African states.
The people of Southern Cameroons learned the habits of parliamentary democracy through institutions that connected Buea to Enugu and the wider British Commonwealth tradition. Political debate, elections, opposition parties, and constitutional governance became part of public life. These achievements remain among the most enduring positive legacies of British administration. Yet these successes were overshadowed by a series of critical political failures.
Failure One: Denying the Foundations of Independence
Britain’s first major failure was its reluctance to prepare Southern Cameroons for full independence. Throughout much of the Trusteeship period, British policy treated the territory as an administrative appendage of Nigeria. This arrangement reduced costs for London but delayed the development of separate institutions that could have supported an independent state.
As decolonisation swept across Africa during the 1950s and early 1960s, territories with comparable populations achieved independence. Southern Cameroons, however, remained trapped between competing political options without a clear pathway toward sovereign statehood. Britain never seriously invested in preparing the territory for independence despite the growing tide of African self-determination.
Failure Two: Delaying Political Self-Determination
The second failure was Britain’s handling of the constitutional future of the territory. By the late 1950s, many Southern Cameroonians sought greater autonomy and political recognition. Although the territory eventually obtained self-government with its capital in Buea, this came late in the decolonisation process.
Southern Cameroonians repeatedly sought assurances about their future political status. Yet Britain never developed a comprehensive roadmap toward full sovereignty. Instead, decisions affecting the future of the territory were often shaped by broader strategic concerns involving Nigeria, French Cameroun, and British imperial interests. The result was uncertainty at precisely the moment clarity was most needed.
Failure Three: The Plebiscite Without Independence
The third and perhaps most consequential failure was the 1961 plebiscite. The United Nations organised a vote that offered only two choices: integration with Nigeria or union with the already independent Republic of Cameroon. Independence as a separate state was not presented as an option.
For many historians, legal scholars, and Southern Cameroonians, this remains one of the most controversial aspects of the decolonisation process. The people were effectively denied the opportunity to choose complete independence despite the broader principles established by the United Nations concerning self-determination.
The central question remains unanswered: Why was Southern Cameroons, a United Nations Trust Territory, denied the same opportunity for independence that was being granted across Africa? That question continues to echo through the conflict today.
Failure Four: An Unfinished Constitutional Settlement
The fourth failure occurred after the plebiscite. United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1608 (XV) envisaged arrangements that would be agreed upon before the transfer of authority. Yet the constitutional framework governing the proposed union remained incomplete and contested.
The Foumban Constitutional Conference produced agreements that continue to generate debate regarding their legal status and implementation. Critics argue that no binding treaty of union was ever concluded between the parties before reunification took effect on 1 October 1961.
Britain, having administered the territory for decades, withdrew without ensuring that all constitutional questions had been conclusively resolved. This was not merely a technical oversight. It created the foundation for decades of legal and political disputes concerning the status of Southern Cameroons.
Failure Five: Abandonment After Reunification
Britain’s fifth failure was its abandonment of responsibility after reunification. Once Southern Cameroons entered into union with the Republic of Cameroon on 1 October 1961, Britain largely disengaged from the territory’s affairs. As federal guarantees gradually weakened and political centralisation increased, London remained silent.
When the federal structure was abolished in 1972 and replaced with a unitary state, effectively dismantling the constitutional arrangement many Southern Cameroonians believed they had voted for, Britain offered little response despite its historical role in creating the conditions that made the union possible. The former administering authority simply walked away.
The 1992 Turning Point: When Britain Looked Away
For many Southern Cameroonians, Britain’s silence reached its most painful expression in the aftermath of the disputed 1992 presidential elections in Cameroon. As demands for political reform, federal restoration, and recognition of Southern Cameroons’ grievances intensified, many expected Britain—the former administering authority—to take an interest in the growing conflict.
Instead, Britain appeared determined to distance itself from the territory it had once administered under a United Nations mandate. Statements and policies emerging from British diplomatic circles were widely interpreted as indicating that Southern Cameroons no longer represented a strategic interest for the United Kingdom. Whether expressed explicitly or through diplomatic indifference, the message received by many Southern Cameroonians was unmistakable: Britain had moved on.
A Commonwealth Bond Broken
To many Southern Cameroonians, this was not merely indifference. It was betrayal. Thousands of Southern Cameroonians had served under the British Crown. They fought in Britain’s wars, upheld Commonwealth ideals, and contributed to the broader British imperial effort. During the Second World War, Southern Cameroonians joined countless others across the Empire in supporting Britain’s struggle against fascism. Communities throughout the territory contributed manpower, resources, and loyalty to a cause presented as the defence of freedom and civilisation.
Many Southern Cameroonians believed that such sacrifice established a lasting bond with Britain and the Commonwealth. They believed that the principles of justice, democracy, parliamentary governance, and the rule of law that Britain had taught would remain meaningful when their own political future came under threat.
Some even point to the contributions made by Britain’s African territories during the war effort, including support for the production of military equipment such as the famous Spitfire fighter aircraft. Southern Cameroonians, like many colonial subjects, were asked to sacrifice for the Empire. They answered that call.
Yet when constitutional grievances emerged and demands for justice intensified, Britain remained largely absent. The former Trust Territory that had once been Britain’s responsibility appeared to have become a forgotten chapter in British foreign policy.
The Great Moral Failure
This perceived abandonment left a deep scar on the collective memory of many Southern Cameroonians. The feeling persists that Britain was willing to benefit from the loyalty and sacrifices of the people during the colonial era, but unwilling to defend their political rights when they faced growing marginalisation after reunification. If the failure of 1961 represented Britain’s greatest constitutional mistake, then its silence after 1992 may represent its greatest moral failure.
As Lord Palmerston famously observed, nations have no permanent friends and no permanent enemies, only permanent interests. For many Southern Cameroonians, Britain’s conduct appeared to confirm this principle. Once its strategic interests had shifted elsewhere, the territory and its people were left to navigate an uncertain future alone.
The Unfinished Business of Decolonisation
History rarely judges colonial powers solely by the roads they built or the institutions they established. It judges them by whether they left behind stable political foundations capable of enduring after their departure. In Southern Cameroons, Britain left behind functioning institutions but failed to secure a durable political settlement. That failure may well rank among the most significant colonial blunders in modern African history.
More than sixty years after Britain’s departure, the consequences are still being felt. The contemporary Southern Cameroons conflict cannot be understood without examining the unfinished business of decolonisation.
The lesson is clear: decolonisation is not complete when a colonial flag is lowered. It is complete only when the political future of a people is settled with clarity, legitimacy, and consent. In Southern Cameroons, that settlement remains unfinished. And for many of its people, the unanswered questions of 1961—and Britain’s silence thereafter—remain among the most enduring legacies of empire.
Dr. Martin Shutang Mungwa contributor The Independentist News.
