Ngah Christian’s call is not bold. It is not visionary. It is not courageous. It is not prophetic. It is political recycling — old obedience politics dressed in moral language. Peace without justice is fraud. Dialogue without security is theatre. Reconciliation without reform is propaganda. Disarmament without freedom is political suicide.
By Ali Dan Ismael Editor-in-Chief
Ngah Christian’s public call for Ambazonian self-defence forces to disarm is being marketed as a peace message. It is nothing of the sort. It is a political deception strategy, recycled from an old script that predates the current war and predates even the armed phase of the resistance itself. This is not new thinking. It is old control logic in new language.
For decades, Southern Cameroonian resistance has been delegitimised through changing vocabulary but identical structure. In the 1990s, the language was “terrorism.” Today, the language is “peace.” Then, resistance was framed as a security threat. Now, self-defence is framed as a moral obstacle. But the demand remains unchanged: stop resisting so power can operate freely. Disarmament is being presented as reconciliation. Vulnerability is being sold as virtue. Submission is being reframed as responsibility.This is not peace-building. It is pacification politics.
The 1999 Precedent They Don’t Want Remembered
This narrative is not theoretical — it is documented.
In June 1999, an open letter was formally sent to The Herald Newspaper, addressed to the Editor care of Dr. Boniface Forbin, PhD, where Ngah Christian was serving as a correspondent/editorial figure. That letter directly accused the paper of publishing false security narratives, manufacturing fear, criminalising Southern Cameroonian political movements, and falsely associating self-organisation with terrorism and instability.
The letter exposed how resistance voices were being framed as threats, how political mobilisation was securitised, and how media was being weaponised to delegitimise Southern Cameroonian self-determination. The language then was “SCNC terrorism.” The structure was fear. The objective was control. The same structure is now being recycled — only the vocabulary has changed.
Then it was: “Security threat.” “Terrorism.” “Destabilisation.”
Now it is: “Peace.” “Reconciliation.” “Disarmament.” Different words. Same doctrine.
History shows continuity, not coincidence.
Ngah Christian’s current posture is not a new moral awakening. It is the modern rebranding of an old political function: delegitimising resistance in service of stability politics. Ngah Christian’s call fits perfectly within this historical pattern: Disarm first. Trust later. Surrender first. Negotiate later. Become vulnerable first. Seek justice later. This sequence is not reconciliation logic. It is control logic.
There is no moral authority in telling an unprotected people to disarm. There is no integrity in calling for peace without guarantees. There is no honesty in demanding surrender without reform. There is no justice in preaching dialogue while villages burn, civilians are targeted, and communities remain militarised.
Self-defence did not create this conflict. State violence did. Political erasure did. Systemic marginalisation did. Broken reunification did. Colonial continuity did. Military occupation did. Resistance is not the origin of the crisis. It is the consequence of it.
Yet the narrative is always inverted: reaction is criminalised, while aggression is normalised. Defence is condemned, while repression is sanitised. The oppressed are asked to disarm, while the oppressor is never asked to demilitarise. Civilians are told to trust, while the state is never required to reform. This is not conflict resolution. It is power preservation.
If peace were truly the objective, the conversation would begin with justice. If reconciliation were real, it would begin with reform. If unity were genuine, it would begin with equality. If dialogue were sincere, it would begin with protection guarantees. But instead, the demand is always the same: disarm first. This is not transformation. It is containment. Not reconciliation. Re-subordination. Not peace. Stability for power, not safety for people.
Ambazonians are not facing a new argument. They are facing a recycled doctrine — one that has historically produced mass graves, displaced populations, political erasure, and broken promises. The language evolves. The outcome does not.
Ngah Christian’s call is not bold. It is not visionary. It is not courageous. It is not prophetic. It is political recycling — old obedience politics dressed in moral language. Peace without justice is fraud. Dialogue without security is theatre. Reconciliation without reform is propaganda. Disarmament without freedom is political suicide.
The Independentist’s Position
Self-defence is not the problem. Oppression is. Occupation is. Erasure is. State violence is. Systemic injustice is. Until justice exists, protection is guaranteed, reform is real, and equality is structural — calls for disarmament are not peace proposals. They are instruments of control. And Ambazonia will not disarm into silence, submission, or extinction.
Ali Dan Ismael for The Independentistnews editorial desk
