Chris Anu rose rapidly in the early phase of the revolution, when communication was crucial to mobilizing the diaspora. As Secretary of State for Communication, he commanded attention with his direct broadcasts and polished style, giving Ambazonia a confident voice on the global stage.
By Ali Dan Ismael
Senior Investigative Correspondent, The Independentist
Introduction: A Figure at the Crossroads
Few figures in the Ambazonian liberation movement have been as visible, contested, and ultimately consequential as Chris Anu. Once celebrated as the charismatic voice of the revolution during his tenure as Secretary of State for Communication in the Interim Government (IG) under President Dr Samuel Ikome Sako, he would later build a formidable media platform, cultivate elite networks, and emerge as a pivotal — and polarizing — figure in the political and information landscape of the struggle.
Supporters regard him as a media strategist who sought to recalibrate the movement’s communication architecture. Critics, however, see him as the architect of fragmentation and the most prominent bridge through which regime narratives seeped into the resistance. This investigation examines the interplay between media power, elite alliances, legal maneuvers, alleged foreign intrigues, battlefield developments, and leadership responses, situating Chris Anu’s trajectory within broader historical and political currents.
The Meteoric Rise: Secretary of State and ABS
Chris Anu rose rapidly in the early phase of the revolution, when communication was crucial to mobilizing the diaspora. As Secretary of State for Communication, he commanded attention with his direct broadcasts and polished style, giving Ambazonia a confident voice on the global stage.
He soon founded the African Broadcasting Service (ABS), which became one of the most prominent media outlets covering the conflict. Initially seen as a national asset, ABS gave the revolution unprecedented visibility. Over time, however, Anu consolidated editorial control, prioritizing his own platforms over institutional channels. Critics within the IG saw this as a shift from national messaging to personal branding, while his defenders argued he was filling a vacuum left by institutional inefficiencies.
The Marianta Split and Strategic Realignment
Tensions came to a head with Anu’s break from the Marianta leadership group. Disagreements over strategy and messaging evolved into a decisive political split. Afterward, Anu began operating with growing independence, forging alliances with political and religious elites from his home division of Lebialem, a region with deep historical and cultural links to Francophone Cameroon.
While some viewed this as a tactical broadening of his base, others interpreted it as the start of a parallel power structure that would challenge the cohesion of the movement.
Lebialem’s Anthropological Roots and Political Networks
To understand this shift, one must examine Lebialem’s unique historical context. Much of its population descends from settlers originating in Dschang, in the Francophone Western Region. Over generations, these communities retained linguistic and kinship ties to Francophone Cameroon. Analysts often describe them as “Eleventh Province diasporans”: culturally Francophone groups living within Ambazonian territory.
Paul Tassong, a prominent CPDM minister and Yaoundé insider from Lebialem, exemplifies this dual identity: geographically Ambazonian, culturally and politically aligned with Francophone elites. Chris Anu’s alignment with such figures gave him a unique role: he could speak to the diaspora in the language of resistance, while also navigating elite Francophone networks.
The Tassong–Nkea–Anu Triangle
Anu’s collaboration with Paul Tassong, Archbishop Andrew Nkea, and other Lebialem elites formed what observers have called a triangle of political, religious, and media influence.
Tassong provided political weight through his access to the Yaoundé establishment.
Archbishop Nkea, an influential church leader, lent moral and ecclesiastical authority.
Anu controlled a significant communication channel.
Supporters argued that this triangle could help open new strategic options. Critics feared it risked blurring the line between resistance and co-optation, creating channels through which regime narratives could be repackaged.
Expanding the Circle: Dr Metuge and Rev Asong
Two other figures reinforced this network:
Dr Metuge, an intellectual voice in the diaspora, began articulating positions that mirrored some of Anu’s critiques of the IG. His supporters saw him as a needed ideological counterweight; detractors saw him as offering intellectual cover for a splintering strategy.
Rev Asong, a respected religious figure, provided moral language that justified Anu’s moves as “reformist,” appealing to diaspora congregations and echoing ecclesiastical currents sympathetic to Archbishop Nkea.
Their involvement transformed ABS from a broadcaster into a media–religious–intellectual ecosystem, capable of shaping narratives inside and outside the movement.
Shadowy Links and “Mr. I Brought the Deal”
Anu’s growing role as a self-styled intermediary between Ambazonian factions and regime actors earned him both praise and suspicion. His contacts with Colonel Bamkoui, Cameroon’s military intelligence chief, and Issa Tchiroma, a well-known political operator, contributed to his evolving public image as a dealmaker.
The nickname “Mr. I Brought the Deal” originated from a dramatic internal episode. Chris Anu publicly accused President Dr Samuel Ikome Sako of entering into a secret financial deal with the Cameroon Development Corporation (CDC), alleging that millions of CFA francs had been transferred into Sako’s account.
According to IG insiders, the accusations were investigated and found to be baseless, but they sparked a brief internal crisis. Anu’s faction hoped the allegations would lead to Sako’s impeachment, clearing the way for him to take leadership of the Interim Government. When the claims collapsed under scrutiny, the impeachment effort failed decisively, and the episode became a political setback for Anu.
Ironically, the “I Brought the Deal” moniker — initially tied to his accusation — stuck to Anu himself. As his later backchannel contacts and factional maneuvering became more visible, critics began using the phrase to describe his own perceived role as a dealmaker, both internally and with external actors.
The Death of Field Marshal: A Turning Point
The death of Field Marshal Lekeaka Oliver in Lebialem became a flashpoint. ABS broke the news first, closely mirroring official Cameroonian military narratives. To some, this indicated privileged access to information. Others argued it was evidence of psychological operations designed to destabilize Ambazonian morale.
The ambiguity around this episode deepened mistrust of Anu’s media operation. Even former supporters began questioning whether personal strategy had overtaken national strategy.
The Washington “Embassy”: Symbolism or Parallel Power?
When Anu unilaterally declared the creation of an “Ambazonian Embassy” in Washington DC, he presented it as a bold step toward diplomatic visibility. But without the backing of the government in exile, it sowed confusion among allies and foreign observers. For supporters, it was a necessary act of initiative. For critics, it was a clear attempt to institutionalize his parallel leadership.
Legal and Symbolic Power Struggle
One of the most significant — and least publicly understood — phases of the rivalry between Chris Anu and the Sako-led Interim Government unfolded not on the battlefield or in the media, but in the legal and symbolic realm.
According to multiple IG officials and faction sources, Chris Anu, working in close coordination with allies including elements within the colonial administration of Prime Minister Chief Dion Ngute, initiated a legal filing to copyright the name “Interim Government” in the United States. This move, insiders allege, was designed to assert ownership over the movement’s public identity and give Anu the ability to legally challenge President Sako if he continued to use the branded name.
The move was widely interpreted within Ambazonian political circles as a strategic attempt to seize control of the movement through legal branding, rather than through internal democratic processes. It marked a shift from conventional factional rivalry to what one senior figure described as “a lawfare strategy — turning symbolism into a weapon.”
In a dramatic countermove, President Dr Samuel Ikome Sako responded by filing his own legal protections, not only for the “Government of the Federal Republic of Southern Cameroons, Ambazonia” but also for the House of Representatives and the movement’s updated emblems. These filings, which have been publicly documented in U.S. intellectual property records, effectively preempted Anu’s legal maneuver, securing the core identity of the government in exile.
Political analysts and legal observers within the diaspora widely described the episode as a decisive turning point. Instead of displacing Sako, Anu’s faction found itself structurally locked out of the movement’s official identity, operating as what many have since referred to as a “shadow cabinet.”
Several Ambazonian commentators argued that the Cameroonian government’s alleged strategy of supporting Anu’s move through indirect legal channels miscalculated the sophistication of Sako’s team, exposing what one described as “the gap between symbolic power plays and institutional strategy within the French–Biya intelligence structure.”
The incident underscored how legal instruments and branding rights had become a new battleground in the wider struggle for legitimacy and leadership within the Ambazonian movement.
Controversies and Resignation
In later years, Anu’s activities became the subject of persistent allegations within activist and diaspora networks. Unverified reports circulated of meetings with unidentified foreign operatives in Cambodia and Ghana, allegedly linked to attempts at informal diplomatic or intelligence contacts. No public evidence has emerged to independently verify these claims, but they contributed to growing unease among some of his former allies.
Further speculation surrounded an alleged incident at a U.S. border point, where activists claimed his computer and phone were seized by American agents. While these claims have circulated widely in diaspora forums, no public court records or official statements have confirmed them. Anu has not publicly addressed these specific allegations in detail.
What is confirmed is that Anu eventually resigned from the leadership of his IG faction, handing over power to Dr Epah, a former CPDM Senate contestant and Restoration Council member. This marked the end of his direct role as factional leader and effectively closed a chapter in his political trajectory within the movement.
Leadership Strikes Back: Sako Reclaims the Narrative
While Anu’s influence waned, the official leadership consolidated its footing.
President Dr Samuel Ikome Sako is widely credited — even by some critics — for stabilizing the movement during its most fractious phase. His approach combined moral authority, diplomatic outreach, and a pragmatic self-defense policy.
On the ground, Sako’s emphasis on community defense forces dealt serious blows to Cameroon’s once-formidable military, shattering the aura of invincibility that had defined Biya’s regime for decades. Analysts note that this weakening of the military’s image emboldened movements like the Tchiroma uprising, showing Francophone populations that the regime could be challenged and weakened.
At the same time, the Government Communications Secretariat strengthened its messaging capacity and strategic framing. Through consistent bilingual messaging and structured communication, the government in exile repositioned itself as the central voice of strategic clarity, resonating with both Ambazonian and Francophone Cameroonian audiences. This clarity overshadowed splinter groups and restored cohesion to the movement’s narrative space.
Conclusion: A Struggle Over Narratives and Power
The story of Chris Anu is not one of simple betrayal or heroism. It reflects the complex intersections of media influence, elite networks, legal maneuvering, allegations of foreign intrigue, and strategic vacuums that emerge in liberation movements. His rise and controversial alliances forced the movement to confront its internal vulnerabilities.
Equally, the assertive leadership of President Sako and the strengthened institutional communication apparatus show how movements can reassert authority through battlefield resilience and disciplined strategic messaging.
The lesson is clear: in liberation struggles, narratives are battlegrounds, and leadership must balance openness with vigilance. Media platforms can mobilize, but they can also fragment. Legal tools can entrench legitimacy or fuel division. Elite networks can offer leverage, but also risk infiltration. In the end, the survival of a liberation movement depends on its ability to combine strategic leadership with coherent, credible communication.
Ali Dan Ismael editor in chief on special assignment.
