History offers a clear lesson: boundaries imposed without consent rarely bring peace. More often, they deepen alienation, internationalise grievances, and strengthen claims of exclusion rather than unity. Sustainable nation-building depends not on rearranging administrative lines, but on trust, inclusion, and political courage.
By Blasius Awonsang The Independentistnews Contributor
A reform presented, a debate provoked
Yaoundé’s proposed administrative redistricting has been presented as a reform intended to improve governance, decentralisation, and service delivery. However, for many observers, the process raises serious political and ethical questions that extend well beyond administrative efficiency.
Rather than resolving long-standing governance challenges through dialogue, law, and popular consent, the state appears to be relying on structural reconfiguration as a substitute for political solutions—particularly in regions already affected by conflict and deep mistrust. This is not simply a technical reform. It risks becoming control through dilution.
Long-standing grievances and unresolved foundations
For decades, Cameroon has struggled to address foundational political grievances, especially those rooted in historical, linguistic, and territorial identity. Instead of engaging these concerns directly, the redistricting exercise appears focused on redrawing boundaries, multiplying administrative units, and fragmenting territories that have long functioned as coherent social and political spaces.
Critics argue that such an approach may: weaken collective identity, disrupt territorial continuity, create artificial minorities, shift local authority toward centrally appointed administrators, and reduce the visibility of unresolved political claims rather than addressing them.
When maps become instruments of power
In this sense, maps risk becoming instruments of power rather than tools of governance. Territory matters. Administrative boundaries shape political representation, resource allocation, security deployment, and historical memory. When boundaries are altered without broad participation, they can reshape political realities without resolving the underlying disputes that made reform necessary in the first place.
Timing, trust, and institutional confidence
The timing of this exercise raises further concern. Implementing major territorial changes amid ongoing conflict, political uncertainty, and restricted civic space may signal not confidence, but institutional fragility. Stable and legitimate states do not fear the identities of their people, nor do they rely on fragmentation to preserve unity.
Process without consent
Equally troubling is the manner in which the redistricting process is reportedly being conducted: without meaningful popular consent, without transparent or credible consultation, without clear constitutional grounding, and in regions where normal civic life is constrained by security conditions. Under such circumstances, administrative reform risks being perceived not as decentralisation, but as domination.
Lessons from history
History offers a clear lesson: boundaries imposed without consent rarely bring peace. More often, they deepen alienation, internationalise grievances, and strengthen claims of exclusion rather than unity. Sustainable nation-building depends not on rearranging administrative lines, but on trust, inclusion, and political courage. Beyond the map, Cameroon’s future stability will not be secured by maps alone. No administrative design can substitute for justice, dialogue, and genuine participation.
Blasius Awonsang
Leave feedback about this