Dear Abdulkarim Ali,
I write with respect for your courage, your clarity of thought, and the moral authority that comes from sacrifice. Your reflections on negotiation, incarceration, and political responsibility raise important questions that deserve calm and principled engagement.
We agree on a central truth: dialogue is indispensable, and the voices of incarcerated leaders must be heard, protected, and respected. Where our perspectives diverge is not on the value of prisoners’ contributions, but on the procedural locus of sovereign negotiation. History and international practice suggest that negotiations determining a people’s political future require representatives who possess full agency—freedom of movement, access to constituencies, and the ability to consult transparently and act without constraint. This is a matter of circumstance, not character.
It is also important to be precise about the nature of the conflict itself. The belligerents in the struggle over sovereignty are La République du Cameroun and the Federal Republic of Southern Cameroons (Ambazonia), presently led by Dr. Samuel Ikome Sako. Any credible dialogue or negotiation framework must therefore reflect this reality, both in representation and in process, if it is to carry legitimacy and produce durable outcomes.
Your caution in invoking historical analogies is well taken. The experience of South Africa—while rightly celebrated for ending formal apartheid—also reminds us that transitions can leave structural questions unresolved, particularly in the economic sphere. Acknowledging these lessons does not diminish the sacrifices of leaders who endured imprisonment; rather, it urges present movements to refine their processes to avoid known limitations.
Accordingly, a balanced pathway emerges: incarcerated leaders provide counsel, moral guidance, and strategic insight; free representatives conduct formal negotiations on behalf of the nation, working in constant consultation with those detained. This approach strengthens legitimacy, reduces the risk of agreements reached under duress, and preserves unity during a sensitive phase.
Our shared objective remains a just, inclusive, and durable resolution grounded in dignity, self-determination, and consent. In that spirit, your voice remains essential—heard, respected, and safeguarded—while the responsibilities of negotiation are borne by those with full political agency.
With respect and solidarity,
Ali Dan Ismael
Editor-in-Chief The Independentistnews
