When a regime ignores advice, tightens civic space, mismanages succession, and then insists it is “indispensable,” it’s like a driver removing the brakes and boasting that the car is “too important to crash.” The road does not negotiate with pride.
By AKO AYA The Independentistnews contributor
Myth #1: “Cameroon guarantees Gulf of Guinea security”
Reality: Maritime security in the Gulf of Guinea improved mainly through regional frameworks and multinational coordination, not because any single state is irreplaceable.
– The Gulf of Guinea’s main cooperative architecture is regional: the Yaoundé Code of Conduct (2013), built with IMO support and signed by 25 West and Central African states. It’s explicitly a collective security approach.
– Piracy incidents in the Gulf of Guinea did decline sharply after 2020, but the trend reflects broader regional measures and industry adaptation—not proof that Cameroon is “the” guarantor. The ICC-IMB’s 2024 data shows incidents are “relatively lower,” but still dangerous for crews.
– What Ako-Aya would say: If the “roof” stopped leaking after the whole neighborhood fixed the drainage, don’t crown one homeowner as “Lord of the Rain.”
Myth #2: “If instability rises, the U.S. will only prop up Yaoundé”
Reality: The United States’ default preference is stability, yes—but Washington’s policy toolset is not a blank check for any regime, especially when governance failures are the fuel source of insecurity.
A U.S. Congressional Research Service brief on Cameroon highlights strategic location and ports (Douala, Kribi) while also emphasizing that stability and potential are hindered by serious political, security, and governance challenges. That is not a “forever endorsement”; it is a warning label.
And on human rights and governance, U.S. reporting has documented persistent concerns.
Translation: America doesn’t “marry” a state; it leases cooperation—renewable only if the asset remains useful.
Myth #3: “Partition is impossible because the world rejects violence”
Reality: This is a rhetorical move, not an argument. It tries to settle a political question by branding one side with a single label.
International practice is messier than slogans. The world has recognized states born from wars; it has also refused recognition to some entities and later changed course when facts, diplomacy, and governance realities shifted. The determining factors tend to be strategic costs, legitimacy narratives, control of territory, and diplomatic alignment—not poetry about “no scenario.”
If Yaoundé’s approach keeps producing protracted conflict and a governance crisis, outsiders will prioritize containment, sea-lane security, and influence competition—which can mean pressure for negotiated outcomes that the regime once considered unthinkable.
Myth #4: “Cameroon’s state capacity is strong and its army is among the most effective”
Reality: The “strong state” claim collides with reputable indicators and ongoing conflict burdens.
– Freedom House rates Cameroon “Not Free” (15/100)—a blunt assessment of civic space, political rights, and civil liberties.
-Transparency International lists Cameroon at 26/100 on CPI (rank 140/180), reflecting entrenched corruption risks—exactly the kind that weakens state performance over time.
– On fragility, the Fragile States Index data places Cameroon in a high-fragility band (FSI score in the mid-90s). Whether one loves or hates such indices, they summarize the same structural stresses investors, diplomats, and militaries watch closely.
– Bottom line: A state can have brave soldiers and still be strategically brittle if governance is collapsing, legitimacy is eroding, and elite competition is poisoning succession.
The author’s biggest omission:
Yaoundé is diversifying away from Western influenceNdzenyuy argues the West will always preserve Cameroon as-is. But he ignores the obvious: Yaoundé itself is hedging.
Cameroon ratified a military cooperation agreement with Russia (signed April 12, 2022; ratified by decree at the end of 2023). That’s not speculation; it’s on Cameroon’s official government site.
Meanwhile, Russia is openly expanding “sensitive” security ties across Africa, including through restructured paramilitary presence (Africa Corps).
And France’s regional influence has been under pressure, with a visible drawdown/withdrawal trend across parts of West and Central Africa and growing competition from Moscow and Beijing.
Geopolitical implication:
If Yaoundé drifts further into alternative security partnerships while remaining politically closed, it becomes less “indispensable” to Western strategy—not more.
“Biya departure anxiety” is not a footnote—it’s the main plot
Cameroon’s succession problem is now a mainstream strategic concern. Chatham House and Reuters have both highlighted the looming transition risk around President Paul Biya and the political stability implications.
A brittle succession + multiple security theaters + entrenched corruption is how states slip from “stable partner” into “permanent headache.”
So what is the strategic reality Ndzenyuy is missing?
The Gulf of Guinea isn’t secured by Cameroon—it’s secured by access Ports, logistics, sea-lane monitoring, and cooperative agreements are what matter. If Yaoundé becomes unreliable, external actors look for alternative access points and new security anchors. That’s why it’s strategically naïve to declare “no scenario.” In geopolitics, scenarios are created by collapse, misrule, and misalignment.
Ambazonia’s value proposition (when argued responsibly)
From the Ambazonian point of view, the argument is not “divide Cameroon for fun.” It is:
– A protracted internal war is already undermining governance and legitimacy.
– Western interests (maritime security, trade routes, counter-extremism) require reliable partners, not permanent crisis.
– If Yaoundé’s model remains closed, captured, and externally drifting, then new political arrangements (including negotiated separation models or internationally supervised transitions) become thinkable—because stability becomes thinkable only through change.
(That is the geopolitical truth: stability is an outcome, not a slogan.)
A disciplined closing note
When a regime ignores advice, tightens civic space, mismanages succession, and then insists it is “indispensable,” it’s like a driver removing the brakes and boasting that the car is “too important to crash.” The road does not negotiate with pride.
AKO AYA
