Anglophone Crisis: Is Reconstruction possible with guns still talking?

Last December 8, Government forces descended on Mbengwi-Bamenda road burning houses and killing civilians. Eyewitness accounts said some of the eight persons killed were burnt alive. The spokesperson of the Ministry of Defense confirmed the operation of the forces, saying they were reacting to an attack on them by separatist fighters, who used improvised explosive device, IED, killing soldiers. 

This most recent incident came after a similar one last November in Naka, a locality in Bali, in Mezam Division, where government forces burned down buildings. This followed the razing of houses in Kikaikom Village in Bui Division earlier on October 7 by the military.  

Happening at a time when Government is planning to implement the Presidential Plan for Reconstruction and Development of the Northwest & Southwest regions, (PPRD-NW/ SW), badly hit by Anglophone Crisis, it is as if they are burning the villages so that they can be reconstructed better. However, the reconstruction programme is yet to commence.  

But given that Government carried out a census of the villages and infrastructures destroyed and adopted a budget for the PPRR, the budget might not suffice to also take care of the freshly destroyed structures, because, they were not previewed when the budget was drawn.  

One of the recommendations of the Major National Dialogue convened by President Paul Biya in 2019 prescribed a minimum investment of FCFA 3,500 billion for the reconstruction of the Northwest and Southwest Regions ravaged by the Anglophone Crisis. 

The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), is ready to partner with Government, in the former’s programme known as the “Recovery, Reconstruction and Development of the Northwest and Southwest Regions of Cameroon.” The UNDP programed seeks to: “Strengthen social cohesion; rehabilitate essential infrastructure; revitalize the local economy.”  

But these lofty goals cannot be achieved if the guns are still smoking. Last year, when the Coordinator of the PPRR and Vice, respectively Paul Tasong and Donatus Njong, visited Buea for consultation, they said the programme was going to begin soon. It hasn’t yet, probably because of the insecurity that is still reigning.  

Asked during the consultation last year how they were going to carry on the reconstruction when the belligerent parties were not balking and the guns were still talking, the coordinators promised to begin with the “green zones” and to gradually spread into the other areas. By green zones they meant areas where there was relative security and calm.  

But the areas that are relatively secure and calm are the urban centres, where little or no destruction has taken place. Destruction has been carried out in rural areas and the hinterlands, where the safety of reconstruction workers may not be guaranteed as they, at the least, could stop stray bullets when the warring parties engage their regular gun battles.  

The sporadic detonation of improvised electronic devises, IEDs,in towns and public places, is turning green zones into red zones.  

At the time of penning this article (November 24) there was a deadly attack on a school in Ekondo-Titi in Ndian Division of the Southwest Region by gunmen, which left four children and a teacher dead. This means the war is still raging. Can reconstruction be taking place in that area which is one of the hardest-hit in the Anglophone Crisis?  

Reconstruction can only take place when the guns have been silenced. In a conflict situation, reconstruction is the last stage in the peace building process. 

Peace building experts say, conventionally, the process starts with amnesty, ceasefire, laying down of arms, withdrawal of fighters from the front, dialogue, negotiations, reconciliation, reconstruction and rehabilitation. 

But President Paul Biya chose to start with reconstruction. Conflict resolution and peace-building experts have likened his decision to “beginning to build a house from the roof, or climbing a tree from the top.” 

Conflict Resolution by Downing Arms First 

When the armed conflict in Sierra Leone started in March 1991, the Sierra Leonean government preferred the “Arms for Development Initiative” developed by the United Nations Development Programme, UNDP.  

While 42,300 weapons were surrendered by 72,500 ex-combatants by 2002, the success of the amnesty exchange was enhanced by a community-led approach in which the community, after broad consultations, chose the development project to be funded in the community.  

The Niger Delta Region of Nigeria was for more than two decades engaged in a resource (oil) conflict. But on 25 June 2009, the then President, Umaru Yar’Adua signed an amnesty deal which stated that militants who freely surrendered their arms within the 60-day amnesty period would not be prosecuted for crimes they had committed in the course of disrupting the Nigerian oil industry.  

In return for the acceptance of the amnesty, the Federal government pledged its commitment to instituting programmes that would rehabilitate and reintegrate ex-militants. The amnesty saw over 15,000 militants surrender their weapons by the deadline date; 13,000 ex-militants were deployed for local and foreign training, skills acquisition and other formal education, while more than 2,500 ex-militants were admitted to higher institutions of learning in various spheres of knowledge.  

However, the examples of Sierra Leone and Nigeria cited here (from a write-up by Mwalimu George Ngwane) are just for the credit of amnesty. There were wars of different kinds from the conflict in Anglophone Cameroon where the Ambazonia fighters argue that it has gone past the Rubicon and want their own country.