It is a surprise to many that what started as a peaceful protest-march a few months back, with people carrying branches as a symbol of non-violence, has now escalated into a bloody confrontation, involving the military against unidentified civilians in the guise of solving what has now been largely acknowledged as the Anglophone problem.
Even if there had been those who could not recognize the magnitude of the grievances as an issue which touched on a majority of Anglophones, the said protest marches, especially the one on 1, October 2017, was loud enough to send across, the message that it was no longer a matter of a few disgruntled individuals working behind the scenes, but rather a collective concern for a people who did not merit to be christened terrorists, but a people pressing for their rights, and this called for an urgent redressing of the situation. This redressing however simply means that the crisis can only be resolved through a meaningful and inclusive dialogue, no more, no less.
However, despite calls for such a dialogue, with a special focus on the root causes of the crisis, not much seems to have been achieved in this direction. Government has instead decided to give a deaf ear to calls coming from several quarters, including political parties, religious bodies and even the international community, namely: the United Nations, the United States the United Kingdom, the European Union and the African Union.
On the side lines, the deployment of troops to the two Anglophone regions was seen as a move to protect the population, as government itself gave the impression. This of course was taken in good faith by the population and that, prior to the deployment, there had been no violence, especially in areas like Mamfe which has now become a battle ground during the past few weeks. It was after this deployment that the ensuing confrontation between the military and the population actually erupted with reported casualties on both sides.
Then, all of a sudden because of the death of some military personnel, the President on landing at the airport on his return from an AU meeting in Ivory Coast, opted to declare war against secessionists-cum terrorists. We can understand the rage that must have gripped the president, but we want to believe that the rage must have driven him a little too far into emotions by choosing the option of war as against the more dignifying option of dialogue.
The option of war only consolidates our humane belief that the lives of the military are as sacred as those of civilians. After all, all life matters and so the loss of some military personnel should not have thrown him off the track which the world believes he is willing to follow after all calls for a meaningful and inclusive dialogue.
From our assessment, just like the war against Boko Haram, the war that the president has just declared is a war against an unidentified enemy, unlike a conventional war where you can locate the enemy and target them. In this case it is the innocent civilians who, all along bear the whole brunt of the military wrath.
For this reason, while we have never called for the disintegration of the country, we can see very clearly that matters have reached this level only because government has refused to listen to all parties, who include unionists, federalists and separatists. The outcome of this intransigence will soon manifest in the social and economic life not only of the people of the two affected regions, but the country as a whole. That is, if the consequences of this crisis are not already playing on us.
This is however only one side of the horrors that the war option is likely to impose on the country as a whole. There is also on the trail, an impending humanitarian crisis which will not only be worst because it will add to the stress which the current refugee problem created by similar situations in neighbouring countries has forced us into. It is even more regrettable because we, who had been playing host to victims from neighbouring countries, will now become unwanted guests of some of the same neighbours, most of who have not yet recovered from the traumas of their own tragedies.
Ironically, while we may be gazing at the skies in search for a solution, within our parliament there is a situation not far from the semblance of a war of words. In both the senate and national assembly, there is vertical state of agitation between government and the opposition. The regrettable thing is that some individuals who the public acknowledges to be very responsible and in very high places in society, have adopted a tone of language which only promotes hate rather than the desired unity, love and oneness. Their utterances are not only provocative, but out rightly condemnable in the face of the situation in which the country finds itself today.
Our sincere wish and hope is that the president and his advisers should come down from their high horses and face the reality on the ground. For it is now obvious that the militarization of Manyu has by all considerations, shattered the little trust that the population had in government and has continually driving many people to the extremes. This is true in the sense that many people are now fleeing their abodes, not from ‘’terrorists’’ but from the military. We are certainly not moving forward towards a solution. Experience has shown that military options in crisis situation have hardly achieved lasting solutions.