By Francis Fultang-Positive Peace Ambassador
When Prime Minister Chief Dr. Joseph Dion Ngute arrived in Bamenda on October 15 to launch the Community Peace Initiative, he rekindled hopes for an end to nearly a decade of violence in Cameroon’s Northwest and Southwest Regions. But beyond the official speeches and renewed promises, one fundamental question remains: Can another dialogue initiative succeed without the meaningful participation of those directly involved in sustaining the conflict?
Since 2016, the two English-speaking regions have been engulfed in turmoil arising from grievances relating to identity, marginalization, governance, and the administration of the common law and educational systems. What began as protests by lawyers and teachers escalated into an armed conflict with devastating consequences for human lives, education, livelihoods and development.
In October 2019, Government convened the
Major National Dialogue in Yaoundé, resulting in important resolutions,
including Special Status for the two regions, the establishment of the Office
of the Public Independent Conciliator and the Disarmament, Demobilization and
Reintegration (DDR) programme. Yet the conflict persisted.
For many observers, the fundamental
weakness of the dialogue was its limited inclusiveness. Separatist leaders and
other influential actors capable of engaging the armed groups were not
meaningfully represented. Questions were also raised about the openness of the
agenda and allegations that some resolutions had been predetermined. Although
contested, these concerns contributed to doubts about the credibility of the
process.
Unfortunately, similar concerns are
emerging around the new Community Peace Initiative, following dialogues in Buea
and Bamenda. While community participation is essential, the absence of
principal conflict actors raises serious questions about the initiative's
capacity to deliver a negotiated settlement. The Peace and Development Pillar
of the North West Regional Assembly must draw lessons from this.
COMMUNITY
DIALOGUE MUST LEAD TO MEANINGFUL NEGOTIATIONS
Traditional rulers, religious leaders,
women, youths, teachers, civil society organizations, business communities and
displaced persons all have indispensable roles in peace-building. However,
community consultations alone cannot end an armed conflict whose principal
actors remain outside the process. One cannot negotiate an end to a war with
only those who want the war to end while excluding those who continue to fight
it.
Engaging armed actors does not mean legitimizing
violence or abandoning the rule of law. It means recognizing the realities of
conflict resolution. The objective must be to stop the violence, protect
civilians and create conditions for sustainable peace. Where direct
participation is difficult, credible intermediaries and facilitators should be
considered.
MILITARY MIGHT ALONE CANNOT DELIVER PEACE
After almost ten years of conflict, it
should be evident that military operations alone cannot resolve deep-rooted
political, institutional and social grievances. Security measures may be
necessary to protect lives, but sustainable peace requires dialogue,
reconciliation, justice and political engagement.
Peace is more than the absence of gunfire.
It is when children can attend school safely, farmers can return to their
fields, businesses can operate without fear and displaced families can rebuild
their lives.
Ultimately, the parties must find the
courage to sit around a negotiating table, look one another in the face and
address the difficult issues that have divided the country for a decade.
FIVE
CONDITIONS FOR SUCCESS
For the Community Peace Initiative to
avoid becoming another missed opportunity, five conditions are essential.
First, inclusiveness must be genuine, with
credible channels for engaging all relevant conflict stakeholders.
Second, the agenda must be open and
unrestricted, allowing frank discussions on identity issues, governance, decentralization,
Special Status, justice including restorative justice, education, security and
accountability.
Third, transparency and accountability
must guide the process, with clear mechanisms for translating recommendations
into action.
Fourth, ordinary citizens, particularly
women, youths, victims and displaced persons, must have meaningful
representation.
Finally, community dialogues must connect
to a broader negotiating framework capable of addressing issues beyond local
administrative structures to the Regional Capitals and to the National Capital.
THE
TIME FOR ACTION IS NOW
The consequences of continued conflict are
too grave to contemplate. Every additional year brings further suffering,
destroys opportunities and undermines the development prospects of the two
regions. Peace in the Northwest and Southwest Regions is not merely a regional
security concern; it is a national development imperative.
All is not lost. Prime Minister Chief
Doctor Dion Ngute's initiative, which is already cascading from regional to
divisional and sub-divisional levels, offers another opportunity to correct the
shortcomings of previous approaches.
But its success must be measured not by
the number of meetings held or speeches delivered, but by tangible progress
towards ending violence and restoring normal life.
The people want more than promises. They
want peace, security, dignity and the opportunity to rebuild their future.
The choice is clear: genuine inclusiveness
and meaningful negotiations, or another missed opportunity. The Prime
Minister's initiative must not become another dialogue about peace without a
pathway to peace. The time for effective peace-building is now.
0 Comments