Snapshot:How Far, 2011?

By Sam Nuvala Fonkem

Paul Biya's latest diplomatic offensive in France is quite remarkable for two reasons. He returned home punctually instead of globe trotting and gallivanting as he usually does whenever he has an official excuse to go abroad.

Secondly, the man mustered enough courage to face the media on thorny issues of national interest, even though he did not have much of a choice.The media coverage, especially his express interview on the esplanade of the Elysée Palace and the chat with a French TV channel were very instructive, even though I suspect the special reportage in the French rightist daily newspaper, Le Figaro, as usual, was a publicity stunt known in French journalism as "Publi-reportage".

Since November 1982, when Mr. Biya came to power by constitutional arrangement following the resignation of his predecessor. Ahmadou Ahidjo, most crucial pronouncements concerning the destiny of what has become known as "La République du Cameroun", today, have invariably been made in France.

Mr. Biya has never had the courage to confront or accost a pluralist national press. As a self-confessed pupil of French democratic institutions, he is inclined to feel more comfortable with France's establishment media when it comes to giving an account of his stewardship to his countrymen, than with the Cameroon media. So be it.

Biya's performance at "France 24" was quite remarkable in that the anchor man screened two televised questions from Cameroonians in the French Diaspora, a significant departure from neo-colonial tradition whereby the voices of dissidents-in-exile were routinely stifled. One is inclined to attribute this media revolution to French President, Nicholas Sarkorzy's personal discomfiture with contemporary Francophone African leadership that has been characterised by ineptitude, corruption and bad governance.

Biya didn't have much of choice with regard to his media encounters. In other words, his choices, besides facing the music, would have been considered inappropriate or ungentlemanly if he either walked out of the TV studio in anger (like his French counterpart in a CBS 60-minute programme), punched his interviewer or spat invectives at him.

He braved the media encounters under very tense and nervous conditions as you heard and felt his very deep and stressful breathing inspirations and aspirations. He managed to circumvent the question of his hidden agenda to prolong his tenure of office when his current and second seven-year term comes to an end in 2011: after a quarter century in office!

Biya artfully dodged the question whether or not he intended to run for office in 2011. In fact, all he said was he was not thinking about it now, which is not to say he will not run in 2011. When he pointed out that 2011 was still far away, you begin to wonder how far it is. You ask yourself how deep is the ocean? How high is the sky? How far is far? Time is tricky, intangible, inelastic and immeasurable. Time is relative.

The length of time from now till 2011 could relatively be equated to length of time from 1982 to 2007. In trying to give the impression that the crucial 2011 was too far off to be of major concern to Cameroonians today, Mr. Biya was merely confirming that his leadership lacks, and has always lacked, vision and purpose other than a mindless, callous and cannibalistic perpetuation of personal rule.

He made some rather inaccurate statements since it is not polite to say he lied, in his French interviews with regard to his promise made on Radio Monte Carlo in the very early 1990's to meet the Cameroon opposition. He has never done so. He has yet to do so. He claimed, and for the first time in history, called Fru Ndi by name, that the latter boycotted a scheduled meeting with him. Not true. He claimed his latest government is broad-based.

That is inaccurate. He claimed his urgent priorities are fighting corruption and upgrading the standard of living of Cameroonians. That again is not evident.Interestingly, Mr. Biya also declared he had no reservations if the remains of his predecessor who died in exile and was buried in Dakar in 1989, were to be repatriated if the deceased family so wished.

One wonders how the repatriation of a deceased head of state could solely depend on the wish of his family. Biya knows better than anyone else that the day Ahmadou Ahidjo's remains touch the soil of Cameroon would spell doomsday for him and the ruling oligarchy.

If Cameroonians have anything significant to look forward to before 2011, it should be the return of Ahidjo's bones to Mr. Biya and his henchmen for nearly two decades.

Comments

[londoner]

Thank you Mr. Fonkem,

Your analyses are always so precise:

Can you please analyse this statement of Biya, which I think is tantamount to treason in the Cameroon context:

"nous assistons à l’impérialisme linguistique de certaines langues, il n’est pas inutile de préserver un espace où l’on parle français"

[red flag]

fonkem,
just as all others southern cameroonians who havd sold their souls to their slave master,
WHY WAS THE QUESTION OF INDEPENDENCE
FOR SOUTHERN CAMEROONS NOT FIRED AT PAUL BIYA, AHIDJO IS DEAD, HE DEAD, NOT IMPORTANT, WHATS IMPORTANT IS THE LIFES OF 7M ENGLISH-CULTURED SOUTHERN CAMEROONINANS. BEEING OPPRESSED BY PAUL BIYA, ISNT THIS A CRIME? WHY IS IT UNDER
THE RADAR TO SPEAK OUT IN INTERNATIONAL

FORUM, I BET YOU PEOPLE COULD HAVE BEEN SHOUTING ALL OVET THE WORLD, FREE SOUTHERN CAMEROONS, FREE SOUTHERN CAMEROONS, IF THIS COLONIALIZATION WAS AN ACT OF THE WHITE MAN.