News Analysis:Fru Ndi - The Tsvangirai That Never Was

By Peterkins Manyong

Only a fool in his folly tries to turn the wheel on which he turns - TS Eliot.

These often quoted words from the play "Murder In The Cathedral" aptly describes what is happening in Africa's democracy where the wheel of change is turned by external influence.  The power sharing deal signed Monday, September 15, by Zimbabwean President, Robert Mugabe and Opposition (MDC) leader, Morgan Tsvangirai, is a perfect illustration of this tele-guided political influence.

Even after the signing, the European Union, one of those groups that dictated it, maintained the economic sanctions it had since imposed on Zimbabwe.When we consider that Zimbabwe is an oil producing nation, the interest shown in its politics  by Western nations can be explained by one thing- the fact that its leader, Robert Mugabe, has been a thorn in the flesh of these countries, the US and Britain in particular.

This hard stance against Zimbabwe contrasts sharply with the ambivalence and double talk that characterise Western attitude to Cameroon's democracy where the central opposition figure since 1990 is John Fru Ndi, an Anglophone. One would expect that countries which profess commitment to the principles of democracy and respect for human rights should be vehement in condemning their violation anywhere.

But, with Cameroon it has been equivocation all the way.  In 1992, western diplomats condoned the theft of Fru Ndi's victory and his house arrest that was accompanied by the placing of the Northwest, his Province of origin, under a state of emergency.This was after the US Embassy had confirmed Fru Ndi's victory over Biya in the Presidential Elections. No economic sanctions were imposed on Cameroon as has been the case with Zimbabwe.

The Commonwealth has always handled Biya with kid gloves even when it has concrete evidence of massively rigged elections and refusal to create a truly independent election monitoring organ.

Fru Ndi, unlike Tsvangirai, has therefore never enjoyed the patronage of Western nations.  Had Biya and his cohorts been diplomatic in their approach, that could justify the inertia of the international community. The Biya Regime has often been frontal on its approach each time these powers mutter unpleasant words against its election rigging ventures.

In 1992, Kontchou Koumegni, Biya's Minister of Communication, spat in the face of the almighty CIA accusing this renowned body of spying on the Biya Regime and attempting to destabilise Cameroon. US Ambassador, Frances Cooke received from Biya's supporters the worst insults that can be hurled on a woman when she criticised the Supreme Court for the incumbent's swearing in. 

No sanctions were contemplated, let alone announced against Biya. Not even a hint let alone a threat to withdraw the US Ambassador from Cameroon.In 2007, three western missions, the US, British and Dutch Embassies described the July 22 polls as a missed opportunity by the Biya regime to continue building confidence in the democratic process.

Far from being apologetic, Jean Marie Atangana Mebara, then Minister for External Relations, gave the diplomatic missions a dressing down. Those who attributed the dismissal of Mebara soon after to the offensive statement, changed their minds when Biya personally took on the diplomatic missions. He challenged them to point out any advanced nation where electoral flaws had never been committed.

An unmistakable jibe at the US because of the electoral flaws in Florida during the voting that brought George Bush Jr. to power.Biya equally snubbed   the call by Janet Garvey, who recommended a national consensus before the Constitution could be amended. When this analyst asked Janet Garvey during a press conference in Bamenda why democracy  was in full bloom in her country and not in other countries where Americans wielded  influence, she said the US can ensure democracy at home because its citizens controlled the process. 

But she didn't explain why her country had imposed democracy in Iraq and in Afghanistan, but not in Cameroon.It should, however, be said in fairness to the US and her western allies that their conduct in each country are determined not only by the prevailing political situations there, but also by the characters of the leading opposition figures there.

Fru Ndi And Tsvangirai Compared

John Fru Ndi was already a household name in Cameroon and most of Africa in 1990 long before Morgan Tsvangirai became a familiar name in the media.

Tsvangirai, like Fru Ndi, has been operating on a rough terrain where killings', maiming arrests and torture of regime opponents are rife.In 1996, a convoy among which was Fru Ndi's car, came under attack by police using water cannons. The SDF chairman managed to escape and seek refuge at the Dutch Embassy in Yaounde.

On the eve of the Presidential Elections in Zimbabwe last June, Tsvangirai also sought refuge at the Dutch Embassy in Harare for what he described as threats to his life. The Biya Regime never bothered to defend themselves in the face of press attacks. Mugabe's henchmen demonstrated more diplomatic tact by denying any attempt on Tsvangirai's life.

Tsvangirai beat the incumbent in the first round of the Presidential Elections in Zimbabwe this year, just as Fru Ndi did to Biya in 1992.In terms of political prudence, the superiority must, with some hesitation, be given to Tsvangirai who is more constant. When Tsvangirai takes a position he stands by it.

Fru Ndi is constant in his opposition to the Biya Regime, but sometimes inconsistent in his methods perhaps because he easily gets misled by loyal political ignorance.  For instance, in 1992 he declared "No good laws, no elections. In the same year; he took part in the Presidential elections without any modification of the electoral code.

The Parliamentary session that saw the imposition of an amended Constitution extending Biya's mandate was attended by all SDF MPs on the instruction of  the same Fru Ndi who had announced a nationwide demonstration against the amendment of the Constitution.

Tsvangirai boycotted the rerun of the Presidential Elections in Zimbabwe when violence became unbearable, but maintained an unbending stand.In terms of speech, Fru Ndi is the better orator, but Tsvangirai is the more astute politician. Africans admire Fru Ndi, but they adore Tsvangirai.

Comments

[Essono]

No way,no how,the West shall never bring Change to our societies.How can we learn this,how can the negro ever understand this?CHANGE SHALL ONLY COME THROUGH THE INVISIBLE WILL OF A PEOPLE,RESOLVED TO END TYRANNY.Sanctions have never ushered in change anywhere on the continent.Libya,Apartheid South Africa,Zimbabwe etc.And even when change did come to some of these c'ntries,it was a direct consequence of the people's determination to cast off oppression and not on Western penalties per se.

This heavy reliance on the West as a panacea for our political woes in Africa,isn't only a tacit acknowledgment of our powxerlessness,but it might be a frightful indicator that a whole generation(on whose shoulders the salvation of this continent reposes) might have indeed given uop on the 'Soul of Africa'.I fear this shouldn't be the case.Bc if it is,then we are lost.

[Essono]

Sanctions have almost always been a catalyst for tyrants to squeeze their grip on power and to unleash an orgie of violence on their people.Zimbabwe is still fresh in our minds.Cameroon doesn't need sanctions for Biya to go and the West has different measures for different peoples.Of what importance is this c'ntry important to the US or UK,for these to impose penalties on her? Do we have 'white settlers' whose lands have been expropriated like in Zimbabwe? Haven't we realised that sanctions are often tied to the degree of importance of that c'ntry to the West and that these penalties have racial connotations?

Or don't we know that the West's "benevolent sanctions" are often metted out on rebellious and unruly 'head boys' who dare 'curse the hand that fed them'?

[Essono]

The political terrains in Zimbabwe and Cameroon are not the same and their colonial past have influenced the evolution of the political opposition in different ways.In Cameroon,NJFN has made alot of concessions and compromises since the advent of multipartism.We may accuse him of this or that,but I hold that whatever decisions were taken was for the good of the people.Tsvangirai isn't as constant as Peterkins Manyong tries to portray.He has had his own share of 'flip flops' just within the short time he has been at the helm of the opposition as compared to Fru Ndi.

Like when he publicly called for a second round in the last Presidentials and then turned around and boycotted the elections despite popular calls within the MDC not to boycott and with many who called the boycot a 'betrayal' to those who died during the violence.

And was that being 'unbending' when he initially refused the terms of the power sharing deal which kept much power in Mugabe's hands and then to turn around and later on accept it? When even MDC Speaker of Parliament and other Legislators were at odds with the deal?

Whatever,NJFN has a choice place in the hearts of many on the continent.And when Cameroon had its own share of political instability in the early '90's,and Zim was relatively peaceful,the rest of the world heard more ab't Zim than Cameroon.Perhaps,it can rightly said that Tsvangirai's cause has benefitted from the expropriation of 'White lands' and gained the support of the West.Had we had such a scenario,maybe the situation would've been different in Cameroon.

BTW,where are those who claim that NJFN is unschooled or is an 'illiterate',they should check out on Tsvangiraai's education.Atleast,our NJFN had a bookshop where he could from time to time read books.

SDF POWER TO THE PEOPLE

[Julius]

The problem with failing democracy is not the actors but the institutions that put the actors in place. Don't try to change people, instead change the institutions, and that is only possible, according to vote sizers, with VOTE SIZING democratic reform.

Think about this: "The more you earn, the less your vote counts and vice versa". This is what we think should replace the "1-person 1-vote" model which is today not only oudated, but also paves the way for big money to take over the decision making.

[Radicalbrother]

In the power sharing deal in Zimbabwe, the opposititon leader is having direct control over the police where as Mugabe is directly in charge of the armed forces.
He is the head of council i.e decision body of 31 members with 15 ZANU-PF and 16 MDC with Mugabe as the chairman.
Which party is now the ruling party? Why are we constantly being deceived? Who forced who into this peace deal and why?
you mean you win your election and someone will force you to share power with?
AFRICA WAKE UP.