“National Unity In Cameroon: Myth Or Reality”

Professor Verkijika Fanso has argued that national unity in Cameroon is partially a reality and overwhelmingly a myth.

National unity, according to him, refers to a situation in which members of a nation generally have the same belief for their country and for each other, while a myth or mythical situation is a belief about something that is doubtful and lacks reality.

Factors that portray the existence of national unity in Cameroon include, among others, the name of the country, football and the abundance of food, while those that show the absence of national unity include, among others, the absence of good roads, the biased use of the official languages, questionable admissions into Anglo-Saxon institutions of higher learning, and the failure to take the interests of one of the communities into consideration in nation building.

In the quest to know whether national unity in Cameroon is a myth or a reality, Fanso explains that the term, myth or mythical, is applied to a story or a thing that has a fictitious origin but that many believe is correct whereas it lacks reality and truth. Real or reality, on the other hand, refers to something that exists and is true, not something that people only imagine exists and think is true.

“As I understand it, this question concerns the unity of members of the two former colonial states that came together in 1961 to form the Federal Republic of Cameroon, now simply Republic of Cameroon, not the more than 240 ethnic or traditional units in the country that did not come into the union through any form of constitutional consultation and do not claim such identity. I am going to argue that national unity in Cameroon is partially a reality and overwhelmingly a myth”, he reiterated.

Prof. Fanso goes on to say that there are three things that seem to portray Cameroon’s national unity as a reality, neither of which has been put in place or helped by the regimes that have run the affairs of the country since unification in 1961. The three things, according to him are: the name Cameroon, the game of football and the abundance of food.

First of all, Anglophone and Francophone nationalisms in Cameroon emerged from the time of the Anglo-French partition of former German Kamerun in 1916, rooted in memories of that country at the time and being a member of it. Belonging to Kamerun and being a Kamerunian, together with traditions of years of hardships under the Germans, took on a nationalist character in both territories during the periods of British and French administrations.

The second thing that visibly portrays Cameroon’s national unity is the game of football. There are hardly any Cameroonians who do not feel emotionally attached or who can be said to be less concerned when the national team is involved in a football game. The whole country rises like one person and is full of joy when victory is won and sadness when defeat is the outcome.

The third thing that portrays national unity in Cameroon is the availability of food, to which I add alcoholic beverages and the market place. No one can underestimate the contribution by the availability of food and alcoholic drink to the sense of belonging in the country. Much of our traditional dishes are commonly shared across ethnic, linguistic and religious divides.

Cassava, maize, beans, plantain and cocoyam in various forms are common in every household meal. Corn fufu and vegetable and kahtikahti, eru, ndole and achu are eaten by people from different backgrounds. And there is always an alcoholic drink, local or modern, after the meal. There is also always in the neighbourhood a market place where the foodstuff and the drink are bought, sold or shared. No one can ever be a stranger in any traditional market place in Cameroon.

But this contribution of the availability of food and local market to national unity is very much threatened by the absence of farm-to-market roads, which are the responsibility of the Government. On the side of the argument that national unity is a myth, there are many important things that, according to Fanso, should have been done since unification to develop the spirit of national unity, which Cameroon failed to do. “I will point out a few”:

The first is the building of national roads to link up peoples and regions and bring development. Roads that could encourage Cameroonians to travel and know their country, strengthen relationships and promote the nation’s sense of oneness were totally neglected, especially in the Anglophone part of the country. For fifty years and more no one could travel freely and safely in the old West Cameroon from Victoria or Tiko in the Southwest through Kumba and Mamfe to Bamenda in the Northwest.

Another neglected factor that could build or reinforce bonds of national unity has been the development of a national language or languages. Ironically, English and French have never at any time during the fifty years and more of unification received equal treatment as official languages. This deliberate attempt to impose French as the only authentic language instead of accepting the two as equal has embittered every Anglophone so much that any claim to the existence of national unity in the country is false.

“The unequal treatment of English and French has generally been regarded as neglect of the interests of former Southern/West Cameroonians and an attempt at cultural assimilation. The outcome has been rivalry and threat of disintegration rather than integration and national unity”, Fanso states. Public educational institutions generally have been used to divide rather than to develop the spirit of integration and national unity in the country. This is particularly true when appointments into positions of responsibility in such institutions are made.

Take the case of the University of Buea; French-speaking students who do not meet the language (English) requirement for admission now parade the corridors of the so-called Anglo-Saxon universities in their numbers, while Anglophone students who have studied in English but do not have O/L in that subject are denied admission. No wonder French, rather than English, is fast becoming the dominant language in the two universities.

Prof. Fanso concludes that, “Any Government that wants to unite its people who have come together from disparate political and cultural backgrounds cannot afford to totally ignore the interests of one group and then continue to think that unity exists”.

Since unification, the interests of the Anglophone community concerning the country have generally been ignored. National unity can only be encouraged and promoted by taking into consideration the interests of the component parts. But when the views of one are imposed on the other in an effort to assimilate, resistance is certain and national unity becomes farfetched.