A Government of National Unity – Part III: The Key to Resolving the Anglophone Crisis in Cameroon?

By Peter Mbile*

The Anglophone Crisis in Cameroon, now in its ninth year, has exacted a heavy toll on lives, livelihoods, and national stability. While there is growing recognition that a Government of National Unity (GNU) can help resolve broader social tensions, its potential role in ending the Anglophone Crisis remains underappreciated. The question arises: can Cameroon take a bold step towards inclusivity by establishing a GNU that accommodates all political perspectives, including Anglophone separatists and other extreme factions? If so, what assurances and strategies would be necessary to make such an approach viable?

Understanding the Concept of a Government of National Unity

A Government of National Unity is a power-sharing arrangement where multiple political forces, often including opposition and former adversaries, collaborate to govern a nation. Historically, this approach has been instrumental in post-conflict reconciliation efforts worldwide, as seen in South Africa after apartheid and in Kenya following the 2007-2008 electoral crisis during which hundreds perished. Such governments foster national dialogue, rebuild trust, and create frameworks for lasting peace.

The Anglophone Crisis and the Absence of a Political Wing for today’s separatists

One of the greatest challenges in resolving the Anglophone Crisis is the absence of a structured political wing representing the separatists – for obvious reasons. Unlike conflicts where armed groups transition into political entities—such as Sinn Féin in Northern Ireland—the Anglophone separatist movement remains fragmented, lacking a central political leadership that can negotiate with the government. This makes it difficult to identify credible representatives who can articulate and especially moderate the movement’s demands within a GNU.

Imagining the formation of a political arm, whether at home or abroad, is a complex challenge in Cameroon’s current political climate and bitter pill to swallow. The government’s legitimate and understandable intolerance of controversial speech further raises the stakes on such a possibility and therefore complicates the situation. However, fostering a legitimate political avenue for separatists to engage in dialogue may be the truly bold step necessary to steer the country away from continued conflict and toward meaningful consultations and disarmament and peace.

Lessons from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Other Cases

Cameroon can learn from ongoing discussions towards negotiations in the DRC, where the government is considering, under extreme duress to engage with the M23/AFC Alliance to seek a long-term, peaceful resolution to their conflict. While the situation is not identical, it demonstrates the potential and appeal of consultations and dialogue as a political tool for resolving intractable and prolonged conflict. Similarly, South Africa’s transition from apartheid to democracy through dialogue—incorporating even those with very extreme political views—offers a compelling case study.

If Cameroon is to take a similar bold approach, it must first enable conditions that allow for consultations, considering that whatever negotiations would follow, would happen within the framework of a GNU. Although, this may seem like rewarding citizens who picked up arms against a State, it may be like a small sacrifice for the greater good. This may include granting former separatists political space, ensuring their security during talks, and continuing in the confidence building measures that demonstrate a commitment to genuine national reconciliation.

The Role of a Government of National Unity in Resolving the Anglophone Crisis

A GNU in Cameroon could address the Anglophone Crisis by:

• Intentionally including representatives with differing viewpoints: deliberately ensuring fair representation of even controversial Anglophone Elite within the government, will ensure that the force of argument has a place around the table and doesn’t need to do so from the bush – this way grievances or perceptions of marginalization will be addressed head-on both by loyalists, moderates and extremists, together.

• Reforming the Political System: Ongoing decentralization would have greater legitimacy and would grow governance structures that truly empower all actors including local communities who ae easily swayed by varying viewpoints, including extreme ones.

• Creating truth and reconciliation commissions at local levels: Providing room for an organic local platform for victims and perpetrators to address past grievances, perceived injustices; mediated by the emerging traditional authorities – mainly led by youth, similar to Rwanda and South African model would provide an avenue for local reconciliation.

• Granting amnesty for purely ideological political prisoners: Encouraging trust-building by releasing individuals imprisoned for non-violent, ideological political activism, though a difficult pill to swallow may represent a bold step in the right direction. 

• Continued economic reconstruction of the crisis regions: a return to peace would see an immediate expansion of economic activities, stronger and more resolute than anything else coming from outside. However, prioritizing investments in infrastructure, education, and healthcare in the affected regions will further enable and accelerate reconstruction, create employment and help rebuild trust and social stability.

Assurances needed for Government and opposition to embrace a GNU

For the Cameroonian government to accept a GNU, there must be guarantees that such an arrangement will not compromise national security, stability or state authority. Potential assurances include:

• National solution for a national problem: Cameroon should be allowed to build national pride and confidence through this process of reconciliation. National figures in politics, traditional authorities, the Arts, Sports, business and Civil society, including the Clergy should be involved in the process to oversee consultations. There may be a need for nationally acclaimed conflict management experts to be co-opted to provide guidance and structure – this could very well be a Grand National Dialogue II. 

• Binding agreements: Establishing constitutional and or legal frameworks that protect the integrity of the GNU, ensuring that any abuses by more powerful political actors are anticipated and avoided.

• Security guarantees for separatist leaders: A sensitive aspect of the process would be providing former separatists and activists with security guarantees and other incentives so they can participate in governance – in a GNU, whether at local or at national levels without fear of persecution.

Simultaneously engaging other extreme Factions: The Case of the BAS (so-called Bureau Anti-Sardinards)

Beyond the Anglophone Crisis, other manifestations of disquiet, such as the so-called BAS, primarily composed of anti-government activists in the diaspora, must now also be considered. A GNU proposition should aim to integrate all diverse perspectives, ensuring that dissenting voices have a place to be aired, and are included in national conversations rather than being alienated. Creating a pathway for engagement between the government and groups like the so-called BAS could further ease political tensions, strengthen national unity, and especially discourage any future thought, that other pathways may exist to influence politics in Cameroon, outside the mainstream, legitimate channels. 

Conclusion: A bold step towards peace, stability and economic take-off for Cameroon 

A Government of National Unity may well be the answer to Cameroon’s longstanding crises. By incorporating extremist views, perspectives and their representatives, reforming governance structures especially at the grassroots, and learning from international examples, Cameroon can pave the way for sustainable peace, national cohesion, and economic progress.

However, such a bold move requires the government to accommodate important military-political and security-driven concerns in inclusive, dialogue-based social and development strategies, especially at the grassroots. It also demands courage from today’s separatists and from opposition groups to be willing and able to engage in open, constructive dialogue, consultation and while in the GNU in frank negotiations. 

The alternative—continued social tensions, suspicions and conflict—will only deepen divisions and delay our country’s development.

Ultimately, history and the science of politics suggest that dialogue, negotiated co-existence, even with extreme factions, is the most viable path to national stability. 

The question remains: do we have the courage to go down this part to peace, unity, stability and economic progress?

*The author is an Environmental Management Specialist and commentator on Society and Politics. He is based in Yaounde, Cameroon and holds a PhD in Forest Economics and Management. The views expressed are his