::: A rebuttal and olive branch to Tapang´s take on Federalism :::

I got up this morning and read with keen interest, comrade Tapang´s piece:

 “Tapang wades into UN debate: The UN cannot interfere on Federalism. Neither can they interfere with independence” 

on Bareta press. 

Though a very well written piece as we have come to expect from the writer, it wasn’t hard to picture Mr. Tapang speaking from both sides of his mouth all through his write up. I therefore, though reluctantly, could not help the urge to expose the inconsistencies loaded in his arguments for federalism and the cynical side jabs carelessly thrown at the independentists:

1. For a start, let´s look at the small semantics of give-and-take. Comrade Tapang started off his piece by declaring categorically that “the UN cannot interfere on federalism or independence” and that “we have to seize our destinies and not wait for international or domestic regimes to give us”. Now, let me state for the record that I agree completely with both aspects of that declaration. However, the inconsistency sets in when Mr. Tapang went on to say “we have pressured the UN and international regimes to come to our aid”. This throws me completely off Mr. Tapang. If the UN can´t interfere, why do you need them to come to your aid? I get it that you may need them to intercede and not interfere but again, interceding will mean asking your “enemy” to soften his stands so you can get what you ask for. That to me is you being given, not you seizing it!
2. On what comrade Tapang defines as the main federalists´ deliverables, he went on to say, “through domestic pressure and international pressure, we can only enforce the domestic leadership to comply with international agreements that safeguard and promote civil rights and political liberties”. This really makes me laugh. While civil rights and political liberties sound some very important nice-to-haves, these would be a hard sell to our people or the UN or international community as what this struggle is about. Civil rights and political liberties are no direct derivatives from the form of state and cannot be any argument or basis for why you want federalism and not the unitary decentralized status-quo. 
3. On his costs-benefits analysis, Tapang wrote, “without nothing, we have achieved something”. And on what the achievements have been so far, he said, “we have pressured for dialogues between the gangster regime and the two UN missions in Cameroon only this year”. Really, comrade Tapang? Did you really achieve that without nothing?! What about the 10 deaths which you mentioned earlier in your write-up? What about the hundreds kidnapped, deported to La Republique du Cameroun and are tortured in their maximum security prison? What about the blank school year? What about our girls raped? What about the internet outage for 3 months running? What about ….? What about ….? Do you, comrade seriously want our people to believe that all those are “nothing” compared to the achieved “dialogue between the government and two UN missions”? Please, tell us that you are joking.
4. On the way forward, you claim that federalists “are now pushing for the recall of ALL MPs and have also given a final dateline for ALL DOs and SDOs to go silent”. Comrade, isn’t it mind boggling that you accuse the independentist for not having the arms to fight with and yet you cannot tell us how you plan to enforce these your calls to resign and deadlines on MPs, D.Os and S.D.Os? Without enforcement institutions, all these ultimatum and deadlines have same commonality with Laurent Esso and Fame Ndongo of La Republique du Cameroun promising reforms without parliamentary legality and institutional implementation plans – they are tantamount to sweet nothings. 

Having called out the inconsistencies in your federalism claims, my major concern with your write-up though, is the lame low blows that you throw towards the independentist, especially when you said, “an independence fighter has only one strategy – take up arms and fight straight up”. Mr. Tapang, if you are an honest dude, you would concede that your claim is a great twist of the reality and facts. SCACUF which is at the frontline of the independence struggle has always called for non violence and one of their major strategies is the litigation approach. Even those groups that favour the acquisition of arms have made it clear that it is for the purpose of self defense and I am sure even you will not challenge the fact that, as a people, Southern Cameroonians have a right to self defense.

You see, Mr. Tapang, whether we are federalists or independentist, we all have a common interest, which should resonate with the wishes and aspirations of the people of the former British Southern Cameroons. If you think the best way to achieve the objective is through federalism, that is your cup of tea and you can always defend and pursue your position without necessarily twisting the facts or jabbing the other. 

I respect the fact that you have been consistent with your federalist position since the start of this struggle, even though I could notice you flirting with the separatists for a short while (probably to woo a few more followers?). Sometime towards the end of last year, you conducted an online survey (in which I participated) to sample the position of Southern Cameroonians. The results of your survey showed that more than 80 % of Southern Cameroonians are for total and unconditional independence. As the free thinker that you pride yourself to be, one could have expected you to start thinking in the same breath as the majority of people you are supposed to be fighting for. I may be wrong, but my understanding is that, the hallmark of a free thinker is not defined by the rigidity to defend and thread a well defined position against empirical evidence even if it means beating a dead horse; but the flexibility to move their head to where the floating cap fits. But again, I respect your choice to stay and defend your federalist position as long as you don’t muddy the waters for the independentists.

You are a federalist, I am an independentist (and I have been since the day I was born!) but instead of wasting vital energy and resources finding faults in the methods and motives of the other, we should rather stand arm-in-arms-with-arms to fight our common foe, La Republique du Cameroun (notice how I didn’t even mention Kim Jung Mbiya!). Ivo, you and Mark have effectively used the rallying slogan that “God is still saying something” to spur and galvanise our people, one which I completely identify with. If you truly believe in that slogan, follow your federalist path, while I pursue my independentist road in the hope that we shall both meet at the foot of mount Fako on the day when God will have his final word, that is, on freedom day. 

Ivo, I know that I shall see you with a great big hug in Buea on freedom day because; you are my brother, my comrade, my ace!!!

...  Emile Tabu Ojong ...