Tuesday, March 11, 2014


20/02/2014 THE BRAZEN FALSIFICATION OF HISTORICAL DATES The Republic of Cameroon has persistently falsified the historical dates of Southern Cameroons. Specifically, the 11th February and 1st October are the casualties. Two techniques were employed in the falsification exercise. The first maintained the date, but substituted the event, the example of which is the 11th February plebiscites, replaced with an irrelevant Youth Day. Meanwhile, the second technique suppressed both the date and its related event, the example of which is 1st October. The 1st October date has been lying in obscurity for half a century, until the impulsion of circumstance, when President Biya referred to it at their independence Jubilee on 1st Janauary 2010. The importance of correctly matching events to their historical dates cannot be overemphasized. It has the advantage of giving political weight to the related state. Moreover, it also establishes the counter-balance of “equal status” to other independent states, regardless of whatever territorial, demographic and economic disparities. Conversely, the misplacement of dates and events plunges the disadvantaged state into a psychologically subordinate relationship, which over time leads to Annexation. As we shall demonstrate, the goal of the Republic of Cameroon right from inception was undoubtedly to annex the state of Southern Cameroon. This was to be achieved by tactically manipulating her historical dates and events, irrespective of the reality of a separate independence, The phraseology of the Plebiscite Question of “Do you wish to achieve independence by joining” whomever, prioritized acceding to independence as the precursor of the joining, without which there would be no such eventuality. Thus the affirmative Plebiscite vote represented ipsofacto the quassi achievement of independence, pending only the endorsement of the decision of the people by the competent UN Organ. Subsequent to the resounding UN approval are three pieces of further evidence, which guided the consolidation of the independence? Firstly, there is the UN provision in Resolution 1608 for a post plebiscite international conference, which would have been inappropriate, except to deal with the challenge of federalizing independent states. Secondly, the existence of the UN-ordained neutral name of Federal united Cameroon Republic is indicative of an envisaged post-independence federalization of the two Republics of Southern Cameroon and the Republic of Cameroon. Thirdly, the UN designation of the 1st October independence date, which the population effectively consummated, marked the complete fulfillment of the impendence process of Southern Cameroons. In light of the foregoing we, conclude that whatever gymnastics the Republic of Cameroon has played could not alter our historical dates, nor diminish our status of a fully independence state, only seeking sovereign recognition. 20/02/2014 THE DECEPTIVENESS OF REUNIFICATION After listening to many comments on reunification it is clear that both the general public and the intelligentsia alike are grossly uninformed of the meaning of terminology. May it be understood once and for all that reunification is not the colloquial joining of political entities that joining is by federalism. The example is the UN – framed appellation of federal united Cameroon Republic for the envisaged new joint Country It is also the reason the Republic of Cameroon under their first Republic adopted the prefix of “Federal”, to arrive at the Federal Republic of Cameroon. The pseudo Federation was not the initial UN-proposed constitutive model, but a watered-down version. Yet, it underscored the concept of federalism as the modus operandi of joining Independent states. It follows that there was never a historical reunification, on the foundation of which the purported Buea Jubilee could have obtained credence. The Buea Jubilee is nothing more than a gigantic deception, designed as usual to facilitate maintaining the stranglehold of annexation on the state of Southern Cameroons. Apart from the inexistence of a historical basis, Reunification is eternally inapplicable to the relationship between the two countries. Intrinsically, the phenomenon is contradictory, incompatible, and mutually exclusive with every situation of separate independences. That is to say there can never be a reunification without a prior joint independence, wherein is inherent the unification phase of a single Independence coin. Independence unifies the constituents of a polity to obtain the abstract noun of unification, from which reunification might proceed, in the same way that a prior “application” is required as the precursor of any “ re-application”. With unification inherently the opposite side of any given Independence and is, therefore, internal to each state, and not an international affaire, the two separately Independent Countries, can never share either unification or reunification. However, it is not categorical that every instance of unification would result in reunification. It only occurs when an Independent state breaks up as a result of either a civil war or external aggression. In essence, the break down of an Independent state signifies the fracture of its unification phase. It is the occasion of the two or more parts returning to their initial oneness that would constitute a supreme act of reunification. In contemporary times, the 1990 reunification of Germany, symbolized by the demolition of the infamous Berlin Wall, is the most recent case in point. The unified Germany was broken up in the aftermath of World War II. May it be made abundantly clear that even if the two Cameroons went to war against each other and later returned together, they would never enjoy reunification The returning into the original oneness would maintain the initial distinctiveness of the respective states, for a re-federalization and not a reunification. Federalism, which results from uniting Independent states, is dramatically different from reunification, proceeding from the verb of having once been a unified state through a joint Independence. In conclusion, there was never, and shall never be an authentic reunification between the two Cameroons. Therefore, the recent Buea affaire is a tourist venture permissible to anybody, who wishes to enjoy the best panoramic scenery in Africa. If President Biya thinks he can still use it to becloud the vision of the People of Southern Cameroons, he has it all wrong. That time has long past, and we will halt at nothing short of a separate sovereign state. The successive regimes of the Francophone state should have thought twice before attempting in 53 years to asphyxiate a UN-authorized Independent state in contemporary times.

No comments:

Post a Comment