In this breath-taking interview granted the press recently, the France-based historian, philosopher and writer takes a critical and profound look at the country, describing President Paul Biya’s thirty-four-year rule as utterly catastrophic.

He proposes ways by which Cameroon can be rebuilt from scratch, one of which is the genuine unity of opposition parties. The interview was translated into English by The Median.

What look do you take at Cameroon today?

It can only be a look of solidarity and sympathy. Like many others, I don’t live here [in Cameroon], but I belong to this country. Here is where I was born. All my ancestors are here.

I must add that to me ancestry is not first of all a thing of biological descent, ethnicity or skin colour. It is parenthood that one chooses with reference to some ideals shared with others – ideals which animate us and which constantly give us breath, no matter where we find ourselves.

But my look at Cameroon is also the critical look of somebody whose horizon is not his village of origin but the world in general. Yet, seen from the point of view of the world, our [Cameroonian] society has all the characteristics of a blocked society.

There is the impression that something very deep is broken here in the course of the past thirty-four years of governance through negligence and abandonment, and that this country has experienced a very serious derailment.

Since 1982, we are not only turning round, caught in mire. We are static with our legs in the air and our head below. African countries with less resources than us and which, at the end of the 1970s were behind us, are now in front us. Very reliable statistics show that there is practically no sector of economic, social or cultural life where truly significant progress has been made during the past thirty-four years.

The balance sheet is catastrophic, the wastes enormous, and it will take decades for the stables to be cleaned. So many years of negligence and brutality have ended up producing a class of deaf, blind and parasitic politicians.

Today this class dominates, with no concessions; we are in a society that is apparently floppy and devoid of every will of resistance. For those of us who have the opportunity to travel to other countries of the world, all of this is indeed hallucinatory and incomprehensible.

Calls are multiplying for the amendment of the constitution in view of precipitated presidential election, and by that an umpteenth candidature of Mr. Biya who is in power for thirty-four years now. What commentary can you make about that?

Mathias Owona Nguini calls that “perpetual government”. The term that best describes this mode of “government by negligence” is satrapy. The more the satrap is caught by the weight of age and the law of mortality, the more he clings to power and curls up on his private pleasures. It is because gerontocrats are afraid of death. They don’t want to hand over [power]. They want to be able to reign on the other side of their grave.

For the rest, the hackneyed techniques that you mentioned were put in place in the Ahmadou Ahidjo era even if the current regime has greatly abused them – the vacuity of motions of support, the unending marches in the streets, useless elections with results known in advance, the stuffing of ballot boxes, the recruitment of bodies, the deregulation of instincts and the violation of spirits, the militarization of entire sections of the society and generalized servitude.

More than half a century after our independence, we are still there and almost nothing has changed. This method of governance by instincts has ended up producing a kind of man who is very corrupt, weak, fearful and servile. This sort of man…is henceforth in every one of us, and this is what makes our tragedy and at the same time the strength of this regime.

He [the President] has before him an apparently malleable mass of figurines created in his image, who he can, without the least risk, morally compromise, mess up at will, and periodically subject to all forms of gymnastic, at any time and under any conditions.

So long as we remain prostrate in this kind of parasitical life, unable to stand up and make him pay a high price for this kind of abuse, nothing will change.

How did a country with so many potentials arrive at this stage?

We are at this stage for an historical reason. Between 1948 and the end of the 1950s, Cameroon had a choice to make between two paths for its historical development.

There was, on the one hand, a nationalistic path incarnated by the UPC movement, and on the other, a path of compromise represented by the ‘aujoulatiste’ bloc. Faced with colonial power, the latter bloc chose a very collaborative strategy. It considered colonization as a benefit, was happy with the superiority put up by Whites and had no shame adhering to the ideology of racial inferiority or adopting, before the rulers, an ethic of servility.

With the liquidation of the great figures of Cameroonian nationalism (Ruben Um Nyobè, Félix Moumié, Castor OsendéAfana, Ernest Ouandié), ‘aujoulatism’ triumphed and has been exercising, since the 1970s, an unshared hegemony on the political culture, public institutions and social life of this country.

Therefore we are at this stage because the spirit of defiance of Cameroonians was finally defeated. The Ahmadou Ahidjo and Paul Biya regimes constitute the two faces of this same ‘aujoulatist’ matrix.

What should we do to come out of it?

We will not proceed to another phase of our history if we don’t consciously and methodically break away with ‘aujoulatism’. This requires so much cultural, intellectual, political and artistic work which will itself pass through a critical examination of our memory. It is thus the ‘hard disc’ of this country and matrix that should be changed.

That said, it would be easy, even irresponsible, to talk abstractly of direct action, of counter-violence, of radical revolt, even of armed insurrection.

On the one hand, nothing amongst all of that is easy, supposing that there exist social forces that are ready to sacrifice themselves for such an option. On the other, a Boko Haram-like scenario (that is, a fanatical, blind and sectarian violence that is nihilistic and without any liberation goal) is very possible, especially after decades of absolute dictatorship.

Otherwise, the way out will be prepared, without which it will be missed. Two ways out are envisaged. The first is the way out from inside. There is the inescapable death of the satrap, which must take place, so it is better to start preparing for it today. It will no doubt lead to pure and simple renewal, if not to the radicalization of ‘aujoulatism’.

For within the present establishment, there is, in fact, nobody with an alternative vision of the future of this country. As I speak to you, there is no shadow of a consequent reflection on the necessary transformations to operate once the page is turned. Absolutely nothing of that sort.

The second way out, that is, rupture of ‘aujoulatism’, is a long-term issue and requires the putting in place of a true social and historic movement. It presupposes some great work of creating new organizations for the masses, for the political education of the people, for experimentation with an alternative political culture, for new dissident arts and languages, for other forms of leadership.

This type of long-term work requires that we show trans-ethnic solidarity without which nothing can be accomplished at the national level; that we selflessly support those who will take risks; that we patiently look for international support necessary for the fight; that we get a clear idea of what to replace what will be destroyed. All of this requires work, organization, discipline and social forces ready to invest.

Today, the country is faced with the Boko Haram terrorist threat. Is this sect capable of waging a long-term war?

It all depends on the kind of war they want to wage and on the kind of opponents that they have before them. Since Boko Haram is a species of hydra with one thousand heads, the latter can only be cut by creating alliances at the sub-regional level.

But the longer this war lasts, the more it will bleed public finances. To minimize the risk of expansion of this type of terrorism in future, a veritable policy of the administration of the territory should be put in place. The areas touched by Boko Haram are amongst the most destitute in the country.

They are facing a triple demographic, food and ecological crisis whose impact goes beyond borders. So long as this crisis is not resolved, we can get rid of Boko Haram today, but other violent groups will resurface tomorrow in the same places.

Do you think the current regime will seek to have political gains from this war?

If there are partisan political gains, they will be marginal, at least in the long-term. The priority is to free the sub-region from a violent nihilist structure whose goal is not freedom. But like in every impasse of this nature, the greatest pain is in the mind. This kind of ‘necropolitical’ ideology cannot be won with high altitude bombings.

Structural conditions which act like a welcome ground to this kind of ideology should be attacked. Yet the government through abandonment, negligence and indifference is one of the factors that caused this type of movement. Corruption as well, let alone sectarianism and the deranged tribalization of the state as well as bureaucracy.

The Far North of Cameroon now casts the image of a region that is cut off from the rest of Cameroon. Do you think the wounds caused by this crisis will be healed? And what, in your opinion, are the dispositions to make?

What is needed is a veritable policy in the north that would take into consideration the specificities of the three basins of Chad, Benoué and Adamawa and their trans-border character. The future of these three basins that are exposed to terrorism depends on a methodic transition towards an economy based on new ecological factors. I’m thinking particularly of water, solar energy, reforestation, but also of tourism and, generally speaking, of wide-ranging agricultural and land reform.

There are more and more rumours of the re-launching of the operation sparrowhawk. What is your impression about these arrests which are said to be within the framework of the fight against corruption?

The problem is that in this matter, the current regime is the judge and the judged at the same time, and it is not certain that justice is independent. In fact, if it truly was, the entire political class today would be in prison, beginning with the Head of State.

In this case as is the case in other African countries, the equivalent should be put in place for corruption cases, at the International Court of Justice in the Hague.

Amongst the arrested personalities within the framework of this operation are former big shots of the ruling party. Do you think they are serious alternatives for change?

Before thinking of ruling the country, these personalities should first of all defend themselves before independent courts.

What do you think of Cameroon’s opposition and what must it do to bounce back?

It has not yet exhausted all the possibilities of putting this regime in difficulty. To do so, it must work together around some minimum objectives of common interest, and do so as an offensive measure. For now, it is reactive. It is not offensive.

Clearly, its breathing space is restricted. It has to…hold its meetings freely without being harassed by a national police service that has unfortunately been transformed into political police.

But repression does not explain everything. With plenty of imagination and a systematic organization, it can transform every arbitrary arrest and detention into a veritable minefield for the government.

There are many great actions that can be initiated and which the oppressive machine, however brutal it may be, cannot be able to contain. I’m not saying that this regime will collapse…like a pile of cards. But it is not invincible.

We are today witnessing the emergence of a new dynamic borne by young political parties. Is there hope?

For this new dynamic to be realized, the opposition should absolutely learn to work together. It is clear, for instance, that with a one-round presidential election, throwing many candidates into the arena is the surest way to lose. The most rational thing to do is to come to agreement on a single candidature and on a transitional government programme. This would include essential constitutional reforms.

At the theoretical level, it is relatively easy to take power. The problem is to know what one wants to do with power once one takes it. It will not be easy at all to rebuild this country when this regime is brought down.

Real herculean tasks will be necessary and in every sector: constitutional reform; reform of the state and elimination of tribalism and bureaucracy; a new wide-ranging sub-regional economic policy; decentralization and regionalization; a new Anglophone and northern policy; a new infrastructural policy; an educational policy; a new health chart; military reform; another cultural policy, for arts and sports; another form of Cameroonian presence in international bodies. Everything or almost everything has to be done all over again.

More and more we hear this in Cameroon: “We are tired of the speeches of intellectuals, we want action. What do you think about these affirmations?

Blocked situations – like ours – are propitious for the emergence of all kinds of impostors, zealots and other illusion peddlers. They are neither experts nor technicians, but rather ideologists. Most of the rest don’t know what they talk about.

The truth is that in situations like ours, actions that are not well thought out lead inevitably to catastrophe. We have before us a difficulty that is profound and systemic, which requires not only intelligence and know-how but also a good dose of wisdom and common sense. To unravel the impasse that we are inheriting and put back this country on its rails, we will need an enormous mass of technical expertise.

Many people of substance are systematically constrained to go on exile and are presented to the public as vulgar characters in Cameroon. What is your commentary on this?

This is not beginning today. See what they did of Ruben Um Nyobè, Félix Moumié, Ernest Ouandié, OsendéAfana, Mongo Beti, Engelbert Mveng, Jean-Marc Ela and many others. See how they are treating Richard Bona, CelestimMonga and many others today. All of this is proof of the new stupor into which the surrounding brutality has plunged this unfortunate nation.

Do you intend to come and settle in Cameroon one of these days?

Under the present conditions I’m more useful to Cameroon and Africa outside rather than live here, being mad, in prison or in a grave covered by vegetation.