By Ngala Hansel
The Commonwealth projects itself as an institution that promotes democracy, human rights and freedom. The organization is made up of former British colonies – and more recently, has seen non-former British colonies such as Rwanda, Gabon and Togo. Gabon and Togo joined the organization in June this year as the 55th and 56th members respectively during the Commonwealth Heads of Government (CHOGM) in Kigali, Rwanda in June.
Some observers were not comfortable with the whole idea of admitting former French colonies whom they argued were not beacons of democracy.
The same hesitancy was true of Cameroon when she opted to join the Commonwealth in October 1995.
According to Melanie Torrent, a senior research fellow at the Institute of Commonwealth Studies:
“Back in October 1995, the admission of Cameroon to the Commonwealth during the Heads of Government Meeting in Auckland (New Zealand) was a fairly controversial affair. Within Commonwealth circles, a number of experts believed the country was too steeped in the political, economic, legal and cultural traditions of its French past and of the contemporary Francophone world to be a beneficial addition to the association; and, to put it bluntly, that its democratic credentials failed to meet the standards of the newly devised Harare Principles of 1991. In Cameroon itself, some shared these doubts. In the Northwest and Southwest provinces particularly, which had been British mandates and trust territories between 1918 and 1961 and on which Cameroon’s historical claim to Commonwealth membership rested, several politicians, journalists and civil society groups thought membership should be postponed until further democratization, including a revised constitution providing for decentralization, if not outright federalism, and greater cultural rights for the ‘Anglophone’ minority, had been secured.”
It can be argued that not much has changed in Cameroon since 1995 when the country joined the Commonwealth. Human rights are violated and Anglophones are disparagingly referred to as “secessionists” or “terrorists” in some government circles. The SW governor, Okalia Bilai even referred to Anglophones as “dogs” and arbitrary arrests remain the order of the day as the government grapples with an armed separatist insurgency which it mismanaged at the beginning.
If the Commonwealth is to have any relevance, it must address the issues of the people in the former British Southern Cameroons (today’s Northwest and Southwest regions) which are the reason Cameroon is in the Commonwealth to begin with.
The Queen who prior to her death was head of the Commonwealth, kept sealed lips on the deteriorating human rights situation in the regions formerly colonized by her country. She never visited the region either and during the Commonwealth Heads of Government summit in Kigali this year, participants too did not make any mention of suspending Cameroon from the organization which claims to be a champion of human rights.
What good is the Commonwealth?
With more than 50 member states, the Commonwealth is certainly an organization to be reckoned with, but what good is it? Of what benefit is it truly to its members including Cameroon?
Centuries ago, Britain decided to go about colonizing the world, torturing and maiming those who dared to resist being subjected to the British crown. Today its past conquest has been reborn as the Commonwealth.
It’s projected as a group of nations supposedly pursuing “common goals and values”. The British queen (until her death), sat at the helm of this group. Under her are more than 50 countries with 2.5 billion people and there is little in common between them. Rwanda which until 2009 was the newest member to join the Commonwealth, did so as a way of getting back at France which the country accuses of being masterminds of the 1994 genocide that killed almost a million Rwandans.
Rwanda joining the Commonwealth was supposed to be a diplomatic slap to France.
But coming back to Cameroon, the question would be, what is the point of membership in the Commonwealth? What have Cameroonians achieved from the Commonwealth apart from the scholarships it offers to a few Cameroonians and sporting tournaments?
Unlike what the British monarchy would want us to believe, today there is nothing common between Commonwealth countries apart from a shared dark history.
The colonial past is what most Commonwealth nations would want to move on from. Many have dumped the British queen as their ceremonial head of state (with Barbados being the latest to do so in November 2021).
What is the relevance of the Commonwealth in the year 2022? Is it a trade alliance? In 2018, the Commonwealth pledged to boost trade. The goal was to secure 2 trillion Dollars worth of trade within the bloc. The organization set 2030 as the deadline for this and as 2022 draws to a close, there is not much progress about this and that is not likely to change in the years ahead. The UK knows this far too well. The Commonwealth accounts for just 9 % of the UK’s total trade, so no, it’s not a trade alliance.
Is the Commonwealth then, an economic grouping? But how can it be, it is not a grouping of equals. It is a confused mix of some of the world’s richest and some of the world’s poorest nations. Think about it: what common economic goal can Cameroon, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Canada, St. Kitts and Nevis and India set?
Next question: is the Commonwealth a strategic alliance? The answer again is no. Because where is the common strategic goal? What defines this alliance? What is it about? What’s the purpose? These are questions that member states should be thinking about as we mourn the queen.
What is the Commonwealth doing apart from reminding the UK of its glorious days?
Cameroon has not been criticized for its treatment of its Anglophone minority and there are no signs that she ever will. There are no signs that she will be suspended as was Nigeria in the 1990s under Gen. Sani Abacha who was accused by the organization of abusing rights and freedoms. Nigeria was only readmitted in 1999 after the return to civilian rule.
No, the Commonwealth only empowers the British crown and gives them a new way to keep wielding power over those they colonized centuries ago.
