Cameroon’s Axis of Power

Anglophone Crisis

Collage by THE REPUBLIC. Ref Photo 1: Yaoundé, Cameroun. DANIEL PANEV / FLICKR. Photo 2: Paul Biya. MARCO CASTRO / UN PHOTO.

THE MINISTRY OF WORLD AFFAIRS
How Israel, France, and the US shape the Anglophone Crisis.
Anglophone Crisis

Collage by THE REPUBLIC. Ref Photo 1: Yaoundé, Cameroun. DANIEL PANEV / FLICKR. Photo 2: Paul Biya. MARCO CASTRO / UN PHOTO.

THE MINISTRY OF WORLD AFFAIRS
How Israel, France, and the US shape the Anglophone Crisis.

In February 2024, I returned to Cameroon with my father. For the first time in years, I saw the country that he once called home—its villages, towns, and cities now visibly marked by an ongoing war. My family, a blend of Anglophone and Francophone heritage, hails from M’mouck-Fosimondi, a village that sits at the intersection of two worlds: the French-speaking West and the English-speaking Southwest. Originally part of the Francophone side like many Bamileke people (one of Cameroon’s largest ethnic groups), M’mouck-Fosimondi became a refuge during the tumultuous years of the Bamileke Wars, also known as the Union of the Peoples of Cameroon Rebellion, when the Bamileke people, fighting for independence from French colonial rule, fled the violence that erupted in their homeland. The village resettled in the Southwest, on the frontier of the conflict, creating a microcosm of Cameroon’s broader tensions—a place where French and English are spoken, where neighbours embody the divided loyalties of a nation, and where the vestiges of colonial rule still reverberate.

Over the last seven years, the Anglophone Crisis has spiralled out of control, affecting dozens of people from our community, especially those near the border. Members of my own family and community have been caught in this exodus, forced to leave behind their homes as conflict encroaches further. The village that once symbolized resilience in the face of one conflict now finds itself at the frontier of another.

The roots of this conflict, however, reach far beyond the country’s borders. As Cameroon’s Anglophone crisis deepens, it is increasingly shaped by a matrix of international alliances that obscure the deeper political and economic grievances at its heart. The interplay of Israel’s military support, France’s enduring post-colonial influence, and the US’s counterterrorism agenda sustains President Paul Biya’s regime and enables it to suppress dissent with impunity. These geopolitical relationships create an axis of power that helps sustain the conflict, while simultaneously entrenching the marginalization of Cameroon’s Anglophone population. While the term ‘Anglophone crisis’ has been widely adopted, it’s important to note that Francophones are also affected by the actions of a wealthy, largely Francophone elite. The conflict is messier than its name implies, and Anglophone leaders have not always upheld their promises. Still, the Anglophone population has historically borne the brunt of marginalization, and this label reflects that reality.

POSTCOLONIAL LEGACIES AND ROOTS OF THE CRISIS

The crisis is inseparable from Cameroon’s colonial past, where British and French rule divided the country along linguistic and cultural lines. After independence in 1960, Cameroon became nominally united under a Francophone-dominated government. The Anglophone regions, located in the northwest and southwest of the country, comprise approximately 20 per cent of Cameroon’s population of 27 million people, while the Francophone regions make up the remaining 80 per cent. What began as peaceful protests in 2016 over the use of French in Anglophone courts and schools soon erupted into violence, as the state’s brutal crackdown fostered armed separatist movements.

These deeper divisions speak to the enduring legacy of colonialism, where political and economic systems were designed to perpetuate inequality. In Cameroon, the state’s structure ensures that power is retained by a select Francophone elite, while the Anglophone regions are left in a perpetual state of marginalization. It is a structure that mirrors other postcolonial African states, where the logic of exclusion and compartmentalization underpins governance and access to power is systematically denied to certain groups.

ISRAEL: MILITARIZED PARTNERSHIPS AND THE ETHICS OF SECURITY

Israel’s involvement with Cameroon dates back to the 1980s, anchored by military cooperation that has since expanded. Originally framed as support for general security, this cooperation predates Boko Haram, which did not emerge until the 2000s. Over time, Israel’s support evolved to include surveillance and repression technologies, such as drones, now repurposed by the Cameroonian government to target Anglophone separatists, including civilians.

Cameroon’s diplomatic alignment with Israel is not simply a product of military partnerships. At the United Nations, Cameroon consistently votes in favour of Israeli interests, especially regarding the issue of Palestinian statehood. This diplomatic loyalty is rewarded with further military and political support, allowing Cameroon to continue its internal repression under the guise of counterterrorism.

Cameroon’s relationship with Israel mirrors the concept of ‘lawfare,’ where international legal frameworks are strategically manipulated to justify military and political goals. Israel benefits from Cameroon’s diplomatic backing at the UN, while Cameroon leverages its alliance with Israel to legitimize its internal policies, framing its actions as part of the global war on terror. 

Cameroon’s use of lawfare in its alliance with Israel is reminiscent of South Africa’s legal defense during the 2024 International Court of Justice (ICJ) apartheid hearings. In those hearings, South Africa argued that its apartheid policies were necessary to maintain security and order in a divided country, drawing parallels to Israeli occupation. Sovereignty was invoked as a shield against international interference, just as Cameroon now does in its Anglophone regions.

During the ICJ hearings, Advocate Sydney Kentridge famously argued, ‘Sovereignty cannot shield a state from the consequences of its moral failures.’ This legal argument resonates with Cameroon’s current situation. The suppression of Anglophone populations is cloaked in the language of security and counterterrorism, but it ultimately perpetuates cycles of repression similar to those used to justify apartheid. In its ruling, the ICJ rejected South Africa’s defence of apartheid, declaring it a violation of international law and recognizing the right to self-determination for oppressed populations. This ruling not only condemned apartheid but also set a precedent for holding states accountable for systemic repression, a precedent that could challenge Cameroon’s ongoing repression.

shop the republic

shop the republic

FRANCE: THE ENDURING LEGACY OF FRANCAFRIQUE

France’s involvement in Cameroon is deeply rooted in economic and political interests that have persisted since the colonial era. Even after formal independence, France has maintained significant influence over Cameroon’s economy and politics through Francafrique, a system that ensures the continued extraction of resources and political loyalty from its former colonies.

This relationship has allowed France to turn a blind eye to the human rights abuses perpetrated by the Cameroonian government. While French companies benefit from lucrative contracts in sectors like oil, gas, and infrastructure, Cameroonian forces use French weapons to suppress separatists in the Anglophone regions. France’s strategic interest lies in maintaining stability in Cameroon to protect its economic interests, even if that means supporting a regime accused of widespread human rights violations.

The transactional nature of this relationship is emblematic of the larger neocolonial dynamic between France and its former colonies. France provides military and economic support in exchange for political loyalty and economic concessions while remaining silent on the atrocities committed by its allies. In Cameroon, this has allowed Biya’s government to wage war against its own people without facing significant international pressure.

shop the republic

THE UNITED STATES: COUNTERTERRORISM AND SILENCE

The US has long viewed Cameroon as a critical partner in the fight against terrorism in the Sahel and Lake Chad Basin regions. US military aid, initially aimed at combatting Boko Haram, has been repurposed to suppress Anglophone separatists, with American equipment and training bolstering the Cameroonian government’s capacity for internal repression.

The ‘state of exception’ is in play here, as the government uses the threat of terrorism to justify the suspension of civil liberties in Anglophone regions. In this context, the US has supported Cameroon’s actions by prioritizing counterterrorism over human rights. This dynamic has allowed the Cameroonian government to suppress dissent while avoiding international consequences, as Washington remains focused on maintaining a strategic counterterrorism partnership.

Human rights organizations have documented widespread abuses by Cameroonian security forces, many of which were carried out using US-supplied equipment. Despite this, the US has been hesitant to challenge Biya’s government, seeking instead to maintain a stable regional ally. This silence only perpetuates the conflict, allowing the cycle of repression to continue unchecked.

shop the republic

shop the republic

THE CONVERGENCE OF INTERNATIONAL AGENDAS

Israel, France, and the US share a common interest in maintaining Cameroon’s stability, as each country benefits from military, economic, or diplomatic relationships with Biya’s government. These alliances enable Cameroon to suppress its Anglophone population under the guise of preserving order while allowing foreign powers to protect their strategic interests.

The convergence of these international agendas sustains the compartmentalized governance system in Cameroon, where the state wields military technology and legal frameworks to enforce repression. These global alliances obscure the political grievances at the heart of the Anglophone crisis, focusing instead on maintaining the status quo to ensure continued geopolitical stability.

Cameroon’s internal conflict serves as a case study of how modern state repression draws on both colonial legacies and contemporary geopolitical interests. The country’s Anglophone crisis is not simply a domestic issue—it is the product of global powers working in tandem to uphold a regime that serves their economic and political agendas.

A CALL FOR ACCOUNTABILITY

The international community must reassess its role in Cameroon’s ongoing crisis. Military aid and diplomatic support for Biya’s government have perpetuated a cycle of violence and repression, with devastating consequences for the Anglophone population. Without a concerted effort to address the root causes of the conflict, the violence will continue, and the international actors involved will remain complicit in its prolongation.

Cameroon’s Anglophone crisis is not merely a local issue—it is a reflection of the broader dynamics of global power and repression. The international community, particularly Israel, France, and the United States, must hold Biya’s government accountable for its actions and take steps to realign its policies in favour of justice and human rights. Legal avenues, such as those pursued against apartheid South Africa, offer a potential path forward, but only if the world is willing to confront the uncomfortable truths about its own complicity

BUY THE MAGAZINE AND/OR THE COVER