Forced March of Youths in Garoua to Support Dictator Paul Biya

On March 10, 2011, secondary school students in the town of Garoua were forced by some politicians to march in support of the President of the Republic of Cameroon Paul Biya following his recent promise of 25,000 jobs to Youths.


From the look of things, one would think it was a powerful voluntary youth mobilization in support of the President of Cameroon. The youths of Garoua were prematurely released from classes in the afternoon of Thursday, March 10, 2011, to take part in a planned march fomented by the regional office of the National Youth Council (NYC)of the NORTH.

Just as their counterparts in the Adamawa region who managed to rally fifty students of the University of Ngaoundere for the same illicit cause; it was a spectacular winning bet for the National Youth Council in the North to see the kids lined up along the banks of the Avenue des Banques of Garoua. Many of these students had no say in the matter since they were pressured and forced by the school officials of their respective colleges/high schools and by some politicians. Releases were read in the class rooms of various institutions in the town of Garoua requesting an interruption of classes on Thursday from 12am to allow students to go home and change into civilian attire, then assemble at the Avenue des Banques of Garoua at 3.00 pm prompt for the march in support of President Paul Biya's announcement of 25,000 jobs. According to Mariamou Djida, student at the Technical High School in Garoua, "I do not know why we're here, its the supervisor who asked us to come,".

As for Usman Bello of Cetic College, "I expect them(school authorities) to tell us the purpose of our movement at the end of the march". After walking distances that paralyzed traffic in the town of Garoua, these students were received by the Secretary General of the Northern region's Governor's office who preached a message of peace. But to the surprise of all, students did not return home after the departure of the Secretary General.Immediately after the SG's sermon, school and college supervisors and principles came out of their hidings to make row calls. As one school authority threatened, "All students who were absent will be punished tomorrow".

In this state of affairs, we are witnessing the total manipulation and misappropriation of the energy ,talents and potentials of the youths of Cameroon in favour of dictatorship. Today schools and colleges of Cameroon have become campaign grounds, instead of arenas for great transformation and positive thinking.What generation is the government and the entire Regime training? Do they really care about the future of the present generation? Does the desire to cling onto power mean dashing out every sense of consciousness? Will this fictitious campaigning benefit the entire nation or just a bunch of obese politicians who have sold their souls to the devil? What is the reason to teach civic education in schools when the same teachers and superintendents do not practice what they preach to the students? Many questions to be answered.

Read the original FRENCH version of this event by following the link below.

http://rjcpatriote.centerblog.net/

Laurent Gbagbo as African of the Year: Understanding the Vile French Machinations in Africa.

By Larry Eyong Echaw

Fellow Africans:

Let's disabuse ourselves of the time -honored fallacies that the West has been perpetuating about Africa. It is against the vital national interests of Western nations for African countries to accede to genuine democracy.

Genuine independence presupposes the adoption of voluntarism and sovereign national policies, that on the short run, could be hostile to foreign interests, for the ultimate purpose of building a self sufficient national economy with machine tool factories, research and development initiatives (including industrial espionage) to acquire the industrialization capacity to build magnetic levitation trains, build shipyards, armament and airplane factories, and create a continental currency that would sustain long term self reliant development.


So far, none of the 53 nonviable micro-nation-states of Africa has this magnitude of capacity building, to sustain itself in a world of continental nations. Perhaps that is why the nations of Europe which crystallized the idea of the nation-state on the Westphalia model, transcended its limitations to create the Maastricht model, where Europe could now compete with America. In a relatively short time, the Euro, caught up and surpassed the Dollar in value and is not threatening to be the world's reserve currency for countries who abhor the jingoism of American foreign policy.

Kwame Nkrumah had this same vision in the late 1950, and attempted to adopt it in Africa, but was countered by Houphouet-Boigny, Tubman of Liberia, Siaka Stevens of Sierra Leone; Haile Selassie of Ethiopia among others who spearheaded the French idea of "French-Africa" where the former colonies would become oversees France.

That is why Abidjan was made to become the Paris of West Africa, and Houphouet-Boigny served as De Gaulle's overseer of the French plantation in West Africa. Houphouet assisted the CIA and the French secret service to overthrow Kwame Nkrumah. Though a series of coup d’etats conducted by De Gaulle's Africa point man -Jacques Foccart from Togo, to Benin (Dahomey) to Mali, Upper Volta (Burkina Faso) Niger, Mali, Congo-Brazzaville, Mauritania, it became clear that any African leader who wanted to remain in power must walk in lockstep with French policy. That is why all African countries in the United Nations had to vote according to the dictates of French foreign policy, else suffer removal from

France. (Foccard says De Gaulle always instructed the French Ambassador to ensure the ousted President is not killed, so that ethnic cleansing would not occur. That is why the game play is to offer Gbagbo an attractive exile in his friend Mbeki's country. In terms of a cost benefit analysis that would be cheaper than the cost of maintaining a United Nations force of 10.000 troops in Ivory Coast for the next six months. Of course, Gbagbo has to be frightened and rendered desperate enough to accept the deal).Houphouet, who for thirty years sowed the seeds of discord in Ivory Coast, was responsible for organizing the overthrow of independent minded African leaders. As a Baole "prophet and magician" he used CIA furnished helicopters, to ferry cocoa and coffee from the hinterland of Ghana and paid the Ashanti kings to rebel against Kwame Nkrumah and deprive him of foreign currency so as to spark the popular uprising that finally took him out of office. Half of the cab drivers in Accra were on the payroll of the CIA (After all the US simply had to print the currency since Nixon had reneged on the Gold standard)

Intriguingly, when rebels threatened any African country, Houphouet offered his good offices as a negotiator and brought the belligerents to Abidjan for peace talks. While in Abidjan, the hotels were regularly bugged and his French masters eavesdropped on the conversations and the strategies of the opponents. The French puppets always carried the day. If it became too difficult the United States were called in to bring in their lapdog-the United Nations. This is an organization whose leader is merely handpicked unilaterally by the United States, even to the opposition of all the other states of the world. Yet, they deridingly claim that they have even a scintilla of impartiality.



Long time observers of the politics of Africa are shaking their heads at how the law of Karma is being applied to Cote d'Ivoire. They say the chickens of vengeance are coming home to roost. Let the Ivoirians have a taste of their own medicine -they claim. So say for thirty years Ivory Coast has sown the wild wind, now it must reap the tempest.

Today, Gbabgo has become the new scapegoat of the West. Like Patrice Lumumba whom President Lyndon Johnson said was better off being eaten by crocodiles in the Congo River, than waiting for UN troops, like

Kwame Nkrumah, Hamani Diori -Barre Mainserra or Mamadou Tanja of Niger who would not cede their country's uranium exclusively to France in return for virtually nothing, like Mohammed Farrah Aideed who helped overthrow America's puppet Mohammed Siad Barre in Somalia,


The West does not want a strong African nation. The United States attempted to dismember the Congo by supporting the Katangese rebellion so as to decapitate the nationalist Lumumba. De Gaulle supported Moise Tschombe the rebel Katangese leader who was the darling of the United States.

De Gaulle was unequivocal that the dismemberment of Nigeria was a good thing for the French in Africa, which is why he used Houphouet, Bongo and Macias Nguema of Equatorial Guinea to fund the Biafran rebellion. Reagan supported Johnas Savimbi and provided land mines that maimed one million Angolan to fight Edwardo Dos Santos who was seen as a Soviet puppet.

In Mozambique the United States used PW Botha to support Alfonso Dal Clama the leader of the RENAMO rebels to destroy Mozambique and eventually kill Samora Machel. So that Gbagbo would be decapitated is a certainty, but the issue is how many Ivoirians will be cannon fodder. When that is done, will it be the end of the African revolution ...no.


Of course, the subterfuge is democracy, -allowing the will of the people to prevail. Well, that is material for college courses on Africa in American college campuses. The reality of the application of American democracy in the jungles of Africa is nightmarish. In Liberia, when William Tolbert came in to end the 99 year lease that

America's Firestone had on large swaths of Liberian rubber, William Swing of the CIA was sent in to decapitate him.

The hatchet man's job was done so fast that there was no time to groom a credible leader. Samuel Doe (whom Reagan was later to erroneously introduce as "Chairman Moi" on his maiden visit to the White House) a high-school drop out, who was a Sergeant in the Executive Mansion, was handpicked to become President. (Of course, the Western press was on hand to extol his new found leadership qualities, until he became an embarrassment to the US).

Charles Taylor was whisked out of a Massachusetts jail through the intervention and funding of Ted Kennedy and the facilitation of Helen Johnson Sirleaf to go to Monrovia and reclaim the American rubber plantation. Of course we all know what happened, rivers of blood flowed, and refugees were ferried through Ivory Coast to the United States to become a new army of nursing home workers.

At the end of the day, it is the fragility and the non viability of the African nation-state that is highlighted. Gbagbo's Bete tribe is recruiting militias from their Liberian cousins called the Gio, to chase away the marauding Diola who are being armed by their Burkina Faso brothers. Their justification is that the French purposely allowed asked Blaise Compare whom Foccard paid to behead his trusted friend Thomas Sankara) to arm the rebels and hold the Northern part of Ivory Coast so as to trigger an eventual ouster of the unyielding Gbagbo who would not bow to the French president.

In 1994 the French used Sassou Nguesso to oust the democratically elected President of Congo Brazzaville -Pascal Lissouba because he refused to continue the financing of French political parties with the proceeds of Congolese oil. (Those who think colonialism in French Africa has ended are living in Alice in wonderland's world).

The regimes that have remained stable in French Africa like Cameroon, and Gabon take their marching orders from Paris without argument. Paul Biya of Cameroon shamelessly tells the press that he is the best student of the French president. The United Nations is ready to push democracy down the throats of Ivoirians through the barrel of the gun, yet Eyadema of Togo and Bongo of Gabon are allowed to be succeeded by their kids.

Whatever is good for the West is good for the World: The UN Principle of Neutrality in the Ivory Coast conflict.

Ivory Coast, also known by its French name as Côte D’Ivoire is a former French Protectorate (1844), situated in West Africa. Upon obtaining its independence from its colonial master France on August 7, 1960, it moved on to face its destiny under its new leader Felix Houphouet - Boigny. Under Houphouet - Boigny, the country was under some relative stability while maintaining close touch with the “Metropolis”- France. As some researchers hold, Houphouet - Boigny was the centerpiece for the establishment and sustenance of the French policy of Françafrique; endorsed by Jacques Foccart, the former Chief Adviser for African Policy of de Gaulle and Georges Pompidou. The concept was a confirmation of the idea that France and its stooges like Houphouet intended to maintain the master-servant relationship. As smoothly as the country went, it was faced with a political coup in 1999 and political turmoil in the form of a civil war in 2002. The country was torn between the Government held South and the rebel North under the Forces Nouvelle. Spreading from Abidjan to Korhogo to Bouake, the crisis crawled to consume the entire country and crept along ethnic lines. In the event of the crisis and division, the international community (AU, ECOWAS, UN and France) acted swiftly, as required by international norms and peace talks were started in order to bring back peace to the country. Negotiations led to the conclusion of the Linas-Marcoussis (January 2003) and Pretoria Accords (2005) with agreements to organize elections in October 2005, while the United Nations deployed a heavy peacekeeping mission – MINUCI (May 2003) and later UNOCI (April 2004) - to reinforce the ECOWAS and French Licorne force. But things stalled due to the lack of political will to carry on with the agreements, leading to a “no-peace-no-war” situation. The situation kept moving up and down until the final agreement of 2010 for the elections that was thought would “fix” the Ivorian ordeal and set the country back on rails.

What are the Mandates of the UN Mission to Ivory Coast?

Mandates as stipulated by the 2004 Resolution 1528

According to the 2004 Resolution, the UN Mission in Ivory Coast (UNOCI) had as major mandate to:
- Monitor the ceasefire and movements of armed groups
- Carryout Disarmament Demobilization and Reintegration (DDR)
- Protection of UN personnel, institutions and civilians
- Provide humanitarian assistance
- Support the implementation of the peace process
- Assist with Human Rights protection
- Engage in public Information
- Law and Order
Additions to the Mandate following Security Council Resolution 1739 of 10 January 2007.

- Disarmament and dismantling of militias
- Operations of the identification of the population and registration of
voters
- Reform of the Security Sector
- Monitoring of Arms Embargo
- Support for the redeployment of State Administration
- Support for the organization of open, free, fair and transparent elections

The election which was suppose to be a sort of last phase of the mission; ushering in a renewed peace, was however not forth coming. One thing always let to the other and postponement became the order of the day. To put it in white and black, many observers and pundits have pointed fingers of accusation to Laurent Gbagbo for playing a double game and resisting the peace pact; by publicly agreeing to it, but undermining it at the background, all in an effort to gain time and remain in power. Gradually and following, several postponements, intense dialogue and negotiations, it was finally decided that the elections were to take place in 2010.
Following the agreements, the first round of the Presidential elections was held on October 31st, 2010. With no overwhelming victory, the contesters had to move to a second round with incumbent president Laurent Gbagbo having to face long time opposition leader Alassane Ouattara . Henri Konan Bedie was forced out of the second round following the results of the first phase. After the November 28, 2010, Ivory Coast again stepped into the pothole of political impasse and tension.

What happened after 28 November 2010?

Four days after the second round, the Independent Electoral Commission of Ivory Coast through its president Youssouf Bakayoko, announced its results, giving opposition candidate Alassane Ouattara victory by 54.1 percent over the incumbent Laurent Gbagbo (45.9%). However, things took a different course when the Constitutional Council (the supreme body) through its president Paul Yao N’Dre gave a contrary result, which propelled incumbent presidential candidate Laurent Gbagbo to the top with 51.45 percent and Ouattara 48.55 percent. With this state of affairs, things were bound to be complicated and ever since, the country has been in a political coma. Fears that it does not sink back to the old crisis impasse stage is in the air.

The UN and the Ivorian Crisis

As soon as the Independent Electoral Commission declared Alassane Ouattara victorious in its preliminary results of the second round of the elections; the UN Secretary General Special Representative (UNSGSR) Choi Young-Jin went public before the media to confirm the victory of Alassane Ouattara over Laurent Gbagbo, without waiting for the Constitutional Council’s final verdict. Some scholars like Dr Fomunyoh have in their analysis of the situation given reasons for this UN intervention. According to Dr. Fomunyoh, the UNSGSR was charged with the role of certifying the election results and that this role was agreed upon by all Ivorian parties, signatories to the Pretoria Accord and reasserted in the UN Resolution 1765 of July 2007.

My Argument on UN Compromised Neutrality

The United Nations Organization (UNO) was created on 24, October 1945 with the aim to maintain international peace and security and promote economic and social development. Some of the principles of the UNO embedded in its Charter are the principles of sovereignty and noninterference in country’s internal affairs. Paragraph 7, Article 2 of the Charter, stipulates that no reason or motive “shall authorize the UN to intervene in matters which are essential within the domestic jurisdiction of any state…” To fulfill its aims and objectives, the UN Charter also stipulates the principle of neutrality. As an international body, the UN’s participation in the peace process is unquestionable. Judging the situation in Ivory Coast very detrimental to world peace and security, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 1528 (2004) to establish UNOCI. Its peacekeeping force (approx. 10,000 personnel) that was sent to Ivory Coast to act as a Zone of Confidence (ZOC) between the start of the crisis in 2002 to 2005 helped to keep both rebel and government forces apart, demilitarizing and disarming factions (DDR), liaising with other UN agencies, building trust in the population; while participating in paving the way for the organization of the elections.
For the very first time in the history of the UN, the world saw the UN through its UNSGSR interfering directly to affirm or confirm the results of national elections on public media. This move smacks of interfering in a country’s internal affairs and a disregard the principle of neutrality which is a corner stone of the UN. The UN’s neutrality is of great necessity to give it credibility in any conflict-prone country where it operates. Above all, neutrality helps the UN to be able to exercise its duty of helping and assisting the civilian population in any conflict environment without being targeted by any party. Seeing the UN SGSR taking the step to publicly confirm the results of a candidate by the Independent Electoral Commission, a body which is only empowered to give preliminary results, was very embarrassing. It was a reprehensible political, international, diplomatic mistake. The UN had to remain neutral and follow up the situation till the release of the final results by the Constitutional Council. Even if the later action of the Constitutional Council’s action smacked of irregularity and favoritism to the incumbent; doesn’t the Ivorian Electoral Code stipulate in Article 64 that the Council, in case of irregularity, could annul an entire election and re-organize fresh ones within 45 days? Why didn’t the UN follow this course and establish the facts of irregularity, thereby opening the avenue to reorganize fresh, transparent and well supervised elections. That way, its neutrality is preserved and its impact is still felt. It is a stated fact that National laws take precedence over international laws. Thus, the UN had every reason to wait for the final verdict of the Constitutional Council before going public given that, it is the sole body mandated to declare the final results according to the Ivorian electoral code. The UN cannot legitimate a candidate before the national body. It had to wait for the final result from the Constitutional Council. According to many observers and critics, the swiftness with which the UNSGSR confirmed the victory of Alassane Ouatara sounded as a bias move; even though it knew the final verdict wasn’t sounded. By going public before the National body, the UN stirred or set the pace for more controversy, accusations and counter accusations, thereby culminating in this political deadlock situation.

Unconstitutionality versus Western Interests

Although it was appalling to watch the action of UNSGSR Choi, it was crystal clear that the UN had either decided to overstep its boundary and mandated role or dropped the coat of neutrality to defend the “hidden interests” of some of its core members and contributors. France, a two sided-dagger has been playing both the fire fighter and instigator of the conflict in Ivory Coast; knocking heads while tapping resources and flourishing its businesses. Haven fallen out with incumbent President Laurent Gbagbo, it is no doubt that France is vehemently and vociferously pulling strings within the international community to lampoon Gbagbo and pull his credibility to the smelly mud. We are stuck to a situation here that pits the support for a constitutionally elected leader (Laurent Gbagbo) against the interest of the Western powers (backing a potential client - Alassane Ouattara). It is unconstitutional to try to unseat a candidate (Gbagbo) who has been declared victorious by the national organ empowered to have a final say in the elections ( the Constitutional Council); in favor of one who has the full and unconditional backing of external support. Alassane Ouattara has been a former World Bank Staff, making him a good ally and guarantor of the interests of the Western powers. This is why the entire international community has thrown their weight on Ouattara while mounting pressure on Gbagbo to accept “defeat”. WHO IS THE DEFEATED CANDIDATE IN THIS MATTER? The candidate declared by the UNSGSR or the one declared by the Constitutional Council? This fact needs to be clear.

What is right for the West must not be right for the rest of the world. Ivory Coast is a sovereign country and no foreign body has the right to influence the decision, wishes and aspirations of the citizens of the country. If the majority of Ivorians voted for Gbagbo, their decision must be respected by the international community in general and the UN in particular. By backing the constitutionally defeated candidate – Alassane Ouattara- the UN is not only compromising its neutral image, but also supports and protects an illegal government made of rebels and ensuring their safety. The United Nation needs to review its actions in the face of conflicts in Africa if it still desires to be a credible body to cater for world peace and security. Already, the UN has suffered a lot of image soiling with diamonds and sex scandals by some of its peacekeepers in the Democratic Republic of Congo and other missions. The world is fast changing and the challenges are getting more multifaceted and multi-complex. Despite the mistakes of the United Nations, the world still needs its presence and assistance to calm the tensions of the human heart and actions. But the UN needs to step up its frame of action and come out clear in support of its core principles and founding mission. The UN was created to help the world and not compromise its genuine role to please some Western big guns. The UN needs to rethink its actions before it loses the trust and credibility of Africa and developing countries in particular and the world in general.

The Mind and Craftiness of a Dictator

A special interview of Dictator Paul Biya Bi Mvondo granted to a French Media France 24. When was the last time he granted an interview to Cameroonian Journalists?




TALK DE PARIS - PAUL BIYA - EN by france24

The Economics of Peace | United States Institute of Peace

The Economics of Peace | United States Institute of Peace

Anti-Paul Biya Protest Movement Washington DC part II

After the February 24 , 2011 anti Paul Biya protest movement in Washington DC, Cameroonians of the diaspora met again on February 28, 2011 in Washington DC for another pressure moment . These Cameroonians came from different state such a New York, Texas, Connecticut, Virginia and Washington DC. With a firm message being to ask Paul Biya the dictator to leave power and free Cameroonians, this second phase went further than the first. Led by people like Simon, Talla Corantin, Tagnidoung, RENE mbuli, the over 70 Cameroonians sounded their messages high and loud to the Cameroon Embassy in Washington DC officials. They carried with them banners with clear messages like: "Biya Must Go", "President Obama help the republic of Cameroon to get rid of its Dictator Paul Biya", "Stop killing the Youths" etc.... After protesting for close to two hours at the Cameroon Embassy in Washington DC, the group matched under the pounding rain down to the White House where they reiterated their message and calls to President Obama.These messages were heard loud and clear by the Obama Administration officials. Even if Cameroon is not their top priority right now, The repeated criticism and exposing the regime will cause a reaction when the time comes.