Editorial

With the notable exception of Cameroonians, the announced deployment of American soldiers to Cameroon to combat Boko Haram terrorists should not come as a surprise to keen observers. First the Americans have been around for a while under supposedly different circumstances. There can be no gainsaying that the United States stated policy has always been to protect American economic and strategic interests where ever they are located or threatened. The Chad-Cameroon pipeline project and the Pecten Cameroon offshore oil exploitation and others fall within this category.

Additionally US strategic interests in the sub-region, particularly in the oil rich Gulf of Guinea, in Equatorial Guinea, Sao Tome and Principe and the Great Lakes region warrant an American security presence. There is no doubt that terrorist groups like Boko Haram which has publicly declared its allegiance to ISIS and others like Al Qaeda in the Maghreb and other criminal gangs in Africa Sahel have publicly declared and have the capacity to strike US interests in the sub-region or from basis in the sub-region. The US decision to deploy its soldiers in Cameroon to enable it participate in the ongoing war against Boko Haram is the clearest evidence that either terrorist groups have set up basis in Cameroon warranting US direction intervention.

Also, the US might have found sufficient factors and indicia of reliability that Cameroon is or potentially a sanctuary of internal and international terrorism. To this extent, there is no reason to blame the US for taking measures to protect its regional and global strategic interests. The United States policy in this regard is well known and should therefore not surprise anyone. The problem however lies with Cameroon. There is no gainsaying that Boko Haram and the threats of international terrorism posed grave danger requiring appropriate response. The response included urgent remedial tactical and strategic military action.

However the declaration of war from a foreign capital by President Paul Biya was an unprecedented violation of the constitution he swore to defend and an assault on the sovereignty of Cameroon. To this extent, both the Boko Haram that the President declared war against from a foreign capital to combat and the President can be said of being culpable of crimes against the sovereignty of the nation. Added to this, his prosecution of the war betrays a despicable lack of leadership and respect for the victims of the war and the sacrifices in life and limb of our valiant men and women in combat for the defense of the fatherland. Worse, President Paul Biya rushed through the National Assembly a liberticidal law against terrorism whose purport is to support his perpetuation of eternal power through the suppression of civil liberties and fundamental freedoms. 

This law places the country under emergency rule and gives tacit blessings to the very culture of fear that Boko Haram hoped to instill in the citizenry. Inviting the USA into the war as he did the French before without informing his people and seeking a mandate to do so from the National Assembly is proof of a potential treasonable violation of the constitution and disregard for sovereign will of the people. The Americans are thus deploying in a war and war zone of potential distinct strategic interests. Observers have not lost sight of the fact that the war in both the US and France forces are deployed or are deploying was in part fueled by arms indiscriminately dropped by France under Sarkozy to criminal gangs in the Libya and African Sahel. These were intended, according to that Sarkozy, to combat the forces of Muammar Ghadaffi.

There can therefore be no doubt that by the participation of the US and NATO in the war for regime change in Libya the US and France raised the profile of terrorists in parts of Africa, Boko Haram being one of the most visible. In Libya and elsewhere as we see in Syria, the US , France and Great Britain have characterized terrorist groups into good terrorists and bad terrorists, although the difference between both categories can easily be conflated or even tenuous to ascertain. The transmutation from good rebels to bad rebels indeed is hard to ascertain as the US, NATO in the world has come to learn in Libya where the criminal gangs they left in place after Ghhadaffi have invited ISIS to take control of the state and opened a floodgate of unprecedented migration to Europe. So far thousands are dying in the Mediterranean on the watch of the supposed moral guarantors of the supposed civilized world.

Coming back to the US intended deployment to Cameroon, there is no doubt that the mission as announced is genuine but the signals it sends are obvious. Regarding these signals, we must first consider the cacophony of actors in the field. There are a recently constituted regional forces with Head Quarters in Ndjamena, French supposedly reconnaissance Units a euphemism for a French military presence and now the US. Only a person with jaundiced eyes will doubt the fact that French colonial military and economic pact with Cameroon makes the polity under potential French military control. The US military deployment will alter the balance of power and influence in Cameroon and the sub-region.

One obvious fact which must be stated is that with this deployment, the US will remain in Cameroon for a long time to come. Inviting the US to deploy its forces seemed easy for Mr Paul Biya but asking them to park and go home may be problematic in the future. Rather than put a time frame for it to execute and end its mandate, it will be re-enforced and given a more robust mandate with time. The deployment also may be construed as a rare signal that President Biya’s more than three decades of personal power may be coming to an end. If this deployment and other international and internal dynamics do not end it, the French will conclude that he no longer serves their interest and kick him out from power. There are emerging signs that the end of President Paul Biya may plunge the country into a potential blood bath due to a paucity of a viable constitutional arrangement for a smooth transition.

Overtime Paul Biya and the international community by neglect and insufficient attention have allowed the Southern Cameroons problem to snowball into a potential time bomb that may explode drawing in communities in neighbouring Nigeria and international involvement. The complexity of the Southern Cameroons problem makes France an unlikely country to intervene once it explodes. The presence of the US forces may be construed as a potential stabilization force that may caution the potential fallout and obviate a needless bloodletting. Many Cameroonians fear that the presence of American soldiers will invite American enemies far and wide worldwide to the Cameroon warfront. Cameroonians are however divided whether the deployment will attenuate or put brakes to the vampirism of French colonial and neocolonial policies that plunged the sub-region in the bloodletting that is ongoing.

No matter from which perspective one may see it, this deployment marks the beginning of a potential new era and the end of one. None echoes the independence that most Cameroonians and African crave for. But both put the spotlight on those who profess to effectively rule Cameroon. It is from this perspective that we should anxiously consider this significant development. Let the truth which President lacks the courage to admit to inform his country men and women be told, this deployment by the greatest superpower on earth marks a significant development worth noting. Lest we forget, Cameroon is at war, an international armed conflict. That fact and the deployment place its sovereignty and destiny in the hands of foreign powers. There is need therefore for a change of guard at the helm of the state to manage this and other developments. The time for the Cameroon Army to be tele-commanded from foreign holiday resorts and hotels may be coming to end. The deployment of US forces carries symbolic weight. One thing that this deployment may beacon is that the time of directing the war effort while foreign forces and those from the super power are on the ground may soon be over.

Details

Ngwa Bertrand

16.Oct.2015

Hits: 1736

Write comment (0 Comments)

With the notable exception of Cameroonians, the announced deployment of American soldiers to Cameroon to combat Boko Haram terrorists should not come as a surprise to keen observers. First the Americans have been around for a while under supposedly different circumstances. There can be no gainsaying that the United States stated policy has always been to protect American economic and strategic interests where ever they are located or threatened. The Chad-Cameroon pipeline project and the Pecten Cameroon offshore oil exploitation and others fall within this category.

Additionally US strategic interests in the sub-region, particularly in the oil rich Gulf of Guinea, in Equatorial Guinea, Sao Tome and Principe and the Great Lakes region warrant an American security presence. There is no doubt that terrorist groups like Boko Haram which has publicly declared its allegiance to ISIS and others like Al Qaeda in the Maghreb and other criminal gangs in Africa Sahel have publicly declared and have the capacity to strike US interests in the sub-region or from basis in the sub-region. The US decision to deploy its soldiers in Cameroon to enable it participate in the ongoing war against Boko Haram is the clearest evidence that either terrorist groups have set up basis in Cameroon warranting US direction intervention.

Also, the US might have found sufficient factors and indicia of reliability that Cameroon is or potentially a sanctuary of internal and international terrorism. To this extent, there is no reason to blame the US for taking measures to protect its regional and global strategic interests. The United States policy in this regard is well known and should therefore not surprise anyone. The problem however lies with Cameroon. There is no gainsaying that Boko Haram and the threats of international terrorism posed grave danger requiring appropriate response. The response included urgent remedial tactical and strategic military action.

However the declaration of war from a foreign capital by President Paul Biya was an unprecedented violation of the constitution he swore to defend and an assault on the sovereignty of Cameroon. To this extent, both the Boko Haram that the President declared war against from a foreign capital to combat and the President can be said of being culpable of crimes against the sovereignty of the nation. Added to this, his prosecution of the war betrays a despicable lack of leadership and respect for the victims of the war and the sacrifices in life and limb of our valiant men and women in combat for the defense of the fatherland. Worse, President Paul Biya rushed through the National Assembly a liberticidal law against terrorism whose purport is to support his perpetuation of eternal power through the suppression of civil liberties and fundamental freedoms. 

This law places the country under emergency rule and gives tacit blessings to the very culture of fear that Boko Haram hoped to instill in the citizenry. Inviting the USA into the war as he did the French before without informing his people and seeking a mandate to do so from the National Assembly is proof of a potential treasonable violation of the constitution and disregard for sovereign will of the people. The Americans are thus deploying in a war and war zone of potential distinct strategic interests. Observers have not lost sight of the fact that the war in both the US and France forces are deployed or are deploying was in part fueled by arms indiscriminately dropped by France under Sarkozy to criminal gangs in the Libya and African Sahel. These were intended, according to that Sarkozy, to combat the forces of Muammar Ghadaffi.

There can therefore be no doubt that by the participation of the US and NATO in the war for regime change in Libya the US and France raised the profile of terrorists in parts of Africa, Boko Haram being one of the most visible. In Libya and elsewhere as we see in Syria, the US , France and Great Britain have characterized terrorist groups into good terrorists and bad terrorists, although the difference between both categories can easily be conflated or even tenuous to ascertain. The transmutation from good rebels to bad rebels indeed is hard to ascertain as the US, NATO in the world has come to learn in Libya where the criminal gangs they left in place after Ghhadaffi have invited ISIS to take control of the state and opened a floodgate of unprecedented migration to Europe. So far thousands are dying in the Mediterranean on the watch of the supposed moral guarantors of the supposed civilized world.

Coming back to the US intended deployment to Cameroon, there is no doubt that the mission as announced is genuine but the signals it sends are obvious. Regarding these signals, we must first consider the cacophony of actors in the field. There are a recently constituted regional forces with Head Quarters in Ndjamena, French supposedly reconnaissance Units a euphemism for a French military presence and now the US. Only a person with jaundiced eyes will doubt the fact that French colonial military and economic pact with Cameroon makes the polity under potential French military control. The US military deployment will alter the balance of power and influence in Cameroon and the sub-region.

One obvious fact which must be stated is that with this deployment, the US will remain in Cameroon for a long time to come. Inviting the US to deploy its forces seemed easy for Mr Paul Biya but asking them to park and go home may be problematic in the future. Rather than put a time frame for it to execute and end its mandate, it will be re-enforced and given a more robust mandate with time. The deployment also may be construed as a rare signal that President Biya’s more than three decades of personal power may be coming to an end. If this deployment and other international and internal dynamics do not end it, the French will conclude that he no longer serves their interest and kick him out from power. There are emerging signs that the end of President Paul Biya may plunge the country into a potential blood bath due to a paucity of a viable constitutional arrangement for a smooth transition.

Overtime Paul Biya and the international community by neglect and insufficient attention have allowed the Southern Cameroons problem to snowball into a potential time bomb that may explode drawing in communities in neighbouring Nigeria and international involvement. The complexity of the Southern Cameroons problem makes France an unlikely country to intervene once it explodes. The presence of the US forces may be construed as a potential stabilization force that may caution the potential fallout and obviate a needless bloodletting. Many Cameroonians fear that the presence of American soldiers will invite American enemies far and wide worldwide to the Cameroon warfront. Cameroonians are however divided whether the deployment will attenuate or put brakes to the vampirism of French colonial and neocolonial policies that plunged the sub-region in the bloodletting that is ongoing.

No matter from which perspective one may see it, this deployment marks the beginning of a potential new era and the end of one. None echoes the independence that most Cameroonians and African crave for. But both put the spotlight on those who profess to effectively rule Cameroon. It is from this perspective that we should anxiously consider this significant development. Let the truth which President lacks the courage to admit to inform his country men and women be told, this deployment by the greatest superpower on earth marks a significant development worth noting. Lest we forget, Cameroon is at war, an international armed conflict. That fact and the deployment place its sovereignty and destiny in the hands of foreign powers. There is need therefore for a change of guard at the helm of the state to manage this and other developments. The time for the Cameroon Army to be tele-commanded from foreign holiday resorts and hotels may be coming to end. The deployment of US forces carries symbolic weight. One thing that this deployment may beacon is that the time of directing the war effort while foreign forces and those from the super power are on the ground may soon be over.

Details

Ngwa Bertrand

16.Oct.2015

Hits: 1333

Write comment (0 Comments)

With the notable exception of Cameroonians, the announced deployment of American soldiers to Cameroon to combat Boko Haram terrorists should not come as a surprise to keen observers. First the Americans have been around for a while under supposedly different circumstances. There can be no gainsaying that the United States stated policy has always been to protect American economic and strategic interests where ever they are located or threatened. The Chad-Cameroon pipeline project and the Pecten Cameroon offshore oil exploitation and others fall within this category.

Additionally US strategic interests in the sub-region, particularly in the oil rich Gulf of Guinea, in Equatorial Guinea, Sao Tome and Principe and the Great Lakes region warrant an American security presence. There is no doubt that terrorist groups like Boko Haram which has publicly declared its allegiance to ISIS and others like Al Qaeda in the Maghreb and other criminal gangs in Africa Sahel have publicly declared and have the capacity to strike US interests in the sub-region or from basis in the sub-region. The US decision to deploy its soldiers in Cameroon to enable it participate in the ongoing war against Boko Haram is the clearest evidence that either terrorist groups have set up basis in Cameroon warranting US direction intervention.

Also, the US might have found sufficient factors and indicia of reliability that Cameroon is or potentially a sanctuary of internal and international terrorism. To this extent, there is no reason to blame the US for taking measures to protect its regional and global strategic interests. The United States policy in this regard is well known and should therefore not surprise anyone. The problem however lies with Cameroon. There is no gainsaying that Boko Haram and the threats of international terrorism posed grave danger requiring appropriate response. The response included urgent remedial tactical and strategic military action.

However the declaration of war from a foreign capital by President Paul Biya was an unprecedented violation of the constitution he swore to defend and an assault on the sovereignty of Cameroon. To this extent, both the Boko Haram that the President declared war against from a foreign capital to combat and the President can be said of being culpable of crimes against the sovereignty of the nation. Added to this, his prosecution of the war betrays a despicable lack of leadership and respect for the victims of the war and the sacrifices in life and limb of our valiant men and women in combat for the defense of the fatherland. Worse, President Paul Biya rushed through the National Assembly a liberticidal law against terrorism whose purport is to support his perpetuation of eternal power through the suppression of civil liberties and fundamental freedoms. 

This law places the country under emergency rule and gives tacit blessings to the very culture of fear that Boko Haram hoped to instill in the citizenry. Inviting the USA into the war as he did the French before without informing his people and seeking a mandate to do so from the National Assembly is proof of a potential treasonable violation of the constitution and disregard for sovereign will of the people. The Americans are thus deploying in a war and war zone of potential distinct strategic interests. Observers have not lost sight of the fact that the war in both the US and France forces are deployed or are deploying was in part fueled by arms indiscriminately dropped by France under Sarkozy to criminal gangs in the Libya and African Sahel. These were intended, according to that Sarkozy, to combat the forces of Muammar Ghadaffi.

There can therefore be no doubt that by the participation of the US and NATO in the war for regime change in Libya the US and France raised the profile of terrorists in parts of Africa, Boko Haram being one of the most visible. In Libya and elsewhere as we see in Syria, the US , France and Great Britain have characterized terrorist groups into good terrorists and bad terrorists, although the difference between both categories can easily be conflated or even tenuous to ascertain. The transmutation from good rebels to bad rebels indeed is hard to ascertain as the US, NATO in the world has come to learn in Libya where the criminal gangs they left in place after Ghhadaffi have invited ISIS to take control of the state and opened a floodgate of unprecedented migration to Europe. So far thousands are dying in the Mediterranean on the watch of the supposed moral guarantors of the supposed civilized world.

Coming back to the US intended deployment to Cameroon, there is no doubt that the mission as announced is genuine but the signals it sends are obvious. Regarding these signals, we must first consider the cacophony of actors in the field. There are a recently constituted regional forces with Head Quarters in Ndjamena, French supposedly reconnaissance Units a euphemism for a French military presence and now the US. Only a person with jaundiced eyes will doubt the fact that French colonial military and economic pact with Cameroon makes the polity under potential French military control. The US military deployment will alter the balance of power and influence in Cameroon and the sub-region.

One obvious fact which must be stated is that with this deployment, the US will remain in Cameroon for a long time to come. Inviting the US to deploy its forces seemed easy for Mr Paul Biya but asking them to park and go home may be problematic in the future. Rather than put a time frame for it to execute and end its mandate, it will be re-enforced and given a more robust mandate with time. The deployment also may be construed as a rare signal that President Biya’s more than three decades of personal power may be coming to an end. If this deployment and other international and internal dynamics do not end it, the French will conclude that he no longer serves their interest and kick him out from power. There are emerging signs that the end of President Paul Biya may plunge the country into a potential blood bath due to a paucity of a viable constitutional arrangement for a smooth transition.

Overtime Paul Biya and the international community by neglect and insufficient attention have allowed the Southern Cameroons problem to snowball into a potential time bomb that may explode drawing in communities in neighbouring Nigeria and international involvement. The complexity of the Southern Cameroons problem makes France an unlikely country to intervene once it explodes. The presence of the US forces may be construed as a potential stabilization force that may caution the potential fallout and obviate a needless bloodletting. Many Cameroonians fear that the presence of American soldiers will invite American enemies far and wide worldwide to the Cameroon warfront. Cameroonians are however divided whether the deployment will attenuate or put brakes to the vampirism of French colonial and neocolonial policies that plunged the sub-region in the bloodletting that is ongoing.

No matter from which perspective one may see it, this deployment marks the beginning of a potential new era and the end of one. None echoes the independence that most Cameroonians and African crave for. But both put the spotlight on those who profess to effectively rule Cameroon. It is from this perspective that we should anxiously consider this significant development. Let the truth which President lacks the courage to admit to inform his country men and women be told, this deployment by the greatest superpower on earth marks a significant development worth noting. Lest we forget, Cameroon is at war, an international armed conflict. That fact and the deployment place its sovereignty and destiny in the hands of foreign powers. There is need therefore for a change of guard at the helm of the state to manage this and other developments. The time for the Cameroon Army to be tele-commanded from foreign holiday resorts and hotels may be coming to end. The deployment of US forces carries symbolic weight. One thing that this deployment may beacon is that the time of directing the war effort while foreign forces and those from the super power are on the ground may soon be over.

Details

Ngwa Bertrand

16.Oct.2015

Hits: 1516

Write comment (0 Comments)

With the notable exception of Cameroonians, the announced deployment of American soldiers to Cameroon to combat Boko Haram terrorists should not come as a surprise to keen observers. First the Americans have been around for a while under supposedly different circumstances. There can be no gainsaying that the United States stated policy has always been to protect American economic and strategic interests where ever they are located or threatened. The Chad-Cameroon pipeline project and the Pecten Cameroon offshore oil exploitation and others fall within this category.

Additionally US strategic interests in the sub-region, particularly in the oil rich Gulf of Guinea, in Equatorial Guinea, Sao Tome and Principe and the Great Lakes region warrant an American security presence. There is no doubt that terrorist groups like Boko Haram which has publicly declared its allegiance to ISIS and others like Al Qaeda in the Maghreb and other criminal gangs in Africa Sahel have publicly declared and have the capacity to strike US interests in the sub-region or from basis in the sub-region. The US decision to deploy its soldiers in Cameroon to enable it participate in the ongoing war against Boko Haram is the clearest evidence that either terrorist groups have set up basis in Cameroon warranting US direction intervention.

Also, the US might have found sufficient factors and indicia of reliability that Cameroon is or potentially a sanctuary of internal and international terrorism. To this extent, there is no reason to blame the US for taking measures to protect its regional and global strategic interests. The United States policy in this regard is well known and should therefore not surprise anyone. The problem however lies with Cameroon. There is no gainsaying that Boko Haram and the threats of international terrorism posed grave danger requiring appropriate response. The response included urgent remedial tactical and strategic military action.

However the declaration of war from a foreign capital by President Paul Biya was an unprecedented violation of the constitution he swore to defend and an assault on the sovereignty of Cameroon. To this extent, both the Boko Haram that the President declared war against from a foreign capital to combat and the President can be said of being culpable of crimes against the sovereignty of the nation. Added to this, his prosecution of the war betrays a despicable lack of leadership and respect for the victims of the war and the sacrifices in life and limb of our valiant men and women in combat for the defense of the fatherland. Worse, President Paul Biya rushed through the National Assembly a liberticidal law against terrorism whose purport is to support his perpetuation of eternal power through the suppression of civil liberties and fundamental freedoms. 

This law places the country under emergency rule and gives tacit blessings to the very culture of fear that Boko Haram hoped to instill in the citizenry. Inviting the USA into the war as he did the French before without informing his people and seeking a mandate to do so from the National Assembly is proof of a potential treasonable violation of the constitution and disregard for sovereign will of the people. The Americans are thus deploying in a war and war zone of potential distinct strategic interests. Observers have not lost sight of the fact that the war in both the US and France forces are deployed or are deploying was in part fueled by arms indiscriminately dropped by France under Sarkozy to criminal gangs in the Libya and African Sahel. These were intended, according to that Sarkozy, to combat the forces of Muammar Ghadaffi.

There can therefore be no doubt that by the participation of the US and NATO in the war for regime change in Libya the US and France raised the profile of terrorists in parts of Africa, Boko Haram being one of the most visible. In Libya and elsewhere as we see in Syria, the US , France and Great Britain have characterized terrorist groups into good terrorists and bad terrorists, although the difference between both categories can easily be conflated or even tenuous to ascertain. The transmutation from good rebels to bad rebels indeed is hard to ascertain as the US, NATO in the world has come to learn in Libya where the criminal gangs they left in place after Ghhadaffi have invited ISIS to take control of the state and opened a floodgate of unprecedented migration to Europe. So far thousands are dying in the Mediterranean on the watch of the supposed moral guarantors of the supposed civilized world.

Coming back to the US intended deployment to Cameroon, there is no doubt that the mission as announced is genuine but the signals it sends are obvious. Regarding these signals, we must first consider the cacophony of actors in the field. There are a recently constituted regional forces with Head Quarters in Ndjamena, French supposedly reconnaissance Units a euphemism for a French military presence and now the US. Only a person with jaundiced eyes will doubt the fact that French colonial military and economic pact with Cameroon makes the polity under potential French military control. The US military deployment will alter the balance of power and influence in Cameroon and the sub-region.

One obvious fact which must be stated is that with this deployment, the US will remain in Cameroon for a long time to come. Inviting the US to deploy its forces seemed easy for Mr Paul Biya but asking them to park and go home may be problematic in the future. Rather than put a time frame for it to execute and end its mandate, it will be re-enforced and given a more robust mandate with time. The deployment also may be construed as a rare signal that President Biya’s more than three decades of personal power may be coming to an end. If this deployment and other international and internal dynamics do not end it, the French will conclude that he no longer serves their interest and kick him out from power. There are emerging signs that the end of President Paul Biya may plunge the country into a potential blood bath due to a paucity of a viable constitutional arrangement for a smooth transition.

Overtime Paul Biya and the international community by neglect and insufficient attention have allowed the Southern Cameroons problem to snowball into a potential time bomb that may explode drawing in communities in neighbouring Nigeria and international involvement. The complexity of the Southern Cameroons problem makes France an unlikely country to intervene once it explodes. The presence of the US forces may be construed as a potential stabilization force that may caution the potential fallout and obviate a needless bloodletting. Many Cameroonians fear that the presence of American soldiers will invite American enemies far and wide worldwide to the Cameroon warfront. Cameroonians are however divided whether the deployment will attenuate or put brakes to the vampirism of French colonial and neocolonial policies that plunged the sub-region in the bloodletting that is ongoing.

No matter from which perspective one may see it, this deployment marks the beginning of a potential new era and the end of one. None echoes the independence that most Cameroonians and African crave for. But both put the spotlight on those who profess to effectively rule Cameroon. It is from this perspective that we should anxiously consider this significant development. Let the truth which President lacks the courage to admit to inform his country men and women be told, this deployment by the greatest superpower on earth marks a significant development worth noting. Lest we forget, Cameroon is at war, an international armed conflict. That fact and the deployment place its sovereignty and destiny in the hands of foreign powers. There is need therefore for a change of guard at the helm of the state to manage this and other developments. The time for the Cameroon Army to be tele-commanded from foreign holiday resorts and hotels may be coming to end. The deployment of US forces carries symbolic weight. One thing that this deployment may beacon is that the time of directing the war effort while foreign forces and those from the super power are on the ground may soon be over.

Details

Ngwa Bertrand

16.Oct.2015

Hits: 2259

Write comment (0 Comments)

For over a decade, 18 African nations have been ravaged by war, exposing military personnel and civilians to violence and trauma. As a result, one hundred million Africans now suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and in parts of Africa, 50 percent or more of the population is afflicted with PTSD. Its effects debilitate individuals and ripple into their families and communities. PTSD affects not only military combatants but also anyone who witnesses or experiences extremely terrifying, tragic or traumatic events such as natural disasters, rape, torture or kidnapping.

PTSD comes with a variety of symptoms, including inability to sleep, horrific and intense flashbacks to high-stress combat experiences, depression, and difficulty relating to friends, family and spouse, etc. The brains and personalities of those with PTSD simply have not been able to process the intensity of past trauma. These experiences continue to haunt and debilitate the lives of those suffering from its effects.

Research has shown that the practice of the Transcendental Meditation (TM) technique can result in large reductions in PTSD symptoms in short periods of time. In a study on Congolese refugees, 90% of subjects improved into the "non-symptomatic" range within 30 days and stayed that way throughout the 135 days of the research (2). A follow-up study replicated those findings and showed that two thirds of the benefit occurred within 10 days of learning the TM technique (3). Effect sizes were larger than those seen with other behavioral and meditation, relaxation or stress management techniques. 

American Vietnam-era veterans with PTSD were taught TM and showed significant reductions in anxiety, depression, and negative personality traits (4). Similarly, Iraq and Afghanistan veterans had a 50% reduction in PTS symptoms in a three-month period after learning the TM technique (5).

TM is a cost-effective, easily learned, effortless mental technique from the ancient meditative traditions of India. Over five million people worldwide have learned this non-religious technique. It is taught in a systematic, highly structured and standardized manner by trained teachers. Over 350 peer-reviewed studies have documented its positive effects on mental and physical health.

The efficacy of TM practice has been confirmed by the American Heart Association, which concluded that TM is the only behavioral technique that can be recommended for lowering hypertension (6). Previous meta-analyses have also shown TM to be the most effective behavioral technique in reducing anxiety (7).

TM practice produces a state of "restful alertness" - deep rest that allows for a kind of passive processing of trauma. TM dissolves the deep stresses incurred by trauma on the physiological level and thereby attenuates identification with the trauma on the mental level.

During TM practice brain wave activity becomes highly coherent, an indicator of orderliness and brain integration. Biological age and stress hormones such as cortisol, epinephrine and norepinephrine decrease. Indices of relaxation and well-being such as serotonin levels, galvanic skin resistance, and immune-modulatory effects all increase (8). Although conventional approaches to PTSD can improve self-confidence, sense of mastery and coping mechanisms, TM practice apparently goes deeper. It provides a broader spectrum of benefits, including increases in ego development, executive functioning, personality integration, creativity, problem-solving abilities and intelligence. More "side benefits" of TM practice include significant global improvement in psychological functioning and well-being beyond disorder-specific symptom reduction (8).

In addition, African military personnel and veterans may be hesitant to seek PTSD treatment because doing so might be viewed as a sign of weakness. TM is a self-sufficient technique, free from the possible stigma of mental health services. The faces and words of people with PTSD whose lives have been changed by TM practice can reveal far more than this article.

Details

Ngwa Bertrand

15.Oct.2015

Hits: 1703

Write comment (0 Comments)

Shakespeare’s villainous Iachimo may also advise us “to leave unspoken that which, to be spoke, would torture thee.” Nobody asked Paul Biya to express worry about the performance of his government in his December 2013 New Year address. Since he did so, Cameroonians expected him to proceed immediately to form a new, more effective and efficient government, especially because it was not the first time he was complaining about the performance of government.

The government had been regularly discredited not only by scandals, but also by the appearance of its being incapable of meeting the tasks of the day, most of which were undreamt of in November 1982. Government had cut the image of a quarrelsome lot working in dispersed ranks; it seemed to have lost sight of its “core business.” Strategic thinking for the urgent transformative actions needed seemed to be absent, but all mind-readers were predicting that the “overall” boss, when he would decide to act, would only move ponds around the chessboard, as usual.

All of 2014 was a long enough wait, but to extend it to 2015 seemed to be too much! Since nature abhors vacuums, the long wait filled the vacuum with doubt and complacency; the government seemed to be doing nothing, just resting on its laurels, waiting for the unknown. Inertia became the order of the day, and society became restive. The best option seemed to be to put pressure from outside to precipitate action. Dozens of “leaked” governments were published in the press. Stories of wrongdoing in the presidency were spun into sources of leaks of new governments. Protests by our valiant soldiers for their dues were mockinglylinked to the advent of a new government. And so expectation of a new government became the talk of the town. 

It is usually said that public opinion allows the nation to participate in its own affairs because it is an invisible power that rules even in the palaces of kings. Even if the limited political experience of the “opinion” makers caused public opinion to be dominated by general and speculative ideas, this did not diminish its power. It was all like our traditional smoking of the rat mole out of the comfort of its hole with the smoke of public opinion.

And so the new government was smoked out at last! As mind-readers had predicted, it involved mainly the movement of ponds around the chessboard. It did not include the SDF and UDC that public opinion had so pompously included in the government. It did not also include those that feed on the carcass of Um Nyobe in total disregard of his legacy and his heritage.

Once the list of the “new” government hit the public place, the paradigm of opinion shifted to critique. Most critiques and analyses have been directed more at individuals for their disobedience or corruption or lack of solidarity, less at systems. Politics may be more about the citizen than the private individual, but solidarity, whether between members of a government or between individual citizens, is the foundation of politics.If critical public opinion finds those who lost their ministerial posts guilty as individuals, it will mean that they were ill-prepared to be ministers; if they are guilty as ministers, it will be a condemnation of the whole system.

The “new” government will most obviously continue to waste the time of the country because it will be operating in the same system. It will face the same internal struggles against entrenched bureaucratic interests and a power-distribution architecture that encourages fraud and corruption. It will enter the same self-serving routine that is usually blind to outcomes.

Systemic institutions need to be strengthened by large-scale overhaul in government and public-sector agencies. Clear, enforceable rules of discipline that create a meritocratic environment and ethical behaviors that are friendly to creativity, innovation, and talent have to be present in all fronts. The “new” government needs to shed its CPDM divisive mindset and build a social consensus around growth-oriented strategies and policies by providing equal opportunity to all citizens, irrespective of political opinion, area of origin, gender, or religion.

If there are clear, transparent rules that can detect errors and fraud fast enough, the fallouts can be managed on a continuous basis. “Epervier” should no longer work in tedious cycles but on a continuous basis. With all the people that populate the prisons today because of corruption and fraud, there should be much familiarity with the tools and methods they used; these should be exploited to correct and strengthen existing systems, and to design tighter security of public funds. This will meet the common saying that prevention is better than cure. It will end the wasteful and shameful practice of punishing after the fact; of using the process to punish potential rivals.

The visionaries and the all-knowing humans variously called proletariats, Bolsheviks, communists that Karl Marx and others envisaged that would be produced and would only speak the fact, not argue or convince, eventually failed to emerge where the experiments for their production were conducted. They nevertheless emerged in Africa around the ‘60s at the head of the new countries that came to being at that time. Although they emerged without the “lightening of thought” that Marx said would cause their emergence, they have endured and prospered till today in Africa!

And so one of the problems with our “new” government is that like the one before it, the members will consider themselves as “creatures” of this type of being, and will work in fear and total submission –with the being representing their own “specter” that will haunt them throughout their ministerial tenure.

Societies can be governed only with ideas. Government must be open to itself and to society as a whole, so that governance ideas can be bounced back and forth to increase their chances of producing the good. All governments need strong leadership not only from the top but from all its members.

Details

Ngwa Bertrand

15.Oct.2015

Hits: 1685

Write comment (0 Comments)