The different languages aside, it was the festivities on 20 May that made it abun- dantly clear to me that the antagonistic feelings between the two groups were a result of post-independent political affairs in the country. On this particular day in 1972, the French and English parts of Cameroon joined to form the United Republic of Cameroon. However, many Anglophones told me that they do not consider Unification Day to be a national holiday at all. When I asked Essomba to come with me to see the festivities, he looked as though I had just proposed something horrible. ‘No, you go! For me, there’s nothing to celebrate!’ he told me.
Back in October 1961, West Cameroon was unified with East Cameroon instead of with (English-speaking) Nigeria. Then, in 1972, President Ahidjo changed the subsequent political structure based on federalism (two areas, one name) into a unitary state (one area, one name). The idea among Anglophones of an equal power relationship between them and the Francophones turned out to be an illusion.
They (Anglophones) started to resent their region’s loss of autonomy and the allegedly sub- ordinate position of the Anglophone minority in the unitary state. Their numerous grievances were mainly of a political, economic, and cultural nature: notably their under-representation and inferior role in national decision-making councils; the neglect of their region’s infra- structure and the rape and drain of its rich economic resources, especially oil, by successive Francophone regimes; and the attempts at “frenchification”. (Konings & Nyamnjoh 1997: 211)
In the long run, ‘…this created an Anglophone consciousness: the feeling of being “marginalised”, “exploited”, and “assimilated” by the francophone-domi- nated state, and even by the francophone population as a whole’ (Ibid.: 207).
There have been only two presidents since Cameroon’s independence and both Ahmadou Ahidjo (1961-1982) and Paul Biya (1982-present) are from the Francophone zone of the country. In fact, until the 1990s Cameroon’s ‘demo- cratic’ political system rested on a one-party policy, namely the (Francophone) Cameroon People’s Democratic Movement (CPDM). After a lot of Anglophone resistance to the political domination of the French-speaking population, Presi- dent Biya was forced to allow other political parties. The system of multiparty- ism in the 1990s has given rise to the most prominent opposition party, the Social Democratic Front (SDF), which is an Anglophone party from the Bamenda area. The party and its founder, John Fru Ndi, and therefore also the Bamenda area, are considered to be the most ‘rebellious’ against the Biya-regime.
The dominance of Francophones over the Anglophones is kept alive through the process of neopatrimonialism (also known as tribalism):
The essence of neopatrimonialism is the personalisation of rule in flagrant disregard of the rational-cum-legal principles that underpin the functioning of a modern state. … In this form of politics, the rational and effective management of the state is truncated and replaced by a reticulated network of ties of personal loyalty and support, governed by materialistic con- siderations. A clientelistic relationship evolves naturally from the entrenchment of personal rule to support the system. The patron prives security (of any sort) including appointments to high positions of his clients, in return for support – which is in the main political. (Mbuagbo 2002)
Neopatrimonialism, or tribalism, is widespread not only in Cameroonian poli- tics but also in almost all aspects of life, including football. The underlying idea is that people are not put in certain places because they have the appropriate certificates or skills but because they are ethnically related to the person who appointed them. Generally speaking, specific Francophone ethnic groups are dominant within the government and they let their families and friends share in the wealth and power. ‘When your brother is in heaven, you can never go to hell,’ one person in Buea told me. Thus one’s tribesmen will always help a ‘brother’ out.
In this perspective, the Anglophones feel that the Francophones will never allow an Anglophone team to win the national D1 competition. The statistics seem to confirm this view. We know that there are only two Anglophone teams that have won the Cup of Cameroon (Kumbo Strikers in 2000 and Olympique de Buea in 2002) but no Anglophone team has ever managed to win the national D1 competition.
Many Anglophones told me that Kumbo Strikers would have won the ‘double’ in the year 2000 (meaning the Cup of Cameroon and the national league), were it not for a controversial decision by the Francophone-dominated FECAFOOT. At the end of the season, Kumbo Strikers was officially top of the league table. FECAFOOT, however, decided to penalize the team due to spectator violence during one of its last matches. The football federation deducted six points from Kumbo Strikers, who then dropped down the league table, and Fovu de Baham suddenly won the national D1 competition.
According to Anglophones, part of the answer to the research question must be sought in the Anglo-Franco issue. Anglophones would argue that they do not have less chances of winning individual matches but that they do have less or no chance of winning the first-division league.
The story of Anglophones versus Francophones goes further in the sense that there is also a division between the Anglophones themselves. There are strong antagonistic feelings between the ‘coastal/forest people in the South West Province and the ‘grassfield’ people in the North West Province’ (Konings & Nyamnjoh 1997: 211). ‘The North West is very poor,’ Essomba explains. ‘Many Bamendas have moved to the South West for business reasons. Here in Buea you
can see that most shops and restaurants are owned by people from the North West.’ Of course, South Westerners are very sceptical about these developments.
Since the early 1960s the North West elite has continued to play a dominant socio-economic and political role in both provinces, and its acquisition of the best jobs and lands in the South West has provoked strong resentment … Such sentiments have been intensified by the fact that the “entrepreneurial” North Westerners have gradually succeeded in dominating most sectors of the South West economy, in particular trade, transport, and housing. (Konings & Nyamnjoh 1997: 212)
The overall idea is that the Francophone government of Paul Biya is trying to divide the Anglophones, ‘… often capitalising on existing contradictions be- tween the North West and South West élites. Some of the latter have been ap- pointed to key positions in their province in response to complaints about North West domination’ (Ibid.: 224-225). ‘The use of regionalism in terms of selective appointments to high offices by the Biya regime has put the two provinces on a collision course. In the logic of divide and rule, the North West and South West Provinces are made to believe that they are enemies. Mutual stereotyping and exclusion … downgrade all areas of potential unity and leviathan state thrives on such cleavages’ (Mbuagbo 2002).
Generally speaking, it matters if one is an Anglophone or Francophone if the two meet, but it also matters if one is a North or South Westerner if two Anglo- phones meet each other. Therefore, a match between PWD Bamenda and Vic- toria United may be an Anglophone derby but it is also a match between the North West and South West Province.