SDF’s shilly-shally could hurt party

The opposition party does well to put up a fight against the system. But it makes a big mistake to make that its only enterprise.

Cameroon’s leading opposition party has two very clear positions ahead of next year’s presidential election. One, there would be no election under the current disposition of Elections Cameroon; and two, the SDF is not boycotting next year’s election.

It is alright to be confused. Everyone is. And the party has been unable to explain the obvious contradiction.  There has rather been a spirited attempt to ensure that the presidential election fails. The party is doing whatever it can to discourage and block voter registration, citing its lack of faith in the neutrality of Elections Cameroon.

One obvious outcome is that the party would be seen in a fight with the Biya-administration, a situation that is likely to appeal to the vast majority of Cameroonians. In taking such a position, the SDF also tries to portray supporters of massive registration as playing ball with the government. But that is all there is for the SDF to take out.

Fact is, the SDF is not the only opposition force that distrusts Elections Cameroon or wants Biya out of office. Biya has ruined Cameroon, according to many accounts, and the election organ is led by men and women who held senior positions in his governing CPDM party. In spite of the calibre of austere people they are, there is the temptation for ELECAM members to be biased as a result of their past loyalties and the need to keep their jobs. They say that would not be the case.

But while the SDF is concentrating its energy on ELECAM other parties are not stopping there. The vast majority of the opposition are getting their supporters to register and are building a case for their candidates ahead of the presidential election. Right now, there have been at least half a dozen declarations of intention to run. Yet, the candidacy of Fru Ndi or any other SDF official is only assumed.

The party, more than anyone else should know that being vague about ones political strategy [not tactic] is the wrong way to go. In 2007, the SDF burned its energy fighting the electoral system only to be surprised by the worst defeat in 20 years in its North West and West strongholds. The party blames the electoral process and claims the vote was rigged.

SDF bases its actions on the erroneous assumption that the regime in Yaoundé considers their existence as a necessary inconvenience to convince the world of the operation of a pluralist democratic system in Cameroon. Somehow, Yaounde would give in, just to save face. And the SDF would take credit for putting pressure.

But no. From its actions, the CPDM would rather assimilate every opposition force and return the country into a de facto one-party system. Former hardliners like Bello Bouba, Augustin F Kodock and now Issa Tchiroma are examples.  And even though on the far extreme, the SDF has become a comfortable opponent of the regime – talkative and but nonthreatening.

With new forces arising, the party may be also be overrating its importance. The SDF remains credited for the return of the country to multi-party politics and for shaking up the Yaounde regime to concede in some areas of freedom. But a lot has changed since the past ten years. The opposition movement in Cameroon is not only a reserve of political parties but has also drawn the interest of civil society groups and “shadowy forces”. New political leaders are also emerging.

Ben Muna, the chairman of the APF who co-founded the SDF, has a stronger credential that John Fru Ndi, the chairman of the SDF. Muna could appeal better to the broader Cameroon and foreign partners, who have complained of the lack of a credible opposition in Cameroon. If the country decides to have an Anglophone president, Muna would be the better choice. Right now, he has a clearer message about what he intends to do.