BREAKING AGAINST VIOLENT EXTREMISM IN CAMEROON

(Google translation of french version)

To see the turn of events in our country Green Red Yellow, it can not be said that the present actions lead to reduce violent extremism in Cameroon. The question to ask is essentially whether we can not have an approach that facilitates a breakthrough in solving the problems that arise.

The first thing to know is that you need to know the root causes of the problem. The knowledge of these root causes does not lie in the   I think that, I believe, or in my opinion ....   "All this has led to the measure s that have made the problem worse. The attempts of solution are initiated in the offices. Actions that bear fruit must be based on information on two dimensions   : intelligence, and an explanation from systematic field information, case study, and the theoretical relationship between these cases. In such a situation, academics must be involved not as political advisers but as people who strip themselves of their political cap to serve the cause of peace in a perspective of respect for the other in its logic while avoiding reasoning. reducers that sets the other in a status that is that of the breaker or destroyer by turning a blind eye to a legitimate ideal he wants to express. A reference on similar cases that have had a positive response from those who make the decisions. The primary sources of information can be neither political veal, forces and populations who live every day the situation, as well as at the sites and places of social expression extremists (Media propaganda, internet and social networks). Scientific study of this information will make it possible to propose solutions that can promote de-escalation. This implies that the political and ideological bias must be eliminated to inform policy makers who must also remove their political helmets to seek to create conditions for de-conflict.

The second consideration is to not be able to take extremists directly as vermin or pests that must be disposed. As noted above, the root causes must be understood. If extremism derives from a denunciationwithout effective response of a situation of current practices in the functioning of the State, public authorities must question themselves to undertake profound reforms . Let's take an example. If corruption is the thing denounced and established from the data and information collected, it is not by inviting a leader to a position of political responsibility that will attack the cause of the problem . The question iswhether the fight against corruption is carried out effectively. Extremism in this case is the consequence of the lack of effective repressive measures against the scourge . The soil in this case is prepared for violent extremism to be expressed and in unsuspected cases. In this case taken as an example of corruption, it will soon become clear that taking superficial measures to satisfy opinion will never work. The fight against violent extremism must do without the politics and passions of ethnic opinions, religions and ideologies to shake up the daily grind that favors inequalities without action being taken so that the immobilization forces taxed too forces of inertia for the educated are jostled . It requires a strong judiciary and structures of struggle that dare to innovate and challenge themselves. A complacent judiciary and corrupted will bring forth '   vigilantes   "To bridge the gap. The vigilante s will be promptly invested in political power and relaunched machine. In conclusion it is necessary that the powers in place operatesubstantial reforms in substance not in the apparent form (political action) before starting to deploy its means of repression .

The third thing to do is not to make the mistake of thinking that with force alone one will have to repress any inclinations. It is obvious that violence will only engender violence. Even if the so-called enemy is eliminated, it will remain that the deep wounds will remain and will only cover the acts of revenge that will sleep in the consciences. The mistake not to make is to want to silence means of expression   : propaganda media and others. These are more sources of information as mentioned above. If we could really go to de-escalation. The silence will never solve the problem when the frustrations crystallize instead of diluting and promote relaxation and understanding of what the other s actually want. Frustrations have introduced e s always as the raw material of violent extremism. Admitting first that the state of functioning of the social body is not perfect is already a step and not a proof of weakness. A proud approach will always prove to be destructive even if the subjects of pride and superiority are not to be demonstrated . In addition, as noted above, there is need to take firm and real resolutions without seeming (people are not as stupid as that) to address the problems. In situations of violent extremism, sites ,personalities and people who work like valves and who will allow relaxation are always needed . Buffers are not spies or intelligence agents and recognized as such they must function as relays. To see them as traitors will lead to catastrophic situations. This is the case of some journalists, traditional leaders , religious authorities and other charismatic people in the communities. The action must be voluntary without coinage. They will certainly have recognition after the de-escalation. Holding their status as sacred, they can serve as a regulator and allow the appeasement of conflicts . The only thing to save them and give radiation in their delicate role and take seriously the messages transmitted and can cause consequent actions so that one side or the other is voi t move things. As previously reported , the presence of forces on the ground must be in the sense of protecting the people and not looking for the so-called suspicious people to get rid of them . Violent extremism breeds leaders every second. Violent extremism cultivated"   values   "That go beyond the sacrifice of life. In this case where repression is the key word, mistakes are quickly made and the populations to be protected become victims and think that other types of forces are needed to better protect them. The abuses that are not repressed transform the security force was rapidly occupying force. Especially when there is already brandishing war trophies on all sides . C andwhich directly feeds the cycle of violence. Without claiming to give recipes, this is to understand that we can not give solutions from an office, on the advice of eminent scholars were they from the cabinets of experts who do not want to move and go on the ground. C them living the situation on the ground (population and police force authorities) are veritable sources of information and proposals to be gathered to prepare a de-escalation. But the question is this   : Is there really any desire to create this de-escalation   ??? If there is this will, we must already know what is done concretely. Some will say that we should not show signs of weakness. Conflict resolution always involves a phase of acceptance that needs to be left to think about the well-being of others in the future and to save lives. It will therefore be unproductive to cause actions that may tarnish the opposing party in its ideal that it seeks to establish, but rather to understand that ideal and to establish a framework that allows expression to be expressed .

Fourth, the solutions are from a collection of information from relevant real s. Identify the source of the frustration and act to resolve them. Exploit information to challenge and propose de-escalation scenarios using sites and buffer people. Buffer sites are not necessarily in the country. It can be located outside the country. Formal and informal meetings can be conducted in this way, and this will make it possible to clearly identify people in the macro picture. On the micro level, useful people are identified in the community and can be used to organize communications for de-escalation . The escalation should not be a political activity of the kind I use my financial resources and my forces to divide r the other side for disorganize. A holistic perspective remains to be considered. The more unity there is in the ranks of the adversary, the more the decisions to be made can become general and take effect. To see them united should not be a phobia but a sign of victory for a lasting de-escalation.

It remains to be seen how to deal with a conflict situation in the process of sedimentation or how to proceed if sedimentation is established   ?

Opinions are expected

P ascal . DH B. Anthorpologist , University of Yaoundé 1