Detained Muslim scholar Abdulkarim Ali rejects Dion Ngute’s ‘natural death’ claim on Anglophone conflict

Detained Muslim scholar and peace activist Abdulkarim Ali has challenged Prime Minister Joseph Dion Ngute’s suggestion that Cameroon’s Anglophone conflict could “die a natural death”, arguing that time will not resolve the political grievances behind the violence.

In a statement dated 29 September 2026, Ali called for a ceasefire, the release of prisoners of conscience, guarantees allowing people in exile to return, and mediated negotiations between the Cameroonian government and representatives of Southern Cameroons.

His essay, titled Neither in 10–15 Years Nor in Six Centuries: Why the Southern Cameroons Conflict Cannot Die a Natural Death, disputes the idea that exhaustion, generational change or economic incentives will eventually extinguish demands for self-determination.

“This is not a strategy for resolution; it is a strategy for avoidance,” Ali wrote.

“It allows beneficiaries of the status quo to present inaction as wisdom, while the core political question, the status of the Southern Cameroons, remains unresolved.”

The statement comes after Dion Ngute addressed a community dialogue and peace and security meeting in Buea on Monday, 28 September. According to reports from the meeting, the Prime Minister said the conflict was already declining and could die a natural death within another 10 or 15 years. He also urged participants to work towards resolving it now and encouraged community leaders to persuade armed fighters to disarm and enter the government’s reintegration programme.

Ali extends his rebuttal beyond that timeframe, arguing that even several generations of waiting would leave the central dispute unresolved unless the parties negotiate a political settlement.

Ali describes the conflict as ‘asymmetric and existential’

Ali’s argument rests on a distinction between the military methods used in a conflict and the political convictions sustaining it.

He describes the Southern Cameroons conflict as asymmetric because separatist fighters use guerrilla warfare against a substantially stronger state military. He also calls it existential, saying those involved in the struggle believe their identity, institutions and right to self-determination face erasure.

In his account, this belief explains why military pressure or a prolonged reduction in fighting may fail to end the conflict.

Ali rejects the assumption that younger generations will simply forget the grievances of their predecessors. He argues that unresolved suffering can preserve those grievances and give future generations reasons to continue the struggle.

“Delay does not extinguish an ideology. It hardens it, teaches a new generation that dialogue was denied, and ensures that any renewed fighting will be waged with greater resolve,” he wrote.

He also argues that an insurgency can persist with relatively few committed fighters where a community’s sense of threat and sources of support endure. His reference to “50 committed fighters” illustrates that argument; the essay does not present the figure as the current size of separatist forces.

Throughout the statement, Ali uses Southern Cameroons to describe the territory comprising Cameroon’s North-West and South-West regions. He identifies its political status as the issue that negotiations must address.

Historical comparisons support his call for negotiations

Ali draws on several international conflicts to argue that prolonged violence requires deliberate political intervention.

He cites Northern Ireland’s 1998 Good Friday Agreement as an example of negotiations addressing competing identities and arrangements for government. The agreement established a framework for power-sharing and recognised that any change in Northern Ireland’s constitutional status required majority consent.

He also points to Mozambique’s 1992 peace agreement and Colombia’s 2016 agreement with the FARC, emphasising political inclusion and, in Colombia’s case, land reform and political participation.

In Ali’s reading, these agreements show why negotiations must engage with the issues that sustain armed movements.

He contrasts those negotiated processes with conflicts where ceasefires or periods of reduced violence have left political disputes unsettled. His examples include Casamance in Senegal, Nagorno-Karabakh and Western Sahara.

Ali also draws comparisons with the Israeli–Palestinian conflict and Iran’s confrontation with Israel and the United States. He argues that military superiority cannot by itself settle disputes over sovereignty, security or self-determination.

These comparisons form part of his wider contention that authorities should distinguish a decline in armed activity from a settlement that addresses the reasons people took up arms.

Ceasefire, prisoner releases and the return of exiles

Ali proposes four steps towards ending the conflict: a ceasefire, the release of all Southern Cameroons prisoners of conscience, guarantees for people in exile to return, and mediated negotiations.

He calls for talks between the Cameroonian government and representatives of Southern Cameroons, with the underlying political questions discussed through to a conclusion.

The statement places prisoner releases and the return of exiles within the proposed peace process. Ali presents them as essential conditions for a credible attempt to resolve the dispute.

His appeal focuses on direct engagement over the conflict’s root causes, rather than an expectation that armed groups will disappear over time.

Cameroon’s Anglophone crisis began with protests in 2016 by English-speaking lawyers, teachers and others over marginalisation and threats to their legal and educational systems. A violent government crackdown preceded the escalation into armed conflict, with separatists proclaiming an independent state called Ambazonia in October 2017.

The violence has exposed civilians to abuses by government forces and armed separatists. The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect has documented unlawful killings, torture and village burnings by security forces, alongside killings, kidnappings and attacks on education by separatist groups.

A peace advocate serving a life sentence

Ali is held at Kondengui Central Prison in Yaoundé. His latest statement continues his public advocacy for negotiations while imprisoned.

According to Amnesty International, he was arrested in Bamenda on 11 August 2022 after denouncing torture against civilians. Before his arrest, he ran the Peace Research Centre in Bamenda and supported the Swiss-led mediation process aimed at resolving the Anglophone crisis.

A military court in Yaoundé sentenced him to life imprisonment on 16 April 2025 on charges of “hostility against the homeland” and “secession”. Amnesty said the judgment was delivered in absentia after Ali challenged the tribunal’s jurisdiction and refused to appear before it. His lawyer told the organisation that the sentence had been appealed.

Amnesty condemned the conviction as “an affront to justice” and called for his immediate and unconditional release, saying he had been punished for exercising his right to freedom of expression.

Ali closes his September statement by invoking Nelson Mandela and Christian and Islamic teachings on reconciliation. He describes ending the war as a moral choice requiring the parties to stop fighting and negotiate.

“Time is not a peacemaker. Peace is made by people who choose it,” he wrote.