Without Paul Biya, Cameroon risks irreversible chaos
Filmmaker Jean-Pierre Bekolo argues that the absence of Paul Biya would strip Cameroon of all legitimate authority, plunging the nation into a period of permanent upheaval. In his recent op-ed, he paints a stark picture of a country already teetering on the edge of systemic collapse.
«Cameroon has entered a phase of permanent contestation, playing out through media, social networks, and power struggles. The factions now vying for influence will soon escalate their tactics,» Bekolo warns.
«We are already living the chaos of a Cameroon without Paul Biya.»
The future, he asserts, is not uncertain—it is already unfolding. The signs have been visible for months, yet remain unacknowledged. Bekolo’s analysis strips away any ambiguity: without Biya’s unifying authority, Cameroon’s institutions will crumble, and its elites will expose their fragility.
A system dependent on one man
Bekolo argues that Paul Biya’s symbolic authority, though eroding, remains the only force capable of holding Cameroon together. Even in his absence or declining health, his presence alone prevents factions from fragmenting further. Public trust in the state has eroded because those who govern in his name lack his legitimacy.
Daily, new examples surface of officials whose titles do not match their influence. The public questions the role of presidential families and inner circles in managing state resources, wealth, and enterprises. Networks once operating in the shadows now flaunt their power, appearing more influential than the Republic itself.
Each incident—whether a Minister of Mines denying state ownership of gold or a Constitutional Council accused of validating political deceit—further weakens faith in institutions. Ministries that fail to address citizens’ daily struggles retain their privileges. Heads of public companies and directors cling to their positions beyond their mandates, while the creation of a vice-presidential role through a disputed constitutional amendment raises eyebrows.
Individually, these events may seem isolated. Collectively, they reveal a single truth: Cameroon’s stability hinges on Paul Biya.
Without him, rival factions once contained by his authority will no longer accept compromise. The power struggles currently confined to media and backroom deals will escalate into open conflict. Those expecting to inherit power through decrees or arrangements will soon discover the fragility of a system built solely on Biya’s presence.
Institutions already paralyzed will fail to function. Within these institutions, voices will rise to challenge decisions that once carried the weight of Biya’s authority. Public finances and funding mechanisms will suffer, triggering a full-blown crisis.
Every decision will be questioned. Every appointment will be scrutinized. Every succession will spark disputes. This is not a forecast—it is the inevitable outcome of a system unable to function without Paul Biya.
And yet, they granted a fresh seven-year mandate to a 93-year-old leader. Only months later, the signs of disorder are already visible.
The only viable path forward
Bekolo calls for a historic act of responsibility: those who have served Cameroon must step aside. Their final duty is not to cling to power but to organize a transition.
This transition must be led by a provisional government with a clear, limited mandate. Its goals: rebuild trust, restore institutions, and establish fair electoral rules. Only this path offers a peaceful way forward and averts collapse.
Anything else—backroom deals, secret meetings, or attempts to circumvent the people’s will—risks plunging Cameroon into the chaos everyone fears.
The authors of such maneuvers will bear full responsibility before history. Their actions are destined to produce the very outcome they seek to avoid: chaos.