ABSTRACT

The church has remained veritable partners in conflict resolution. This explains why the study aimed at examining the role of the church in the resolution of inter-tribal conflicts in the Northwest Region of Cameroon with the case study of Bali-Nyonga and Bawock. Data for the study was obtained through interviews and the review of relevant literature. About 50 informants gave valuable information on the contributions of the church in resolving the Bali-Nyonga and Bawock inter-tribal conflict in the Northwest Region of Cameroon. In Bali-Nyonga and Bawock with 15 of them drawn from Bali-Nyonga and the same number from Bawock.

Twenty of the informants were also drawn from church leaders and actors. The study found out that the church played a meaningful role in the resolution of conflicts through mediation, negotiations and consultations. Findings also revealed that moral, material and financial assistance was offered to those affected directly by the conflict. Such ventures were not discontinued in the post conflict period and it also laid emphases on reconciliation and forgiveness in a bid to ensure durable peace.

Some recommendations were also made by the study among which were; the need for government to ensure strong legislation on inter-tribal conflicts and the political integration of communities by local governments. The civil society role was also emphasized and the need for the cultures of peace to be imbibed on the people of the region was also recommended. Only through the implementations of these recommendations can the efforts of the church gain meaning and ensure durable peace in the area.

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND TO STUDY

Religions role as a promoter of both conflict and peace has been established by scholars. But there is a consensus argument among conflict experts that peace and reconciliation are fundamental Christian core values. Churches have enormous credibility, which offers them the potential to be suited for aiding peacemaking. This capacity of churches as peace promoters is largely overlooked by scholars, who tend to privilege the crucial role of churches as generators of conflict in society. This trend amounts to the blanket labeling of religion as a source of conflict across the world Juergensmeyer (2003), Wellman (2007). The use of violence by Christian faith tradition in numerous instances and places across the globe is particularly emphasized in ways that obscure churches roles in conflict prevention and mediation. In recent decades, scholars like Bercovitch and Kadayifci-Orellana, (2009), Odoemene (2012), argue that religion is equally a guarantor of societal peace. These scholars have sought for decades now to understand how religion has interacted with peace through the lens of Faith Based Organization (FBOs) in conflict prevention and resolution makes religion a resource for peaceful co-existence. Little wonder Odoemene (2012:53), labels the approach of researching violence only as “lopsided, insufficient, and somewhat misleading.” He uses the Catholic Church to illustrate how religion brings peace, stressing that the church has been able to participate in peacemaking and reconciliation across the world, especially after the Second Vatican Council called for the church to pay attention to justice, peace, and human rights. Scholars have acknowledged the capacity of Faith-Based-Organization (FBOs) to be involved in various forms of conflicts at the local, regional, and International levels (Nichols 1994; Sampson 1997; Bercovitch and Kadayaifci Orellana, 2009, 176).

Inter-tribal conflicts have become rampant in many African countries in general and Cameroon in particular. This phenomenon has witnessed an upsurge in Africa because there is well established tribalism in the continent (Ngengong, 2007). This has been demonstrated in the outbreak and existing conflicts in Africa like the case of Angolan and Sudanese Civil wars, the Rwanda genocide and the Nigerian minority uprising which has been a bitter blow to the unity of the country since independence. These and other outbreaks have made Africa to be described as a continent of crippling or entrenched civil wars due to high level of ethnic or tribal diversity (Ibid). These have impacted negatively on the development of the continent as these incessant conflicts have given rise to underdevelopment, health hazards, poverty, insecurity, hunger, drought among other inconveniences making Africa lacking behind in terms of economic growth when compared to another continent of the globe.

In spite of these negative effects of conflicts, measures have been taken to address the situation by the international community and the various African governments that are affected by the crisis.  Such measures include dialogue between the conflicting parties in a bid to initiate understanding and peaceful coexistence. Third party intervention in crisis is a generally acceptable norms as mediators carry out mediation as well as consultation. In extreme cases punishment has been used as a weapon to minimize the outbreak of the conflict as it serves as deterrence to the perpetuators of these conflicts. This therefore means that as attempt at resolving conflicts exist at all levels; international, regional and local. At the international or global level, the United Nations since its inception has been instrumental in preventing disputes and their escalation into wars. It is also well noted for the restoration of peace in conflicting circumstances through the various bodies; the Security Council, and the General Assembly under the supervision of the Secretary General. The quest for peace is not limited to the United Nations. At Regional levels, the African Union, the Arab League, the European Union, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and other sub-continental organizations like Southern African Development Community (SADC), Economic Community of West Africa (ECOWAS) whose main concern amongst others is to solve regional and sub-regional crisis and maintain peace. Their mission are in line with chapter VIII of the United Nation chatter in its article 52 which encourages regional organizations to settle disputes in their own area peacefully [Cernohous, 2014]. Locally, governments in regional and divisional authorities like the case of Cameroon are also important in the management of conflicts.  This is also true for the courts and special commission that are put in place to resolve specific conflicts as well as the society.

In spite of the measures, the problem still persists in the continent and North West of Cameroon is not indifferent. This has been initiated by the numerous ethnic groups that inhabit the Cameroon triangle. As indicated by Sheteh, (2012), Cameroon is Africa in miniature’ as it exhibits all major climate, vegetation and ethnic or tribal composition of the continent.  He goes further to argue that Cameroon harbors over 280 ethno-linguistic groups with very strong tribal identities. There is thus a long history of different tribal grouping that exist in the territory and it is no gain to say that conflicts between these groups must exist. Differences in their culture and ancestries or origin accounts for these conflicts as the increase in population on land that is stagnant has made it possible for different villages to compete over the scarce resource along lines of tribal or ethnic affiliations. It therefore means that the principal cause of Inter-tribal conflict can be attributed to land and this can be traced to the colonial period.

This explains why religious bodies and organizations have been engaged in conflict resolution over the years. For instance, the World Council for Churches (WCC) and the All African Conference of Churches (AACC) meditated the short lived 1972 peace agreement in Sudan. In South Africa, various churches were at the vanguard of the struggle against apartheid and the peaceful transition of power from the apartheid regime to the government of Nelson Mandela. The most dramatic and most frequently cited case is the successful mediation of the Rome based community of Saint Egidio that help in ending the civil war in Mozambique in 1992. In Cameroon, the churches have also been involved in conflict resolution. For example, the Roman Catholic Church has since 2002, established the Justice and Peace Commission (JPC). The Commission is admired for the role it plays in Inter-tribal conflict management and peace building within the region. The long-lasting land dispute between the Bali-Nyonga and Bawock that led to destruction of property and a near annihilation of one of the parties; a similar Inter-tribal conflict in Mbessa and Oku also on land disputes which had dragged on for ages without solution despite the intervention of the civil administration could only be arrested when the JPC succeeded in bringing the warring communities to the negotiation table.

1.2. Statement of the Problem         

The recurring inter-tribal conflicts between the Bali-Nyonga and Bawock communities in the Northwest region of Cameroon highlight significant socio-political and cultural challenges that undermine peace and development in the region. Despite numerous efforts by various stakeholders to mediate these conflicts, the disputes persist, often resulting in violence, displacement, and destruction of property. One of the critical areas requiring exploration is the role of the Church in conflict resolution within this context. The Church, historically viewed as a moral and unifying institution, has the potential to mediate and foster reconciliation between conflicting parties. However, its impact and effectiveness in this role remain under-researched and inadequately documented. This study aims to investigate the Church’s involvement in the Bali-Nyonga and Bawock conflict, examining its strategies, challenges, and overall effectiveness in promoting peace and reconciliation. Understanding the Church’s role could provide valuable insights into enhancing conflict resolution mechanisms not only in Cameroon but also in other regions experiencing similar inter-tribal tensions (Nji, 2020; Mbunwe, 2018).

1.3. Research Questions

The fundamental research statement presented above can further be divided into subsidiary questions.  Hence, the specific questions will be;

1. What are the contributions of the church in resolving the Bali-Nyonga and Bawock conflict in the Northwest Region?
2. To what extent is the contribution of the church been effective in resolving the Bali-Nyonga and Bawock conflict?
3. What are the challenges facing the church in their role of resolving the Bali-Nyonga and Bawock conflict?

1.3.1 General Objective

This research has a general objective to assess the challenges facing the church and their role in resolving inter-tribal conflicts in the Northwest Region of Cameroon and how effective their contributions have brought a sustainable solution to the crises in the North West Region of Cameroon.

1.3.2 Specific Objective

1. Identify the contributions of the church in resolving inter-tribal conflicts
2. To examine the challenges facing the church in bringing sustainable solutions to the crises in the Northwest Region of Cameroon.

1.4 Research Hypotheses

1. What church has played significant contribution has the church brought in resolving these inter-tribal conflicts in the Northwest Region of Cameroon?
2. What were the effectiveness of the Church’s endeavors in resolving these conflicts?
3. What are the challenges facing the church in their role of resolving the Bali-Nyonga and Bawock conflict?

1.5 Literature Review

The literature review in this work, there is a clear indication that much has been written on conflict and conflict resolution. However, there is little to ride home about when one considers that little or nothing has been documented on what are the contributions of the church in resolving the Bali-Nyonga and Bawock conflict in the Northwest Region. Most specifically, there seem to be no work on the church in the management of these conflict in the North West Region of Cameroon, talk less of the Justice and Peace Commission of the Catholic Church and the Presbyterian Church in Cameroon. This study therefore comes in to fill this gap.

1.5.1 Conceptual Review

1.5.1.1 Tribe

Tribes can be described as indigenous peoples who are not directly or outside the administration of a centralized authoritative state (Martel, 2012). (Appiah, 1999), gives a vivid description of a tribe when he opines that it is “…..a group of people who descendant from common ancestors and ruled by a hereditary “chief, who share a single culture (including, in particular, language and religion), and who live in a well-defined geographical region” (703). Better still, they can be viewed as independent organized genealogically groups where individual rights and membership are determined by lineages (Brown, 2001). As per (Gellner and Hart, 1972), they are thus rooted in the kinship system where patriarchal lineage is grouped agnostically (Gellner and Hart, 1972) as each member of society or kin traces its descent to a lineage or one person or better still ancestry (Evan Pritchard, 1940). This is common to Africa as each individual adhere to and identifies to a tribe or ethnic group with a common origin, migratory history and other forms of human entanglement in the course of their history.

(Richard Tapper, 1991) affirms this when he argues that kinship and patrilineal descent is the central core of a tribe as it becomes bases for “identity, political allegiance, and behavior” (16). He goes further to argues that this gives rise to social homogeneity, egalitarianism, and segmentation making it unique when compared to the state which is heterogeneous in nature. It therefore implies that tribes will be prone to a single language or ethno-linguistically and ethno-religiously homogeneous. By implication, homogeneity is one of the major characteristics of a tribe. However, Puglia (www.africaeconomicanalysis.org) argues that modernism and urbanization have given rise to heterogeneity in many societies and the mixture of different groups, cultures, religions and languages have made the term redundant and prefers the appellation “ethnic” to tribe. It therefore means that the study will view ethnicity as tribal or ethnic group and tribe to mean one and the same term.

1.5.1.2 Ethnic

Multiple and contradictory definitions of ethnicity have been offered by a range of scholars from different academic disciplines. The term “ethnic” is derived from the Greek word (ethnos). A good working definition is that a collective shares common ethnicity (ie it is an ethnie) if the group has a common name, a shared myth of common descent, shared historical memories, one or more differentiating elements of common culture, an association with a specific “homeland,” and a sense of solidarity for significant sectors of the population. These attributes of ethnic communities were offered by Hutchinson and Smith (1996), and they are accepted here as both necessary and sufficient conditions of ethnicity, although other influential definitions exist (e.g. Brass 1991; Horowitz 1985). An ethnic group, then, is a subjectively-subscribed-to cultural collective that emphasizes the role of myths of descent and historical memories (also regarding a regionally specific homeland) and that is characterized by one or more cultural differences such as religion, customs, language, or institutions (Smith 1991).

The ethnic markers listed above might be more or less strongly developed for certain ethnic groups, but all ethnic groups will manifest each attribute to some degree (Smith 1988). Other definitions are more circumscribed, and for example recommend limiting the definition of the ethnic group to a sense of group uniqueness. However, this is not a sufficient condition for the emergence of ethnie, as it does not differentiate ethnic groups from other types of group to a satisfactory degree (e.g. regional groups, or even interest groups such as tennis clubs). The content of the shared culture might differ between ethnic groups (e.g. religion for Jews, language for Germans) and the varying importance can help to explain the different trajectories of ethnic communities (Smith 1981).

More fundamental than the question of necessary and sufficient markers is the question of to what extent ethnicity is primordial or constructed. Primordialism holds that ethnicity is rooted in objective reality and that it is externally given. Humanity is understood as being divided into primordially existing ethnic groups bound together by kinship and biological heritage. Constructivism sees ethnic groups as products of human social interaction and construction, as malleable and nonexistent outside subjective perception. Constructivists view national and ethnic identities as the product of historical and subjective forces rather than as a biological necessity. One variety of this is the instrumentalist approach (Hechter 1999), which treats ethnicity as a resource for interest groups for achieving political goals. Primordialist views do not hold much currency in the academic discourse anymore; it is now commonly accepted that ethnicity is subject to human agency, perception, and construction. Ethnic categories are not independent from their social representations; they do not objectively exist. Ethnic markers cannot be objectively derived from reality, and it is only when they are endowed with significance that they become psychologically and behaviorally relevant (Smith 1991).

However, scholars differ in their views of how much the construction of ethnicity is constrained by contextual factors. Accepting a radical constructivist view of ethnicity implies that any amount of perceived group distinctiveness is enough to build an ethnic group on but that no amount is enough to ensure that an ethnic group is built on it. It also implies that ethnic identity is not universal and not an essential quality inherent to the human condition. However, other views have highlighted that, although the term “ethnicity” is recent, the sense of kinship, group solidarity, and common culture to which it refers is as old as the historical record, that ethnic groups have played an important role in all societies, in every period, and on every continent (Hutchinson and Smith 1996). More moderate constructivist accounts seem, on balance, more convincing. They suggest that the construction of ethnicity is limited by existing constructions, physiognomies, history, and political geography. According to this view, people are limited in their ethnic self-definition by, but not prisoners of, constraining contextual factors.

Acknowledging the constructed nature of ethnicity on an analytical level brings the danger of failing to acknowledge the often-tremendous subjective importance that people place on their ethnic group belongings. Although ethnicity is ultimately a construct rather than an objective reality, it is experienced as an objective reality—that is, it is part of people’s psychological reality. Primordial notions of ethnicity are prevalent in the popular discourse and in lay conceptions of ethnicity. Here, features of ethnic groups are often taken to demarcate an objective difference, and ancestry is seen to link successive generations of its members. The concern of academic psychology should be to study people’s experiences and perceptions, not to negate them. This is especially important when studying ethnic-minority groups, for whom an emphasis on ethnic difference is often an attempt to protect themselves and their interests from a more powerful majority group.

1.5.1.3 Conflict

Whenever two individuals opine in different ways, conflict arises. In a layman’s view, conflict is nothing but a fight either between two individuals or among group members. No two individuals can think alike and there must definitely be some differences in their thought, process as well as their understanding. Disagreement among individuals lead to conflicts and fights. Conflict arises whenever individuals have different values, opinions needs, interests and are unable to find a middle way.

In defining conflict, Ramsbotham et al (2007: 13) sees it broadly as a peaceful and or forceful pursuit of incompatible goals by different groups over a wider span of time and involves a wider class of struggle than arm conflict which Sandal (1999:22) views as a narrower category denoting conflict where parties on both side resort to the use of force. However, John Burton (1990:15) gave a distinction between disputes about negotiable interest that can be settled by compromise and more deep-seated conflicts that involved human needs and can only be resolved by removing underlying causes.

Conflict is a struggle or contest between people with opposing needs, ideas, beliefs, values, or goals. Defined in broadest terms, conflict denotes the incompatibility of subject positions (Diez et al, 2006: 565). This definition emphasizes that the opposition or incompatibility at the heart of the conflict, and initially leaves open the exact nature of these incompatibilities, i.e. whether they are between individuals, groups or societal positions; whether they rest in different interest or beliefs; or whether they have a material existence or come into being only through discourse. Whatever be the case, conflict can be defined as incompatibility of interest.

1.5.1.4 Inter-Tribal Conflict  

There are differing literatures on the meaning of ethnic conflict. Before conceptualizing the term explicitly, there is the need to understand the meaning of conflict. The term “conflict” can be described as the pursuing of similar but incompatible goals by individuals or simply competition over the same interests or goals. Better still, when parallel intentions and commitments are bound or when people disagree over issues then can one talk of conflict (Deconzo, 1997). (Tem, 2016) gives a colorful description of conflicts when he opines that “….. Opposition, friction and argument between two parties or more protests, demonstration and aggressions between two parties or more and other destructive behaviors are indicators of conflict”. With this understanding of the term “conflict”, inter-tribal conflict has been insinuated as a state of affairs where people disagree exclusively on ethnic lines leading to confrontations, aggressions, arguments, oppositions and friction between tribal groups. This therefore indicates that one group must claim a distinct ethnic identity and acts in the interest of such a group. Inter-tribal or ethnic conflict will involve at least one party from different ethnic identities or members of different ethnic groups or civic clashes among members of a tribe within or across the borders with the warring parties mobilizing along ethnic lines or acting on behalf of a particular ethnic group (Cordell and Wolff, 2010; Tishkov, 1999:576). To (Angstorm, 2000) it is understood to be “organized large-scale violent conflict among ethnic groups of which at least one has not achieved statehood or is not in possession of the state apparatus”.

1.5.1.5 Conflict Resolution 

Conflict Resolution theorists in contrast; reject the political power view of conflict, arguing instead that in communal and identity conflicts, people cannot compromise on their fundamental needs. However, argue that it is possible to transcend conflict if parties can be helped to explore, analyze, question and reframe their positions and interests.

Conflict Resolution therefore emphasizes intervention by skilled but powerless third parties working unofficially with the parties to foster new thinking and new relationships. They seek to explore what is the root of the conflict and tend to find creative solution that the parties may have missed. Conflict Resolution is about how the parties can move from zero sums destructive conflicts to positive sum constructive outcomes. The aim is to develop processes of conflict resolution that appear to be acceptable to parties in dispute.

As Johan Galtung (1996) defines it, Conflict Resolution is a comprehensive term which implies that the deep-rooted sources of conflict are addressed and transformed. This implies that behaviors are no longer violent, attitudes are no longer hostile and the structure of the conflict has been changed. In the view of Kurtz (1999), Conflict Resolution can be defined as the implementation of peaceful strategies for settling conflicts using alternative to violent forms of leverage.

Curle (1971) in his model of the transformation in asymmetric conflict contends that the sole aim of conflict resolution is not the elimination of conflict which would be both impossible and undesirable. Rather to him, the aim of conflict resolution is to transform the actual and potential violent conflict into peaceful non-violent processes of social political change.