Cameroonian political media is shaken recently by a rather unusual output discrete deemed almost secret t civilian cab of the Presidency. A wave that echoed in the authorized circles of the diaspora. Indeed taking the pretext of a ” right of reply ” , on the edge of a call to ethics, the very proud Director of the Civil Cabinet, Martin Belinga Eboutou, deemed close to President Biya, sent on October 26, 2009, a to the point improbable, having warning signs to the Congolese weekly Le Choc who made headlines in his latest deliveries by controversial articles, not without clumsiness publicly accusing the Cameroonian president of manipulation and forfeiture.
The projection of Martin Belinga puzzles and amplifies the confusion and misunderstandings born from the “articles” of the Shock. The observation nothing very extraordinary that a close collaborator of the Head of State takes his pen to express his disapproval to a magazine that attacks shame ashamed to the President and denounce “the abject campaign of denigration” of which the latter would be victim. But, it must be said that in the context of Cameroon this approach takes on a different meaning and challenges in more than one way. Of the two things, one: or the Palace of Etoudi considers that the very confidential periodic Le Choc, is the armed arm of the Sassou clan, in which case this hypothesis would legitimize the idea that there is a real fight of leadership in Central Africa since the disappearance of Omar Bongo. Or, the Cameroonian Presidency through its Civil Cabinet takes seriously the rantings of the approximate Le Choc, which would be worrying at this level of the republican hierarchy. In both cases, there is clearly an error of analysis and bad management of opportunity, accompanied by a cruel lack of control and perspective in approaching a file so commonplace that a simple Ministry of External Relations or the Ministry of Foreign Affairs the Communication would have managed without effort. To wonder what is the purpose of the Cameroonian Embassy in Congo?
Exercising one’s right of reply is a normal act in itself and universally accepted. No one disputes this evidence. Unfortunately, the Dcc seems to have, by his bloodshed, all in all cyclical, forgot the antinomy that there is enter right of reply and duty of Retrospectively, the legal paradigm evoked to justify his correspondence could have to disappear in front of another more intuitive, that one, the good sense. Especially since the incriminated polemical texts are marginal and do not require to situate the debate at such a high level of the republic. This makes us think that this is a deliberate act of internal political communication. We are clearly in the classical field of political communication in the endogenous public space. Alas, in his ” right of reply “, Martin Belinga goes astray and deconstructs the uses and at the same time what has always been the “strength” of the Civil Cabinet: its discretion, its myth and its measured distance. It would not be a caricature to say that this rhythm, the deconstruction, we risk sinking into drift. Moreover, when one fattened the trumpets of the flattering legend of the universalism of democracy, to pretend that Cameroon has appropriated it, it is at the very least a tartufferie at worst an imposture. Worse, we come close to the scam when we rely on cleverly ciphered references to his advantage.
Undoubtedly, the Director of the Civil Cabinet adroitly summons the reflex identity and nationalist to create the empathy of Cameroonians and their adhesion to a cause whose contours seem singularly imprecise and distant. The secondary nature of the president’s media hassles is evident in the situation in Cameroon today. The erosion of the legitimacy of Paul Biya is such that all this indifferent Cameroonians “means”. In the field of collective consciousness, this case is a non-event. The split between the public thing and the individual Biya is such that his reputation hitherto circumscribed has now crossed the borders of Cameroon. On the other hand, we share, without any Manichaeanism, the point of view of the Dcc which says between the lines that would win to mother Central Africa to make the cultural and political borders accessory. Surely, this would contribute to the emergence of a real identity if not common, at least shared. From this point of view, the Dcc gains momentum and its correspondence will at least have the merit of having a symbolic significance in the sub-regional geopolitical context.
Whatever one says, it remains an alibi that has given birth to act of political communication. A priori, it supposes a knowledge of ” codes and channels of the public space and a mastery of its language”. This is clearly far from the case of the CC, which betrays its pastism and reveals a certain feverishness coupled with a lack of damaging cold blood. Other forms of mediation and modalities better adapted exist to enlighten the opinion or take it to witness. Certainly Paul Biya is today in a situation that he hates. He has been exposed since the disappearance of Omar Bongo. Forced to play substitute leaders in Central Africa, his body defending, he became the target of commentators on all sides, he who has the art of advancing masked. This surely explains why the Cabinet Civil appropriates a file without real interest and without real stake. In its demonstration, the Dcc cries out to the plot to try to limit the collateral damage and the contagion effect by being the amplifier of the institutional annoyance. The overly technical argumentation deliberates unequivocally and places the Cameroonian presidency at the heart of an ancillary debate. In any case, the intentionality blurs the message, because covered with suspicion. The medium used makes the speech lose its meaning. We swim in the doldrums of intelligence having awkwardly capitulated to an insignificant little newspaper.
To the Director of the Civil Cabinet, if it were necessary, and at the same time to his deputy Joseph L é , a well-known journalist, some magazines are machines for generating interpretation . Transgression and provocation are the pillars of their economic model . As a result, a modest magazine whose background and form is the journalistic trickery is used by its readers to read an indigestible cream pie mixing the endemic corruption that everyone envy (!) a vitriolic portrait of the Cameroonian president, in some realistic respects, is only an epiphenomenon. If the Dcc of the presidency has fun answering every time a publication, a website “Attack” Paul Biya, he did not leave the hostel. We think there are other emergencies and priorities in Cameroon. The prioritization of issues should be the current imperative and taking into account the modern communicational fact, a necessity.
In addition, mentioning by name: Jean Paul Tedga, Mila Assouté and many others, Martin Belinga unrolls them the red carpet and offers them an unexpected legitimation and notoriety! Politically, it is unquestionably a fault. Strategically it is counterproductive, tactically adventurous for the Cameroonian power in place and blessed bread for the people concerned and their allies. It must be said that the austere long-limbed Dcc has long been an illusion with his grand airs as a diplomat “warned”. Today in the confusion and cacophony that characterize Government communication has just revealed that it lacks coolness and experience in political communication outside the cozy corridors of palaces and chancelleries.
More generally, this event comes to unveil the incurances and contradictions of communication at the top of the state, unaccustomed to this perilous exercise. Nothing suprising, especially since a good part of it has been privatized and outsourced for the last ten years to the benefit of of a certain Patricia Balme, whose service record and questionable skills do not justify the huge emoluments paid to her. Another part of this communication is the reserved domain of the presumed didactic Jacques Fame Ndongo, Minister of Higher Education, whose intermittent lyricisms as communication officer of the CPDM are more like linguistic theses than political messages aimed at to be assimilated and understood by ordinary mortals. The last part of this vast communication project, the most congruous, is back to the defector Issa Tchiroma, yesterday still “opponent”, today spokesman of the government and incidentally Minister of Communication. This minister that his wandering and its political transhumance from opposition to the “presidential majority” and vice versa, disqualify being spokesman for a government he fought for years seems to be reduced to the role of spectator, in a case which he should have been one of the main actors. In fact, this illustrious political clone of the useless Bello Bouba, also having benefited from a morocco, is a a mediocre personage whose sadness one can not help but think would enrich republican life and render a service to democracy.
In the end, we affirm that “thought should be a constant vigilance” and reflection an urgency for the close collaborators of the Cameroonian Head of State. It is a question of integrating the ternary dimension of the reflection which conjoins, contextualizes and finally simplifies. In the sphere of the consubstantial political communication of the channels and the message conveyed, it would give coherence and relief to the governmental action by allowing to make arbitrations adapted to the circumstances and to the contemporary time . This is why we are entitled to wonder if the authors of the correspondence to Le Choc magazine have thought about, measured, evaluated and anticipated the impacts of their “right of reply”, an instance that they would benefit from using with great subtlety. and discernment. We say that, when one takes the risk of instrumentalization of a quasi-incident, to pose such an important political act one must measure the consequences beforehand. We think that in the case that concerns us and that is the joke of bistro, it was urgent to wait or delegate to the relevant services. We conclude that there is fault and especially political fault. Martin Belinga, considering his rank, is neither the interlocutor nor the intercessor indicated in this “conflict” junk. Diplomacy is a posture, communication, an attitude.