The Dynamics of Cameroon’s Major National Dialogue and Attempts at Resolving the Anglophone Crisis since 2016: Understanding National and International Responses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper revisits the historical roots and attempts by national and international parties in preventing and resolving the Anglophone Crisis since the last phase of its escalation in 2016. It argues that, the Major National Dialogue that was influenced by bottom-up pressures from national, regional, and international actors in the form of protests and armed confrontations, has not successfully addressed the conflict. While the Government thinks that the Dialogue at the Conference Centre in Yaoundé from 30 September to 4 October 2019 was successful, leaders of opposition parties, civil society activists and separatist groups responses show that it was a big failure and a “non-event” that had nothing to do with their struggle for separation and independence. The study which depended on both the rich primary and secondary sources that exist on post-independence Cameroon, argues that, the failure of both the Swiss-led and Canadian-led peace talks and the inability of the government to cooperate with external parties and separatist leaders has given way to more violence in the regions. The study concludes that, for peace and security to be restored, the government of Cameroon must put aside its interests and reorganize an inclusive, broad-based and transparent National Dialogue without preconditions, especially as the crisis has rendered the entire Anglophone regions ungovernable.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".