Tapang Ivo Tanku’s Warning: Why Winning Is Not the Same as Taking Power

Tapang Ivo Tanku’s Warning: Why Winning Is Not the Same as Taking Power

Yaoundé, November 13, 2025 (True Cameroon) - Professor Tapang Ivo Tanku, political analyst, recently posted an assessment of Cameroon’s 2025 political landscape. His central argument is blunt: in Cameroon, opposition candidates may win votes, but they cannot win power because the system controlling certification, not the population, determines outcomes.

His analysis is not theoretical. It is rooted in the real machinery of Cameroon's political order, an order shaped by:

  • institutional gatekeeping

  • centralized administrative control

  • security oversight

  • long-standing party networks

  • and an electoral environment built to preserve continuity

This article examines Tapang’s core claims, evaluates their relevance, and outlines practical, concrete, legal ways Cameroonians can strengthen democratic space in a system not designed for political alternation.


I. WHY TAPANG’S COMMENTARY HITS THE HEART OF CAMEROON’S REALITY

Below is a grounded breakdown of his argument, placed squarely within the actual structures of the Cameroonian state.


1. Elections Exist — Transitions Do Not

Tapang argues that the question is not whether Tchiroma or any opposition figure can win numerically, but whether:

  • MINAT can accept the result

  • ELECAM can publish it transparently

  • the Constitutional Council can certify it

  • security forces can enforce it

In Cameroon’s political reality:

  • MINAT controls the administrative machinery of elections

  • ELECAM is widely seen as non-independent

  • The Constitutional Council has never overturned a presidential result

  • Security forces remain aligned with the presidency

This creates what analysts describe as electoral certainty elections occur, but outcomes rarely shift.


2. CPDM’s Ground Network: The Real Source of Power

Tapang highlights CPDM subsections as the real machinery of control.

This is accurate.

Across Cameroon’s 360+ subdivisions, subsection presidents:

  • mobilize voters

  • monitor polling stations

  • influence local ELECAM agents

  • control local narratives

  • negotiate with traditional rulers

  • act as intermediaries between administration and population

In rural Cameroon where elections are won these networks are embedded, familiar, and permanent.

Opposition parties, by contrast:

  • have weak rural structures

  • operate mostly in cities

  • lack permanent village-level networks

  • depend heavily on short-term mobilization

In authoritarian-leaning systems, ground structure beats popularity every time.


3. Crowds ≠ Votes; Votes ≠ Power

Tapang correctly notes:

  • Crowds attend rallies out of curiosity

  • Social media noise rarely correlates with real influence

  • Rural voters often attend all rallies, not out of support but out of interest

  • State institutions, not crowds, determine outcomes

Cameroon is not a country where rally turnout predicts results.
It is a country where administrative networks decide the flow of electoral information.


4. The Military and State Security Shape the Final Picture

Tapang’s reminder is grounded in reality:
In Cameroon, the military and police define the boundaries of political competition.

This does not mean they choose winners directly but they determine:

  • what protests are allowed

  • what political gatherings proceed

  • how election day security operates

  • how post-election dissent is controlled

In systems like this, citizens do not have the capacity to enforce their own vote.


5. Western Powers Prefer Predictability

Tapang’s analysis aligns with 40 years of Cameroon's diplomatic pattern.

Western partners consistently prioritize:

  • stability

  • counterterrorism cooperation

  • regional influence

  • economic ties

Biya’s regime has been predictable and cooperative internationally.
Western governments rarely risk instability by supporting untested leaders.

Thus, foreign actors are unlikely to challenge internal outcomes.


II. WHY TAPANG’S MESSAGE MATTERS

His post is relevant because it provides:

  • a clear language for describing political stagnation

  • a structural explanation beyond emotions

  • a framework for understanding why change is slow

  • a realistic assessment of Cameroon’s power architecture

Above all, Tapang’s analysis reminds Cameroonians that political imagination must be paired with civic organization.


III. WHAT CAMEROONIANS CAN DO CONCRETELY, LEGALLY, AND REALISTICALLY

The following strategies are grounded in Cameroon’s actual political terrain.
These are long-term civic pathways that strengthen democratic space without confrontation.


1. BUILD REAL LOCAL ORGANIZATIONS (NOT JUST ONLINE MOVEMENTS)

Cameroon’s political power is rural.
Therefore, civic engagement must also be rural.

Communities can safely and legally organize around:

  • development associations

  • parent-teacher groups

  • health committees

  • farmers’ cooperatives

  • village youth councils

These groups create local accountability ecosystems that reduce reliance on political intermediaries.


2. STRENGTHEN COMMUNITY-LEVEL CIVIC EDUCATION

Focus on practical knowledge, not activism:

  • What MINAT actually does

  • How ELECAM functions

  • How budgets move from Yaoundé to councils

  • What rights citizens have in local governance

  • How to report irregularities legally

Knowledge reduces manipulation.


3. CREATE NON-PARTISAN PUBLIC MONITORING STRUCTURES

Communities can track:

  • council projects

  • municipal budgets

  • school funding

  • health center conditions

  • water projects

Publicly accessible scorecards are legal and effective.


4. SUPPORT LOCAL JOURNALISM AND COMMUNITY RADIO

Cameroon’s information battle is local, not national.

Community radios can:

  • fact-check politicians

  • discuss development budgets

  • highlight mismanagement

  • educate voters

A well-informed village is harder to manipulate.


5. ENGAGE FORMALLY IN COUNCIL AND REGIONAL SESSIONS

Cameroonian law allows citizens to:

  • attend municipal council meetings

  • request budget details

  • petition for project transparency

  • engage in participatory development forums

These are legal and often underused.


6. DOCUMENT EVERYTHING

In Cameroon’s controlled political space, documentation is power:

  • minutes

  • photos

  • receipts

  • audio evidence

  • local testimonies

Institutional memory strengthens accountability.


7. PUSH FOR REFORMS THROUGH CIVIL SOCIETY NOT SOCIAL MEDIA ALONE

Real reform comes from:

  • legal petitions

  • policy proposals

  • independent lawyers

  • professional associations

  • academic institutions

These bodies have legitimacy and protection that social media movements lack.


IV. CAMEROON’S FUTURE DEPENDS ON ORGANIZED CITIZENS, NOT CHARISMATIC MOMENTS

Tapang Ivo Tanku’s commentary is a reminder that charisma cannot defeat structure, and hashtags cannot overcome institutions.

But Cameroon is not doomed to stagnation.

Countries with similar systems — Senegal (2000), Zambia (1991 & 2021), Benin (1990), Kenya (2002) — built lasting change through:

  • civic networks

  • community education

  • legal advocacy

  • public accountability groups

  • media pressure

  • institutional reforms

Cameroon will need the same.

Change is not a moment.
It is a process of organized civic maturity.

V. CONCLUSION: THE FUTURE BELONGs TO ORGANIZED COMMUNITIES NOT POLITICAL MOMENTS

Political science is clear on one principle:
authoritarian resilience is strongest where citizens are isolated, and weakest where citizens are organized.

In Cameroon, decades of centralized control have created a culture where people expect change to come from:

  • a charismatic leader,

  • a viral speech,

  • a dramatic election,

  • or a symbolic moment.

But history in Africa and beyond shows that real transition is never triggered from the top.
It emerges from bottom-up grassroots mobilization, built slowly, consistently, and locally.

Grassroots political theory identifies three pillars that change entrenched systems:


1. Local Organization

Communities that organize independently around water, schools, markets, farms, health, or development projects develop political strength organically.

These groups become:

  • information hubs

  • accountability networks

  • negotiation blocs

  • civic schools

  • watchdog structures

This turns villages and neighborhoods into autonomous centers of civic pressure not passive recipients of political narratives.


2. Dense Social Networks

Strong democracies are built where citizens:

  • meet often

  • share information

  • evaluate leaders collectively

  • compare promises to outcomes

  • document failures

  • and coordinate across villages

These dense social networks dilute the influence of political intermediaries who currently dominate communication between Yaoundé and the population.

When citizens talk to each other more than they talk to politicians, the political landscape shifts.


3. Civic Discipline and Continuity

Grassroots mobilization is not a burst of energy it is a discipline.

It means:

  • showing up to council meetings

  • tracking budgets

  • asking for documents

  • documenting local issues

  • forming committees

  • demanding transparency

  • educating neighbors

  • repeating the process consistently

No protest, rally, or election can substitute for daily civic pressure at the community level.


The Theory in Practice: What It Means for Cameroon

The political machine described by Professor Tapang Ivo Tanku the subsections, the administrative networks, the controlled information flow is powerful not because the people are weak, but because the people are disconnected.

Grassroots mobilization reconnects them.

When communities build:

  • cooperatives,

  • civic associations,

  • watchdog committees,

  • rural forums,

  • women and youth councils,

  • and independent local groups —

…they create alternative centers of legitimacy that slowly reduce the influence of centralized party structures.

This is how democratic cultures grow:

not through sudden victory,
not through social media energy,
but through thousands of small, disciplined actions
that accumulate over time.


Grassroots Work Is Slow But It Is Unbeatable

Every country that transitioned peacefully from dominant-party rule relied on grassroots mobilization:

  • Zambia in 1991 and 2021

  • Senegal in 2000

  • Kenya in 2002

  • Benin in 1990

  • Malawi in 1994

None of these transitions began with an election.
All began with organized communities:

  • farmers' associations

  • teachers’ unions

  • religious councils

  • youth networks

  • student movements

  • neighborhood committees

  • women’s groups

Cameroon has these structures but they are often fragmented, politicized, or dormant.

The task now is un-fragmenting, re-training, and re-activating them.


Why This Matters Now

If Tapang’s analysis is correct that the system is designed to ensure continuity then the only meaningful counterweight is grassroots civic organization strong enough to demand accountability at every level.

Not confrontation.
Not chaos.
Not violence.

But organized civic pressure backed by community legitimacy.

That is what scholars call “the slow revolution.”
It is the only type of revolution that authoritarian structures cannot easily suppress, because it does not depend on elections it depends on people.


Final Word: The Road Ahead

Cameroon will not change because someone wins on social media.
It will change when ordinary people, village by village, association by association, build a civic culture strong enough to:

  • track their leaders

  • demand transparency

  • monitor budgets

  • educate their communities

  • and hold institutions accountable

Grassroots mobilization is not glamorous.
But it is the only strategy that has ever rewritten the political map of any country.

If Cameroonians choose that path patiently, lawfully, and collectively then the political simulation described by Professor Tapang Ivo Tanku will not last forever.

Not because the system collapses.
But because the people have finally learned how to out-organize it.

0 comments

Leave a comment