Minister Atanga Nji’s latest work bridges academia and statecraft

In his new book titled Understanding the Meaning of My Permanent Struggle for Respect of Republican Legality, Minister Atanga Nji presents what can be interpreted as both a conservative defense of the existing order and a testament to his own substantial contributions to Cameroon’s political stability.

The book’s postscript introduces a particularly compelling concept: the ‘imperfect balance’ theory, which Atanga Nji positions as a significant contribution to political science and conflict resolution theory.

The anglophone crisis through a new theoretical lens

Since 2016, Cameroon’s Northwest and Southwest regions have experienced an armed conflict following separatist groups’ demands for an independent ‘Ambazonia Republic.’ These groups claim systematic marginalization of anglophones by the francophone majority. Atanga Nji challenges this narrative directly, arguing that tangible government achievements in the anglophone regions and the prominent positions held by anglophone leaders within the state apparatus contradict separatist claims.

The minister’s central argument rests on empirical evidence. As an anglophone who has climbed to the highest levels of state power while previously working in the private sector as a banker and finance expert, he embodies—alongside other anglophone leaders in government and major private sector positions—the refutation of the alleged marginalization.

This argumentation forms what could be termed a ‘successful integration thesis,’ which serves a broader strategic purpose: it represents a symbolic counter-insurgency approach where the presence of anglophones in top positions and significant public investments in anglophone regions undermine claims of systemic discrimination.

The ‘imperfect balance’ theory: four key propositions

Atanga Nji’s postscript takes readers by surprise with the development of his ‘imperfect balance’ theory, presented as a guiding principle for conflict management, dispute resolution, and negotiations. This theory extends presidential reflections on peace and international security, particularly President Paul Biya’s address to the 72nd UN General Assembly:

“The quest for peace concerns us all. All countries must work towards its achievement.”

“Our most precious asset is peace. Without it, we cannot undertake anything lasting or effective for the benefit of our youth and our people.”

The minister elevates this presidential intuition to a theoretical paradigm, starting from the premise that all wars are useless, aligning with general human principles and international bodies like the UN. However, he introduces a crucial distinction between legitimate defense and war for war’s sake, arguing that there exists a ‘legitimate war’—specifically against terrorism—that justifies the use of force by a legitimate government.

The ‘imperfect balance’ theory fundamentally challenges the ideal of perfect compromise. Atanga Nji argues that seeking absolute balance or total distributive justice in negotiations is not only unrealistic but counterproductive. He writes:

“To put an end to all justified or useless conflicts that disturb humanity’s tranquility, we must engage in negotiations and above all, compromise. To do this, we must accept the politics of the golden mean, which is not necessarily just because there is never a perfect compromise. A compromise is not necessarily a compromise, for if belligerents viewed compromise as capitulation, armed conflicts would never end.”

The author develops his theory through four structural propositions:

1. The golden mean isn’t always just

“Imperfect balance is a balance that isn’t always just, but it allows for resolving any conflict with a sense of equity and a desire for appeasement. In every negotiation, it must be understood that the golden mean isn’t always just, and the balance so often sought as a solution to conflicts or grievances isn’t always balanced.”

This proposition forms the theory’s core, asserting that procedural equity (reaching a settlement) takes precedence over substantive justice (the settlement’s conformity to an ideal of justice). The ‘imperfect balance’ is therefore a functional rather than normative equilibrium.

2. Compromise as reciprocal renunciation

“The meaning of compromise sometimes involves doing violence to oneself by accepting to lose something precious to regain peace or resolve a difficult political, economic, or social equation.”

Here, the theory enters the realm of political economy of gift and renunciation. Negotiation isn’t a bargaining process where each party obtains what it considers just, but a process where each party makes ‘sacrifices’ to preserve collective order. This sacrificial dimension of compromise aligns Atanga Nji’s thought with hierarchical contractualism theories rather than Rawlsian egalitarian contractualism.

3. Imperfection as the condition for peace

“Indeed, balance contains imperfections, and this must be acknowledged when facing negotiation deadlocks. Once we accept that there is never a perfect compromise, and that compromise isn’t necessarily capitulation but common sense, we will always arrive at the golden mean logic to end all conflicts disturbing humanity’s tranquility.”

This proposition performs a classic epistemological inversion: far from being a failure, the imperfection of balance becomes its enabling condition. The expectation of a perfect compromise is a source of blockage; accepting imperfection is a source of resolution.

4. The logic’s universality

“In negotiations, one shouldn’t take too much or give everything. The imperfect balance logic must now be integrated into international negotiations at all discussion levels, regardless of the subject, so that the world becomes more peaceful, less selfish, and less dangerous. […] The imperfect balance logic can now be perceived as humanity’s guide. It applies at all levels of life.”

Atanga Nji elevates his theory to the status of a universal governance principle, applicable to international relations as much as ordinary social interactions.

Applying the theory to Cameroon’s anglophone crisis

The relevance of this theory becomes apparent when connecting the two registers of the author’s thought. According to Atanga Nji, the anglophone marginalization thesis rests on an unrealistic expectation of perfect balance: numerical equality (the two anglophone regions represent neither a quarter of Cameroon’s population nor a significant area justifying equal parity), strict parity (demanding parity based solely on colonial language is illusory), institutional symmetry between linguistic communities (it would be dangerous for national cohesion to reason in terms of spoken language when neither of the two official languages belongs to Cameroon). Such an equilibrium is not only impossible in a composite society like Cameroon’s with four cultural areas but also undesirable, as it would freeze identities and paralyze political decision-making, compromising the national unity policy pursued by successive Cameroonian governments.

The ‘imperfect balance’ allows for thinking about an asymmetrical yet peaceful coexistence: anglophones don’t have strict proportional representation, but they undeniably hold key positions; they don’t benefit from pure federalism, but they participate in state leadership. This equity within inequality—using a classic formulation—constitutes, according to the author, Cameroon’s only realistic horizon.

The heuristic strength of this theory finely accounts for real political negotiation processes, where actors accept suboptimal solutions to preserve social order. It aligns with rational choice theorists’ work on ‘imperfect Nash equilibria’ and Jon Elster’s analyses on the rationality of renunciation. It also provides a framework for understanding the Cameroonian regime’s relative stability despite structural tensions: President Paul Biya’s managerial expertise precisely lies in his ability to manage imperfect balances, to partially satisfy without ever completely excluding.

The ‘imperfect balance’ theory represents Atanga Nji’s most original contribution in his book. By asserting that the golden mean isn’t always just, that the balance so often sought isn’t always balanced, and that peace requires accepting to lose something precious, the author proposes a framework for understanding political negotiation that shifts the emphasis from substantive justice to procedural viability.

Atanga Nji’s work stands as an exceptional political document for researchers in African political science. It offers a window into Cameroonian power discourse during the National Renewal era, the mechanisms for legitimizing a regime constantly under tension with its margins, and how integrated anglophone elites negotiate their dual community and state affiliation.