Interview with the Cameroon-Nigeria Mixed Commission (CNMC), winner of the 2020 Milefsky Award

In 2020, IBRU awarded the third annual Ray Milefsky award to the Cameroon-Nigeria Mixed Commission (CNMC), the United Nations organisation tasked with implementing the 2002 International Court of Justice (ICJ) judgment covering the two states’ land and maritime boundaries. IBRU director Philip Steinberg interviewed Mohamed Ibn Chambas, Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General for West Africa and the Sahel and Chair of the CNMC.

The CNMC has an expansive mandate. Has the multifaceted nature of the CNMC’s work hindered or assisted the Commission in carrying out its duties?

The mandate of the CNMC covers: ‘supporting the demarcation of the land boundary and the delineation of the maritime boundary; facilitating the withdrawal and transfer of authority in the Lake Chad area, along the boundary and in Bakassi Peninsula; addressing the situation of affected populations; and making recommendations on confidence-building measures’ (2nd Communique).

The CNMC has since found itself dealing not only with a demarcation problem requiring a multi-disciplinary team but dealing with a multi-faceted problem affecting two nations, two regions and local populations that are delicately divided by the line. This has presented a challenge because, apart from resolving an international boundary problem for which the two countries agree in principle, there are cases where challenges have been met from local populations whose comprehension of the boundary is different from the technical boundary in the demarcation instrument. The inclusion of cross-border cooperation programmes and confidence building initiatives has enabled the process of demarcation to proceed smoothly with the cooperation of local populations who, for the first time, were learning how to live and deal with the implications of a demarcated international boundary.

Your mention of local populations’ concerns reminds me of last year’s Borderlines interview with Professor Akihiro Iwashita who stressed the need for community consultation.
How has the CNMC balanced this imperative for community input with its mission to restore colonial-era boundaries that were made without regard for community interest?

The CNMC is dealing with a boundary that passes through more than 300 villages throughout its entirety. There is a lot of cross border trading among communities with people owning farmlands in one country while living in the other. The situation is even more complicated when it comes to cattle herders where cattle have to traverse the border in search for pastures. Demarcation of the boundary introduces hard boundaries which, if not properly understood, may lead to immediate localised tensions among communities failing to understand the implication of the demarcation. The CNMC carries out extensive sensitisation exercises alongside its demarcation to ensure that the process does not affect the local populations or, if it does, it is clearly understood and has the minimum impact on their livelihoods. We are convinced that the boundary divides a territory but not a population.

Does the CNMC’s experience in the Lake Chad basin, which has changed drastically since it was first divided in the 19^th century, provide lessons for other boundary delimitations in rapidly changing environments?

Changes in physical geography not only affect the Lake Chad area, but have been observed throughout the course of the boundary. Where the boundary was defined by rivers or artificial features that have changed or disappeared over time, the demarcation instruments have been found to lack precision.  They were also drafted in two languages that are not always consistent when viewed under a technical microscope. Experience in the Lake Chad area helped the CNMC prepare for these geo-physical changes and got the working teams to understand that they may be looking for features that may have changed over time or been tampered with. In some cases, the CNMC had to bring in expert hydrologists to determine the original course of a river which now passes through a village, and expert geodesists to determine which of the peaks between two hills was the one referred to in the original demarcation.

In the popular press, borders are usually associated with dispute and conflict. Does the success of the CNMC suggest that border delimitation and management can also build peace?

Building consensus between the Parties to implement the ICJ judgment was not always easy.  Over time, working together through the CNMC, we were able to build trust and develop brotherly, cooperative relations, especially during the field operations to physically assess the land boundary.  Genuine warmth developed among the teams of surveyors, and now, as we approach the end of that process, the prospect of cross-border development projects in favour of local populations affected by the demarcation builds support from those communities that straddle the boundary. Importantly, both countries confront threats of insurgency and terrorist extremism, especially in the north.  Their ability to manage their common border facilitates a joint, cooperative response to these security concerns, which arise in border areas.

How can the CNMC serve as a model for other states, in Africa and elsewhere, seeking to delimit and manage their borders?

The main lesson learned from the CNMC is that boundaries are best demarcated in times of peace, as opposed to waiting until there is a dispute. At the beginning of the process, it was very difficult to get the Parties to come to a consensus on the actual course of the boundary, with each Party remaining fixed with its own interpretation of the demarcation instruments. This divergence of opinion gave rise to disagreements early in the exercise. As the process advanced and the Parties developed confidence in each other and tensions over the Bakassi decision subsided, there were less and less occurrences of such divergences in opinion or, if there were any, they were resolved on the ground. The Parties have even come back to re-examine the areas they previously disagreed on and have found ways to continue discussions to resolve their differences. It would make sense, therefore, to encourage neighbouring countries to demarcate their common boundaries and have an ongoing border management program.