South Sudan News Agency

Friday, Apr 18th, 2014

Last update03:13:32 AM GMT

You are here: Home

South Sudan News Agency

Let the Debate Boil Down to the Referendum… Not a Dead Unity!!

By Luk Kuth Dak

May 24, 2010 (SSNA) -- Now that there remained only about a few months before the general referendum in South Sudan, one would hope that much of the debate must now be boiled down to the aftermath of the referendum, instead of the invariable barking of some in making a dead unity attractive.

For brevity’s sake, won’t it be ludicrous for anybody- Southern or Northern- with an ounce of common sense and good judgment, to ever assume that what was not done in the half a century long and counting, of the Sudanese illusive unity can now be achieved in a matter of seven months?

That’s a legitimate question, given the mixed signals the National Congress Party sometimes sends. In recent days the skunked pit bulls of the regime of tyrant Omer al Basher have reignited their proverbial rhetoric of threats and smear tactics that the South can’t possibly stand on two healthy feet, if it chooses to separate. “The Sudan must not be divided under a government of the National Congress Party,” vaunted Ali al Atabani, the owner of the regime’s newspaper, al Rayulaam.

That was not all.

The regime’s strongman and Vet Doctor, Nafia Ali Nafia, an Islamist extremist and a bigoted zealot, was quoted as disparaging: “ South Sudanese are not qualified to run a village, let alone a state; We must keep this country together, that’s what our forefathers would want us to do.” He barked.

Evidently, that’s yet another example of the NCP’s government being untruthful about its true intentions towards the implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), and making unity attractive, especially to the people who suffered the most. Indeed, sadly so, the only thing that these extremists have ever done in South Sudan, was none other than the divide-and rule policies, stealing of the oil revenue, and arming their sellout militias, of course, to destabilize and disrupt the security situation in the region, in order to postpone or nullified the referendum for good.

Now, we all expect these kinds of stuff from the dishonest, racist and ideological loons, but from Gen. Athor Deng, a Dinka son? That’s takes the issue to another level!!

In one of my previous articles, I argued that, for unity to have a chance, it has to be built, first and foremost, on honesty, mutual respect, goodwill, trust and most importantly, confidence. It’s more like a marriage, that you have to work on everyday to make work. Unfortunately, those essential component of unity are seriously lacking in the core relations between the two parts of the country, at least for now.

Subsequently, if you’re a South Sudanese who happens to visit the so-called “National Capital,” Khartoum, you will most certainly be shocked! There’s really nothing that you will see to make you feel at home. Certainly, you won’t find a single street named after a Southerner. In fact, you will be greeted with a street named after the slave master, al Zubeir Rahma Pasha!

But if you took a careful listening to the sarcasm in the invictus inaugural speech by Lt. Gen. Salva Kiir Mayardit, the Chairman of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement SPLM) and President of the government of South Sudan (GoSS), then you should know that the SPLM leadership has made an unambiguous decision that the time has simply ran out for any talks about an attractive unity. It will now throw it unequivocal support behind the South Sudanese people, in their just quest for the freedom that they’ve never had. “There’s no turning back.” Said the SPLM’s Secretary General, Pagan Amum.

Now, the think-tanks, the journalists, the writers, on both sides of the country have a pivotal role to play, in order to make the separation all the more peaceful and smooth, and not to allow the NIF Lunatics to lead us into disastrous devoice that will have lasting effects on any future reunification.

“A lie cannot live.” Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. 1964.

The author is Vice President of the Sudanese-Americans Journalist Union, and former anchorman at Juba Radio. He can be reached at: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Listen, Bank Managers: “The Customer is King”

By James Alic Garang

November 10, 2011 (SSNA) -- It is human to give credit where it is due and offer constructive criticisms if warranted. South Sudan—a nation born out of long struggle and unsurpassed yearning for liberty, justice and prosperity— is no exception to this golden tenet.

To make light of public criticisms, our distinguished leaders are quick to lecture the critics on postwar progress: Let us be patient because “Rome was not built in a day.” And seeing that essential public and private sector institutions are being created from scratch, our sympathetic populace cannot help but buy into such a war legacy argument. Hence, in the spirit of latter line of reasoning, one is hard pressed to appreciate the efforts of South Sudan Banking Sector. Though underdeveloped or lacking in modern banking sophistications, it deserves a modicum of appreciation for providing limited services including but not limited to instant money transfer services, demand deposit & checkable instruments, and facilities of commerce among others.

Nonetheless, there is an ample room for improvement. This tells us that complacency on the part of banks is not an option nor will a citation of war legacy cut it.

Although many areas need improvement, customer service is the focus of this piece. Let me draw your attention to one scenario (Those of you who have paid a visit to a bank in South Sudan can attest to this narrative):

You step in the bank and the first thing you see is the long queue of customers waiting to be served. In layman’s language, the clientele appears visible, angrier, frustrated and agitated. Whether you want to deposit hard currency, cash a check or withdraw money from your account, you have to put one or two hours aside for wait-time. This makes for a dreadful banking experience. To put it mildly in the economists’ lingo, the opportunity cost of visiting a commercial bank in South Sudan is exceedingly high. Those two hours you spend at a bank premise could be easily put to other productive uses such as shining shoes for pay, writing that overdue paper, working overtime for remuneration, and what have you!

For those dealing or trading in the vehicle currency, their plight or wait time is outrageously prohibitive! (Just visit the nearest bank or foreign exchange bureau to see for yourself such astronomical wait times).

However, this begs the question: What accounts for long wait-time at the bank premise? Several factors rationalize those long wait times. In my humble view, the succeeding reasons top the list:

First, customer representatives lack experience. They are slow in attending to customer needs or end up sometimes providing a mediocre service. Because experience is an acquired feature; training and interactive learning-by-doing could close the gap going forward.

Second, there are fewer tellers or fewer windows at most banks. For God sake, why can’t you add more windows for ‘bulky’ transactions because nowadays Somalis come with sack full of money? The unreliability of our money counting machines, power outage/disruption and poor connectivity coupled with inexperienced bank customer representatives, accounts for long wait time.

Third, some customer representatives have made it a second nature to move up and down during business hours, hence squandering account holders’ precious time.

Fourth, some customer’s representatives are schooled in rudeness or are euphemistically militaristic. Instead of listening, they quarrel with customers. This exercise in exchange of ad hominem adds to wait time. They forget that customer is always right or god in some quarters.

Therefore, the formula for arriving at long wait time is simple:   inexperienced customer representatives + small number of tellers + small number of windows + unnecessary movements during working hours + militaristic attitude = long wait times.

That is awful. But seriously, what can the bank managers do to improve customer service or drive home the mantra “The Customer is King?”

There are no silver bullets. However, bank managers would do the public a big favor if they try the following which are by no means exhaustive:

Recognition Phase: The Customer is King

The bank management must recognize that customers, who are truly kings, have no preference for long wait-time or to be talked down in rude manner as some customer representatives do on daily basis. Doing so flies in the face of the expectations “the customer is king.” What would recognition do? It will enable managers to devise ways and means to reward those representatives who offer high, professional services and punish those undeserving. Rewarding good behavior and punishing bad one is a budding stimulus for improvement.

Solution Phase: Undertake Concrete Actions to Get to the bottom of the Problems

Do the following if circumstances permit:

1. Increase both the number of windows and tellers at “prestige and commoner” sections. This makes it possible to serve a large number of customers at one time;

2. Skill upgrade is badly in South Sudan. Therefore, train individual customer representatives on ethics and obligations that underscore “the Customer is King.” The customer sovereignty is lacking in customer service providers and it is one reason for delayed service at any banking premises in our infant republic;

3. Let the ‘first come, first served’ be the basis upon which customers are attended to. There is no reason I come before you and I end up being served last because I do not know the bank manager or customer service provider.

In conclusion, we will be remiss if we fail to give credit to our banks. But truth be told, we are long way from attaining best customer satisfaction. Customer sovereignty is lacking in our public or private service providers’ vocabulary. Long wait times at bank premises are nuisance and it is   high time bank managers embark on several soul-searching endeavors such as recognizing the sovereignty of customers and offering solutions to ease the problems. Such easing mechanisms include: training customer representatives, hiring more tellers, opening more windows, and rewarding good behaviors and punishing bad ones. The moral to the bank managers and their supporting staff is unadorned: customer expects to be treated as kings or as always right.

The writer is a doctoral candidate in economics at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, USA. He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

The Lou Nuer Youth in Murle territories rejected inappropriate labeling of their anticipated self defence against the Murle community in Jonglei

Press Release

An attempt to marry peace and justice after ethnic conflict in Jonglei remains largely incomplete in the region. It is not the Lou Nuer’s fault, it is your incomplete and incapability to execute the order appropriately with balance considerations of all people in the State!

President Kiir Mayardit
CC Dr. Riek Machar
Cc: Regional Governor- Kuol Manyang Juuk
Cc: UN Humanitarian team
Cc: SPLA head division 8

January 1, 2012 (SSNA) -- It is apparently clear that the South Sudanese and international community at large misinterpreted our anticipated self-defence against Murle community. This is to remind the international community and our national society that the fighting currently taking place in Jonglei is an anticipatory self defense and retaliations, reference to the Uror County attack on August 18/2011, the Mareng attack and Nyandit attacks of 2009. The Lou Nuer Youth had endured the Murle unfriendly behavior with patient and tolerant. The Nuer culture have taught us to forgive and give enough time to the people to rethink of what they had done to us without any cause while waiting for friendly negotiations. We are sorry that the Murle warriors were on run and they could not relief and cease our angry by confronting us in the day time.

We have heard enough complains through the news that our attack against the Murle is not a retaliations and revenges of Uror county attack. This is not true. The reason why we delay not to attack Murle as soon was because we had been searching for the missing members and re-organizing our youth who were scattered during the Murle attacks in Uror County. If the US government can take about one month to retaliate against the Afghanistan’s terrorists, how would you expect the disarmed community to retaliate and defense themselves right on spot without guns in their hands? The August 18/2011 attack on Uror left many people missing, burn houses to ashes and killed women, old folks and children from age of zero upward.

For many months and years, we kept quiet thinking that Murle would apologize and accept peace negotiation but instead, they kept attacking and attacking our community even after the Uror County massacres. We had given enough time to the government of South Sudan in order to disarm Murle but until these days, there was nothing being done in regard to the atrocities made by Murle community or to disarm them completely. We had acknowledged that the government had no proposal and plan to disarm, mediate and bring the culprit to justice. If human being’ life worth important to the government of South Sudan and international community at large, why would our killing be better while murle death is unworthy?

When the South Sudan government proposed the disarmament, we asked the government that our community should be disarmed at the last minutes because we have the principle of not attacking any community without reasons. Any community we fought in the South Sudan had first humiliated us, attacked us or mistreated our community members for long time. The government of South Sudan had united against us when we regret not to surrender our guns. They had launched an attack aggressively against our Youth in the Cattle camps and in the Lou Nuer surrounding areas during the disarmament time. We insisted not to give our guns simply because we bought them with our cattle and resources but our elders intervened and many meeting were conducted to give our guns to the government. We voluntarily give the guns to the head division of Jonglei and we believed that the current government was witness to our voluntary disarmament.

After we were disarmed, we thought that the disarmament may proceed to the other communities in Jonglei. Unfortunately, they stopped the disarmament from the Lou Nuer and Murle got an opportunity to kill our members all the times. We had realized that our disarmament was an optional plan for the government of President Salva Kiir and Dr. Riek Machar to allow Murle people to kill us and finish us all. What did we do? During the presidential election time, we voted without any doubt behind President Kiir Mayardit.

He has shown up in Waat and Akobo during the election campaign and we kindly received him with respect. Although he lies and left an agenda that he would never fulfil, we respect his tolerant, patient and the fact that he fought aggressively for the success of South Sudan independent. This simple reason had convinced the majority of Lou Nuer Youth. We stand behind him until these days but trust of the leadership should not be used as an exchange for the life of our community members. He knows very well that majority of the people had welcomed and greeted him in Akobo and Waat until he promised that he will build the biggest Jonglei Health Center in Waat.

Few months ago, our Youth representatives had called for peaceful settlement negotiation between the Lou Nuer and the Murle. Rev-Deng Bul was a key speaker to the peace initiative and conflict resolution but Murle community had rejected our call in present of Rev- Deng Bul. They refused to talk to us while we were the victims of their attacks on August 18/2011 and in the past. We are wondering if we should be the one to pursue peace alone or they are the one to add more hands on peace settlement negotiations.

We happened to accept peace simply because our elders and officials had pursued us to forgive Murle and forget what they had done to our vulnerable members especially children and old people in Uror County but Murle kept killing, attack villages and kidnapping children in daily basis around Lou Nuer area and in Jonglei society at large. We have heard yesterday that President Kiir Mayardit had dispatched taskforces of the SPLA and the UN troops to Jonglei territories after our anticipated self-defence action against the Murle community. We still hold our breath that South Sudan or Jonglei government is not a part of our target though some participated initially to our sufferings. If we have ill intentions against the government of South Sudan or State government, we would have opened the door to the rebels and the government of Jonglei would not be in Bor town by then.

In many occasions, we had rejected George Athor (rebels) calls overwhelmingly but yet the government of South Sudan does not recognize and believed us as a part of state-building. Our being silence to this enduring mistreatments is not a fear but respect for the South Sudanese community. We had called and written many letters to Kiir Mayardit himself but nothing materialized as to disarm Murle or send the Murle elders to their community for peace mobilizations.

By then, we had captured Lilkuangole, Pibor and we are still after the real Murle warriors that had killed thousands of Lou Nuer members, children and women. We respect the properties of the international organization (UN), RSS and the SPLA. We had interacted almost with UN troops and the SPLA troops in Lilkuangole and Pibor but we avoid them, knowing that they are not the target. We only targeted our main enemy although we knew that all of the Murle people were taken as refugee by the UN troops and the SPLA forces in Lilkuangole and Pibor. We knew very well that they are there with UN troops and the SPLA forces but our objective does not goes beyond, to radical launch an attack to the UN compound and fight the SPLA forces unless if they launch an attack to us in defend of Murle.

The United Nations charter, article 51 apply to all human beings on earth and therefore, we realized that our being silent for long times is a clear mistake. We should have taken any step as long as it is an anticipated self-defence. We ask the government of South Sudan to bring this injustice to an end by this year or otherwise, we will do more attacks as to revenges the Mareng attacks, Nyandit attack and few attacks going on after us in Lou Nuer territoires while we are here in Murle Land. If eye for an eye will work, then we missed the magic for long time.

We need the government of South Sudan first to bring our 180 children and women being kidnapped by Murle plus our cattle. We strongly asked the government of South Sudan to disarm Murle first,  deploys troops in the border to intercept the Murle’s movement at night and day times and after all these steps, we will give our guns to the authority, knowing that we are in peace. The Lou Nuer members will always retaliate in self defence as long as the enemy attack us first. The Land of Lou Nuer had never been crossed by enemy and it would be a surprise if the Murle attempted to cross it from East to West or South to North of Lou Nuer territories. We had danced in their land for few days but yet there is no better confrontation from them. “Justice Delay is justice denial!”

Happy New Year!

The Lou Nuer Youth in frontline at Pibor and Lilkuangole, Jonglei. You can try to reach us at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Response to Mr Ateny Wek Ateny on Panthou War

By Elhag Paul

May 22, 2012 (SSNA) -- Ateny Wek Ateny diatribe in response to my article ‘Panthou Fiasco: President Kiir needs to resign now’ published by South Sudan Nation on 2nd May 2012 shows a shocking level of assumptions, denials and abuse of words such as racist and genocide.  Anyway, this is to be expected.

Ateny’s lack of knowledge of the term dinkocracy obviously has contributed to his anger and the use of abusive language in his self expression.  I would like to say I bear no hard feelings at all.

I shall for the purpose of clarity strive to explain the meaning of the term dinkocracy in the hope that it will be better understood and used.  Thereafter, I shall address Ateny’s denial and use of abusive words such as racist and genocide.

Ateny in his assumptions believes the term dinkocracy to be an attack on the Dinka tribe.  No that is not the case, he got it completely wrong.  One would have expected the executive director of Policy Advocacy and Strategic Studies to be careful on committing to writing without understanding the subject matter of his critique.  Ateny’s failure to check things out has led him to write an unnecessary invective that exposes his own anxiety possibly created by the behaviour of his fellow tribes mate in government.

Dinkocracy is defined as, “a system of rule that can be found in South Sudan based on tribalism whereby parliament is either wholly or partially filled by appointment of corrupt members. Institutions and structures that are presently in place are just for face saving purpose. In this system consultation and citizen's rights are not respected. The views and opinions of citizens also do not mean anything. Looting and corruption is accepted as a method of wealth gathering with the façade that the government is working to address it. The police force is predominantly illiterate and come from the ruling tribe. Their job is to administer brute injustice. Violence is routinely exercised freely by members of the ruling tribe (in the organised forces) with impunity. Government officials are guarded and protected by their kith and kin as opposed to agents of the state.”  This is what the term means and this definition can be found in under the title ‘Lies and Illusion of South Sudan’s president Kiir’ published on 26th September 2011.

So Dinkocracy is not as Ateny claims about “stereotype(ing) and polarizing the Dinka as tribe.”  It is a system of rule and as such it is ludicrous to equate a system to a tribe.  There is nothing that can link the two here.  Members of other tribes in South Sudan who subscribe to this system of rule are Dinkocrats.  For example, Pagan Amum, Wani Igga, Reik Machar and so on are by definition Dinkocrats.

Ateny argues that “government of RSS is not Dinkanized or Dinkocracy.”  I disagree and I believe that the government of South Sudan is both Dinkanzied and a dinkocracy.  It is Dinkanized because the government is 100 percent controlled by Dinka.  All the sovereign ministries and important institutions are in the hands of the Dinka.  Where a minister is not a Dinka the deputy and others are.  In such cases, the minister is just a figure head.  Where a Dinka commits a crime no action is taken and the victim gets no redress.  For example, the killing of Equatorian police officers in government offices in Yambio by Dinka soldiers, killing of Kakwa families in Yei by Dinka soldiers, killing of a doctor in Yei by Dinka soldiers, killing of 4 youth on Christmas eve in Juba by Dinka soldiers and many, many others all over South Sudan that have gone unaddressed.  In all these cases the killers have gotten away scot free simply because they are from the ruling tribe.

SPLM/A is surely a Dinka organisation.  Scholars and journalists have conclusively stated so.  Please see Louisa Lombard’s article in New York Times under the heading ‘A page from Khartoum’s playbook’ published on 20th February 2012.  Presently in South Sudan the country is run for the interest of Dinka in open violation of the CPA which the Oyee party pretends to be upholding.  For example, the CPA clearly stipulates that the territory of South Sudan and its borders are those of 01/01/1956.  Anything outside these borders is not part of South Sudan.  Thus for one to be a citizen of South Sudan, such a person must reside within the 1956 borders.  Now as everyone knows Abyei is not part of South Sudan as per border of 1956 because it falls under South Kordufan.  However, the CPA has a special provision for Abyei to decide whether to be part of South Sudan or the Sudan.  This provision has not yet been implemented fully and by default Abyeians are still legally Sudanese.  Nevertheless, president Kiir ignores the fact of this legality and goes ahead to appoint Abyei boys such as Ahmed Alor, Luka Biong and others prematurely into ministerial and ambassadorial positions knowing very well that they are not South Sudanese.  His justification is that they are Dinka and because of that they must be South Sudanese.  This is what I am talking about as prove that SPLM/A is Dinka and vice versa.  Legality of the international instruments are ignored for the interest of Dinka which means that Dinka interest comes first before the interest of the rest of South Sudan.

This is a dangerous precedent because it means that all the tribes of South Sudan divided by international borders such as the Nuers, Anyuak, Acholi, Kakwa, Lugbara, Madi, Mundu, Zande etc will in future bring their own tribes mate from across the borders to exercise power in South Sudan to the detriment of South Sudanese citizen.  Now Mr Ateny, as someone who has been to law school, I am sure you would know and agree with me that what president Kiir and the Oyee party are doing here with the Abyei boys is illegal and is only for the interest of the Dinka and no one else.  In light of this, can you honestly argue that observers like me are anti Dinka?  Also can you argue that SPLM/A is not a Dinka organisation?

Mr Ateny, why is it that no Dinka is willing to come forward and challenge this appointment of people who are technically not South Sudanese into ministerial and strategic positions?  Again why is that no Dinka is willing to come forward to challenge the numerous abuses of the other tribes and power by president Kiir and the Oyee party publicly so that they can be counted?  It is this lack of interest from the educated Dinka to honestly challenge the ills of the Oyee party that is exposing them to genuine criticism.  I must say here that the Dinka are their own worst enemy (their behaviour towards other tribes) and they need to be rescued from themselves.  And in doing this we will rescue South Sudan.  Otherwise in allowing the Dinka to run riots all of us will sink as evidenced by what is going on in the country now.  So I ask you to join efforts with me to rescue our country.

The denial of reality in South Sudan by the Dinka is breathtaking.  A good example is Ateny’s assertion of Dinka majority.  He argues, “Ignorance breathes hatred.  Indeed the Dinka people originates from seven states in which they are majority – and in a decentralised system of government, more than ten ministries would still have to come from Dinka whether Kiir is the president or Elhag Paul.  During the war, the Dinka were not by standers and you know it very well.”  Just imagine this kind of arrogance born out of illusion. Who in South Sudan has not fought?  This is something that should not even be thought of, but because the Dinka want to dominate they promote all sorts of nonsense.

Although the Dinka are found in 7 states of the RSS, it is important to note that in those states there are other ethnicities with full citizenship rights to represent their states. It does not automatically mean that because Dinka are in those states, they must be the ones to represent those states as now done dinkocratically by appointments and nominations.  The Dinka people need to be sensitive and considerate of rights of the other tribes.  Even if the Dinka were to be the majority, how can they justify lording it over 63 tribes.  So the Dinka take 10 ministries and the rest of the 63 tribes share 20 or so ministries.  What a joke?   Why should the 63 tribes accept this Dinka nonsense in their own country?  If this be the case, the Bari speaking people comprise nearly 8 groupings or so, should they now ask for 8 ministries.  Is this logical? This situation is replicated with Nuer people, with people in East Equatoria, with people in Western Equatoria.  This Dinka argument now must be deconstructed and demolished.  It can not be allowed to stand.  Another is the fallacy that the Dinka comprise one third of the population in South Sudan.  This is not true at all.  It is propaganda to embellish statistics to again justify their supposed right to rule.  Dinka comprise 18 to 20 percent of the total population of South Sudan and no more. 

Ateny insinuates that the other tribes hate the Dinka.  The question is: have the Dinka asked themselves why people hate them?  If they have, what did they find out and what did they do to remedy it?  If they have not, is it not their responsibility to find out about their blind spots so as to adjust accordingly and live peacefully with others?  Do the Dinka know what it means when they assault the very core of others by saying, “We liberated you”; “We are born to rule” simply because the Dinka are ready to act violently?   Do the Dinka think that they will forever be well armed to continue to oppress others as now?  It is important to know that nobody has the monopoly of violence.  One can be mighty today but there is no guarantee that one will continue to be so forever.  Our own story with the Arabs stands as an example.  But let us take it a little bit deeper.  The very concept of state as a protector of all (strong and weak) in equal terms is to ensure safety of everyone thus eliminating tribal protection.  What this means is we need to invest in development of the state and discourage tribal protection.  In RSS it is the latter that is the norm as opposed to the former and this is the cause of the current situation in our country. 

Now the Dinka are the rulers of RSS, and the country is sinking slowly let them prove it to the world that their so much trumpeted genetic pre disposition to rule is genuine and useful.  On the one hand the Dinka want to be ‘natural’ rulers and when they flop as usual they do not want to take responsibility and they begin to rant and accuse people of tribalism, racism and so on to divert attention from their own tribalism and spectacular failures.  Come on, grow up.  The Dinka can not have it both ways.  Accept the realities. 

It is this very behaviour that Ateny projects on me.  He shamelessly labels me as racist with ‘genocidal motivated thoughts’.  First of all Ateny does not understand the meaning of the word racist.  Racism occurs between people of different races, for instance discrimination between white people and black people, or as in our case with the Arabs in the then Sudan.  As I am an African like Ateny, where does the racism come in here?  It would have been more credible if Ateny called me a tribalist, but then this will not hold because in the current circumstance of South Sudan, I do not have power to exercise tribalism.  It is the Dinka who are promoting tribalism.  The evidence is everywhere in RSS. 

As with regards to genocide, this is a red herring.  I do not know where Ateny pulled this from.  This could be his own psychological insecurities tormenting him resulting from imagined fear of reprisals due to the abuses the Dinka inflicted on others. 

I have no reason to encourage or promote genocide as claimed because in my opinion anybody that actively encourages genocide is mentally deranged.  I am so surprised to hear Ateny accusing me of that.  The reality is if we do not talk about Dinka abuses and expansionist policies, this is what will trigger hatred and possibly lead into some unhealthy thoughts.   Since 1983 with the birth of the Oyee party , Dinka expansion has been central to its operations.  For instance, the renaming of places as New Bor etc are elements of this colonialists ideology and tendencies.  What is wrong with the Dinka remaining in their ancestral land like the rest of the people of South Sudan?  Why do they want to colonise other people?  What is wrong with the original indigenous names of the lands they come to?  The manner in which the Dinka displaced the Bongo people of Tonj is something that the rest of the tribes in South Sudan need to watch carefully.  President Kiir is silently promoting this obnoxious practice in Upper Nile and Eastern Equatoria. 

If the Dinka persist on this path they can be sure of one thing and that is the other tribes of South Sudan will resist as this is a matter central to human existence.   The prominent Dinka leaders need to address this issue for amicable co-existence with the other tribes of South Sudan, if they don’t, they are letting the Dinka people in particular down and South Sudan in general.   This is because ultimately there is little to gain by this kind of practice.

Lastly, this is not a statement of personal attack.  It is a clarification for the record.  It would be good and in the interest of RSS to see all the people of South Sudan concerned working together to promote respect and positive development of our state to ensure safety and human dignity for every citizen.  Dinkocracy is destructive and if allowed to continue it will sink our nascent state.

[The truth hurts but it is also liberating]

The Author lives in the Republic of South Sudan. He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

To Salva Kiir: Don’t Fuel Athor’s Rebellion

By Dr. James Okuk

May 17, 2010 (SSNA) -- Many people would like to enjoy speculating and manufacturing rumors these days regarding the fresh military rebellion of the former SPLA General, Mr. George Athor. Some have been against and others for what this great man has done as a consequence of his self-defense against the GoSS and SPLM leaders who want to violate his democratic rights by force. This division is a sign that Southerners are not yet one nation to speak with one voluminous voice in the coming referendum (if it is going to take place de jure?). It has been known that disunity is a serious challenge to achieving common good and collective rights in public life of successful human societies. At least unity in diversity has been successful in advanced big nations because of their respect for the sense of direction with the rule of just laws. Resorting to the rule of law were justice is lacking has never thrived, surely.

Crushing Mr. Athor militarily and suspecting some Shilluk people of supporting him is not going to work at all. Let’s avoid war and value peace!!! We have done it after Nasir Split when we dialogued it out in 2001 – 2002 to re-merge our splintered forces prior to CPA great achievement, we have done it again in Rumbek in 2004 when we put our house in order so that Dr. John Garang does not any longer carry the SPLM/A in his briefcase when he traveled (of course that briefcase got burnt in the crashed evil Ugandan Presidential Chopper leaving SPLM behind with the current continuous confusion), and we have done it in the Juba Declaration in 2006 when we dialogued it out with Paulino Matip, Ismail Kony, Clement Wani Konga and others in order to join and integrate our gallant forces for the defend of the Greater South Sudan and dignity of its people.

Unfortunately we failed to do it directly with Gabriel Tang-ginya, Tom El-Nour and few others though at least we managed to keep general peace with them (except for some few instances of clashes with them in 2007 and 2009) as they continued to pay their loyalties to the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF). What can prevent us at this moment to dialogue it out with Mr. Athor and others at this critical moment without showing our tired SPLA military muscles from the 22 civil war? None!!! Mr. Athor is one of us and he is capable of understanding our concerns as we consider his case too. He is not idiot as some people would like to portray him. He knows what he is doing and his demands are all reasonable for negotiation. He knows that the Sudanese and especially South Sudanese courts are a failure to waste time with because at the end of the day, most of the judges are SPLM supporters.

On Saturday and Sunday, 15th and 16th May, 2010 the SPLA went on rampage in the areas of the Shilluk Kingdom which lie on the western bank of the Nile, beating children, youth, women and men of all ages mercilessly in the name of fake disarmament that has never been carried out honestly elsewhere in the South. These uniformed men had a list of youth and men they were directed to disarm in some villages, and when they failed to get hold of them, the supposed liberators of Southerners and protectors of the people of Southern Sudan (the SPLA) turned brutal and wicked on the families of the alleged names. They left many innocent Shilluk civilian wounded and traumatized as they arrested others for more torture and intimidation. What a terrible “Army of South Sudan!” God come to our aid!!

Surely, if the so-called GoSS and SPLM leaders are rational human beings who know what to learn from history as they were honestly advised online by Prof. John A. Akec of Juba University in his opinion article; “Doleib Hill Crisis: Lessons from History” seconded by James Chol De'Guin in his article; “Athor Crisis: Peace Must Always be Given a Priority”, these leaders should disciplined their army at this critical time not to mistreat the Shilluk or any other people of Southern Sudan. Alas!

What the SPLA has done in the Shilluk land, so far and so bad these days can, without much doubts, is adding fuel to the fire of Mr. Athor’s rebellion. While the wise voices are calling for peaceful settlement of burning issues and erupting problems, the SPLA commanders are ordering force and violence even on the innocent civilian in the Shilluk Kingdom and suspected areas of Padang Dinka that harbour the courageous son, Mr. Athor. The SPLA has a loosed chain-of-command because of maintaining its bush system of commanders’ headquarters. Any headquarter of a certain commander with a SPLA force can order any operation without the knowledge of the C-in-C and even the General Chief of Staff. This has caused many blunders because any commander or officer can take some SPLA on offence for his selfish interest without the knowledge of his above bosses.


Page 284 of 381

Our Mission Statement

To bring the latest, most relevant news and opinions on issues relating to the South Sudan and surrounding regions.

To provide key information to those interested in the South Sudan and its people.