South Sudan News Agency

Thursday, May 28th, 2015

Last update03:08:00 AM GMT

You are here: Home

South Sudan News Agency

Ugandan President Has a Deadly Hand in South Sudan’s Political Crisis

By James Moises*

Kampala, July 27, 2013 (SSNA) -- I closely monitor South Sudan’s security, political, and economic developments because it was a big part of my job as a former insider who worked for one of Uganda’s most secret organizations. After I left my former employer here in Kampala, I have been experiencing constant change brought about by the past actions that I carried out against the wills of my brothers and sisters in South Sudan. I have sensitive documents that will show to the world that my president, Museveni, has South Sudanese blood on his hands and he is protecting billions of dollars for both relatives and operatives of the South Sudanese president, including secret deals that were signed between the two presidents.

The Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni has gained unwanted attention in the political stadium of the Republic of South Sudan. Museveni, son of a cattle-keeper, was born in south-western Uganda. The president of Uganda rules our nation with an iron fist and has recently managed to lend his niggling leadership ideology to President Salva Kiir of South Sudan.

The relationship between Kiir of South Sudan and Museveni of Uganda has reached an unparalleled level: the two men talk at least once a day, earning them the nickname “The East African Lions,” a name only known to their trusted insiders (I was one of the Ugandan insiders). But what I am concerned about is whether or not Salva Kiir knows he is dealing with an experienced dictator who can manipulate and slay with a smile on his face. Maybe the South Sudanese leader likes the way my president is running his country because he may have been influenced by Museveni’s success in ruling Uganda for more than twenty seven years.

The current political crisis in South Sudan started with a five-member team secretly handpicked by the South Sudanese president in October 2011. The men were not well-known to South Sudan, let alone the political leaders of South Sudan. All the team members were called “presidential private secretaries.” They were told to do exactly what the president of South Sudan wanted them to do because “the risks were high.” Then, in late October of the same year, the leader of the so-called “presidential private secretaries” on South Sudanese side was told by President Kiir to prepare for a serious meeting with an unidentified contact, a Ugandan by nationality. During the discussion, Kiir went into details describing the plan as the “big project” that must be managed behind the scene, no matter what it takes.

In the first week of November 2011, the meeting took place in an office located north-west of the State House of the Republic of Uganda. The meeting involved two Ugandan security agents and the five men selected by Kiir. A similar plan developed by South Sudan’s president to use Ethiopia as a secret location to deal with peripheral threats was also initiated. Nevertheless, the request was denied by the former Ethiopian Prime Minister, Meles Zenawi, citing an aversion. The idea almost cripples the bi-lateral relationship between Juba and Addis Ababa but the relationship of the two countries was later normalized after Kiir agreed not to repeat such a controversial request ever again. This is just a foretaste of Museveni’s long evil act against the freedom of the people of South Sudan.

Museveni’s involvement in dirty political tricks is not new; the man has been caught red-handed before by the United Nations (UN) investigation commission, which was mandated by the UN Security Council to investigate his link with a Congolese rebel movement, the M23. The UN found that Museveni supported the rebels through his brother called General Salim Saleh, who is best known in Uganda as a “scandal-prone sibling.” The evidences provided by the United Nations (UN) showed that Museveni provided financial, military, and intelligence support to the ruthless, eastern rebel movement. Museveni’s interest in toppling a foreign government has been described as a “fantasy” by both his rivals and critics.

As a former insider, I know that the ‘Juba-Kampala plan’ helped Kiir in some areas of his political wishes, but the plan itself caused many problems in South Sudan, for example, it is inciting tribalism and threatening the new nation to collapse.

The president of Uganda is already a suspicious man in South Sudan. In July 2005, South Sudanese charismatic leader, Dr. John Garang, died in a mysterious Ugandan presidential helicopter crash. Many South Sudanese also suspected that George Athor, a former rebel leader fighting against Kiir’s regime, was not killed in South Sudan as the Juba alleged. Instead, they believe that Athor was killed in Kampala by Juba’s agents who were accommodated by Museveni’s private security branch. They then transported his body to South Sudan to stage the act.

Museveni is known in the international arena as a staunch supporter of South Sudan. In the past, he publicly expressed his dissatisfaction with Khartoum’s treatment of the South Sudanese. But his unwavering support of South Sudan should not be taken as a sign of good friendship between the two countries.

Here in Kampala alone, South Sudanese who have links with Juba’s regime have bought houses worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Some of the people who bought houses are ordinary people who have no jobs, but received huge financial support from Juba through Museveni’s close aids. I have documents of financial agreements, land donation, network of underground corruption, and expensive properties owned by President Kiir and some of the people in his inner circle. I am prepared to expose documents that will directly link Museveni to the grim crisis that is now brewing in the Republic of South Sudan.

The South Sudanese are not Ugandans

South Sudan has over 63 different tribes who speak different languages. These people are known for their diversity, hardwork, courage, hospitality, and many other unique cultural norms. The idea that a plan created by a Ugandan dictator can succeed in South Sudan is absurd. Yoweri Museveni must first study the people of South Sudan, and only then can he be sure of what to do. The South Sudanese are brave people and are afraid of no man. Therefore, dictator Museveni, who established himself as the teacher of a Kiir in Africa’s newest nation, must be exposed.

President Museveni recently sent Uganda’s soldiers into South Sudan to help Kiir deal with the ongoing political crisis. These army personals are now in Juba assemble in north-western side of Juba, some 57 Km away from Juba. The other division is stationed in South of Juba, a distance of about 81 Km. South Sudan National intelligence Agency must check out these locations to verify these evidences. Believe me; you will be stunned when you reach in those locations. The international community and South Sudanese must know that the Ugandan president is the one who gave all these ill-guidance to Kiir and he is now assisting him with covert military assistance intended to kill anyone who oppose Kiir’s leadership. South Sudan national army, SPLA, must be vigilance about Ugandans who are now living in South Sudan.

The world, and the South Sudan in particular, must know that the Ugandan president is not an expert in any good governance; he is only an expert in dictatorship. I want the good people of South Sudan to understand that Museveni is an experienced killer here in Uganda, and you must tell him to stay out of your home dealings or else your nation will be another Somalia in our beloved Africa. The people of Uganda are your brothers and sisters; please do not see us in the image of our long-time dictator, Museveni.

James Moises is a former national security agent in the government of Uganda and has extensive knowledge of the covert security deals signed between Kampala and Juba. He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Lawyers for Democracy Welcome the “Yes” Vote of Nine Ngok Dinka Chiefdoms to Join South Sudan

“This vote is a symbolic reminder to President Kiir and Michael Makuei that democratic authority finds its legitimacy in the consent of the people"

For immediate Release

Juba, October 31, 2013 (SSNA) -- History is made today in Abyei by the Nine Ngok Dinka Chiefdoms, after nearly two years of untold suffering from the Government of Sudan, South Sudan and the International community, women and men of Abyei who exercise their democratic rights, voted overwhelmingly with 99.9% to join the Republic of South Sudan.

It is worth noting that the people of Abyei voted to be part of the Republic of South Sudan not to be part of Kiir’s cabinet.

The Lawyers for Democracy in South Sudan call upon the People’s Parliament who declared the independent of South Sudan on the 9th of July 2011 in an open sitting, to exercise the same powers and declare that Abyei is part of the Sovereign Republic of South Sudan.

We also call upon the Political parties of South Sudan in general and the opposition in particular to exercise their historical role and endorse the results of the Abyei referendum. Because this will strengthen confidence in our young democratic system, it will serve as an important legitimizing mechanism that could provide the government of the day with a mandate to undertake change, and could provide the Parliament with an indication of public opinion on Abyei issue, this Yes vote legitimize a significant change in our history that make it difficult to reverse, we believe that the People of Abyei through their vote demonstrated, were able to "settle" a debate on Abyei issue that will serve as protective device forever.

We also take this opportunity to congratulate the people of Abyei for taking this historical step and peacefully determining their destiny, and thank the people South Sudan and Civil Society for mobilizing the public support for a successful conduct of the referendum. Long leave South Sudan.

Lawyers for Democracy in South Sudan (LDSS)
Juba, Republic of South Sudan

South Sudan Media War and Propaganda

By Peter Gai Manyuon

January 27, 2014 (SSNA) -- There had been a lots of accusations between the Government of South Sudan under President Gen Salva Kiir Mayardit and the Sudan People Liberation Movement (SPLM/A) in opposition lead by the former Vice President of South Sudan Dr Riek Machar. There is ongoing campaign on which group committed the crimes in Juba, Unity State, Malakal and Jonglei as well. There had been lots of propaganda on the side of the government since the war escalated in South Sudan especially the spokesperson of the Sudan People Liberation Army (SPLA) Col Philip Aguer had been in forefront advocating for what might benefit government which he is representing.

Most of the South Sudanese have acknowledged as the strategy of trying to implicate and inciting the all scenario which indeed happened and that was why the Inter-governmentals Authority on Development (IGAD) clearly regulated the propaganda as an issue identified as the way SPLA is always preaching. Well for those who studied Journalism and different scholars globally, will acknowledge that propaganda is always being use in politics, war and etcetera, because some people want to be heard well more than other side or group. According to Oxford dictionary, Propaganda, simply put, is the manipulation of public opinion. It is generally carried out through media that is capable of reaching a large amount of people and effectively persuading them for or against a cause.

However, many scholars came up with different views as Propaganda is concern, the exact meaning of propaganda is constantly debated, however, and no specific definition is completely true. Some argue that any persuasive communication is propaganda, while others hold that propaganda specifically alters political opinions. However, it is doubtless that propaganda is material which is meant to persuade or change public opinion, and though it often varies in form and technique it always serves the same purpose. Propaganda is communication for the purpose of persuasion.

Propaganda, although it has existed almost indefinitely, has grown immensely during the past few centuries. Although evidence of intentional propaganda can be traced back as far as ancient Greece, the advent of communication media on a larger scale has exponentially increased its usage. After the invention of the printing press, it became possible to quickly and easily produce posters and books. Prior to this development, however, the majority of propaganda was spread by word of mouth. The printing press enabled the propagandist to quickly produce mass amounts of posters with one intended effect, a form of propaganda much less risky and difficult than oral communication.

This indeed happened in the side of the government when fighting emerged between the Presidential Guards unit in Juba capital on 15th, 16th, and 17th and subsequently spread to most of the states.

Furthermore, the number of the civilians that were killed in those places is good number of people who can do something to the Republic of South Sudan because most of them were intellectuals.

Too much of anything sometimes, can lead to destruction, looting, and killing; why do I mention this? In South Sudan, people have given themselves titles that are too many; The issue of (Beny in dinka) (Kuarmidit in Nuer) and (Uthur maduong in Lou/Jurchol) have taken South Sudanese to square one. People like titles when they don’t do the needful to the Community.

What I know is that in every problem, there might be the cause which people should dwelled on, and for the case of South Sudan; people will be focusing on Juba massacre because people who were killed in Bor, Unity came as the revenged from the people whose their people were killed in Juba and no one will deny the fact. People are not making comparison on who is wrong and who is right and for your information the central government in Juba will be answerable to the all the mess that had been incurred. The loss of lives, properties, will be put on the government of South Sudan because they have implicated, motivated the fighting that started within the same Army.

Ideally and realistically, President Salva Kiir Mayardit have been regarded by most of the South Sudanese as the person who had been mislead by a small clicks of individuals that have taken the Country to the square one, people might ask who are those people misadvising Kiir? They are seven figures in Juba who are the very guys who were mobilizing people to killed one community in Juba last year 2013 ;they include Minister of Defense ,Minister of Information and Broadcasting, the two directors of National Security both external and Internal, Governor of Northern Bhar-el-gazal State and Army Generals who were in Juba during the incident including the General representing Republican guards in Juba.

Hence ,when the fighting erupted within President Kiir republican guards in Juba on the 15th of December 2013 and escalated to some states in South Sudan, it send massage to the world that, President of South Sudan known by the name Kiir Mayardit have been defeated by how he should governance the people of South Sudan in good faith. Others people term him as the second Museveni in South Sudan; others term him as another IDI AMIN Dada of South Sudan. People might ask why he failed in his leadership. The answer is very simple, he failed due to the fact that, Kiir have forgotten the mission and the vision why South Sudanese were fighting for their freedom with the Northern Sudanese beginning from 1945 -2005 when the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) was signed in Naivasha Kenya on the 9th of January 2005.

Where on earth will you find the government without oppositions? But for the case of South Sudan many people do not see the problem within the ruling party.

More interestingly, many researchers, analysts and writers gave in different projections, recommendations about South Sudan crisis that started by the Republican guards which was turned by Kiir loyalists to be tribal war that ended up with Nuer massacre in Juba last year and subsequently affected every tribe that is in greater Uppernile region.

Compressively, there are very tangible points and facts that might need attention of the western world to oversee. When am talking about western world, am meaning the International Community that are dealing in Human rights monitoring and documentation globally. Why do I say so? The Country like the Republic of South Sudan is at the stage of disintegrations, collapsing because no one is trusted in the Country leadership at the movement. Tribal agendas are the only one that focuses on the people minds in South Sudan right now, some people are projecting on many issues when you hear might be disastrous to the people of the newest state.


There is need for immediate indictment and persecution of the people who were behind the genocidal that took place on the, 16th, 17th and 18th of December 2013 in Juba because they took the people of South Sudan to Rwanda history of 1994 which is unacceptable and ambiguous to be advocate for at this particular period of time . The number of the intellectuals who were killed especially in Gudele, Jabel Kujur, Newsite, Manga, Khorwilliam in Juba because they were born Nuer needs good methodology, qualitative and quantitative research to find the facts and realities on who killed them using scientific approach.

There is need to form a team of the Committees that comprises of the International CIDS and Journalists who can visit South Sudan to investigate the root cause of sending soldiers to killed one community without basis or legitimacy. Hence ,Human rights watch should be part of the committees to come and investigate the atrocities committed by President Kiir and his loyalists in the Country. This is the time to publish the findings and recommendations on what should be done to the criminals who are killing people up to now in Juba.

International Community (IC) and International criminal court (ICC) should also investigate or prosecute all the comrades who were inciting the tribal war through the media in South Sudan by using propaganda full of lies. Because most of the people have been killed due to the propaganda preached by those who do not love the peaceful co-existence in the society.

The death of two hundred people who die when the boat capsize in White Nile in Malakal when civilians   were trying to cross for safety, should be brought in to book for the proper accountability.


Media war and Propaganda is not good to be use in the South Sudan because we are one people with one objective that is peace and prosperity , propaganda is not good to be use at this particular period of time where people minds focuses still remembering the pasts like tribalism, corruption. Everyone is entitled to his/her rights in South Sudan as per the Transitional Constitution 2011 are concern. Let come together as South Sudanese and we identify what can determine our destiny to a better level.

Author is the Independent Journalist who had written articles extensively as Columnist on the issues of Democratization and Human Rights in South Sudan; you can contact him through, This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it


The Science of Modern Propaganda. , 2001.

Addis Ababa Deals: Fixing Damages of Leadership Ineptitude

By James Okuk, PhD

“In fact, the life of a private citizen would be preferable to that of a king at the expense of the ruin of so many human beings” – Machiavelli.

October 12, 2012 (SSNA) -- Tricky Agreements usually avoid clarity and specificity on critical issues of disagreements and conflicts. That is why the silent deals behind inks on white papers often push ahead and leave many windows for the future circumstances to determine the final outcomes. This is exactly what has happened with the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) between the SPLM/A on behalf of Southern Sudan/Liberated Areas and the National Congress Party (NCP) on behalf of Northern Sudan/Government of the Republic of the Sudan.

The CPA addressed the details of how the two parts of the Sudan (Southern and Northern) could stay together peacefully, sharing wealth, power and security for an interim period of six years (2005 – 2011). The conduct of the referendum for the people of Southern Sudan (including Abyei referendum) was supposed to mark the end of the interim period. But nothing much was said about the aftermath of the referendum result, especially if it ended up in secession of Southern Sudan. Each side was left to seek what it thought could suit its utilitarian interest. This is the departing point where the conflict between the two split countries (Sudan and South Sudan) emanated.

On one hand, NCP Khartoum is used to economic wars and sanctions. It also knows the tactics of managing the tough times and dusty political weathers. Its leaders could turn as many stones as possible to find alternatives when the usual is lost. They don’t easily resort to utopia and fantasy when it comes to economy. Thus, they have failed to fall under many upheavals that came across them except separation of South Sudan.

On the other hand, SPLM Juba is still novice on management of state affairs, especially the economic aspect of it. Its leaders thought that economic war is like gathering morale for holding a rifle (aka AK47) and destroying the enemy in the shortest time possible. They forgot that the wild life in the rebellious bushes is totally different from the civilized urban life in the peaceful states. Yes, the SPLM/A commanders had managed to run a pseudo-government in the bushes of Southern Sudan without monthly salaries and other privileges of comfort, simply, because life in the bushes and jungles does not depend on money but solely the will to survive. Nonetheless, they failed to run the Republic of South Sudan on the same bush model because living in towns and cities necessitates periodic circulation of money within an atmosphere of viable economy.

There is no any experience known worldwide where a country can survive without money and other urban facilities. The SPLM Juba failed to establish such impossible precedent. Hence, it has to come back to its proper senses and strike deals of rescue from Khartoum with the help of African Union and the United Nations. As a result, Juba had to lick the unnecessary vomits it has sprayed all over. Its inept SPLM leaders had no choice but to rush to Addis Ababa in order to sign the nine deals so as to avert economic grave and political collapse. Now things have opened up with a breath of relief from the disaster that was about to happen. Praise the Lord, Alleluia!

I hope the child-like SPLM leaders in Juba have leant their lessons that economic war is not a joke nor can it be won on mere propaganda that lack the sense of truth and care for the common good of the people. It is a war that can disturb super powers to the core, leave alone pretentious dwarf economy like the one still germinating in the nascent Republic of South Sudan. Also I hope they have been advised that becoming a foolish donor of multiple oil pipelines constructions while this resource is non-renewable is being unmindful of appalling living standards of masses in South Sudan. Why not build a diversifying rail way that can last even if oil dries up in future?

As no country is left alone to behave like an island on the face of the United Nations, the African Union and other regional organizations, the governments of the Sudan and South Sudan were urged and pressured to negotiate out their post-secession disputes and strike some necessary bilateral deals. The two governments were even offered high level mediators to help them overcome their contentions. The chief mediator happened to be one of the former prominent presidents of a country that has wealth of experience in conflict and its resolution. Not only this but also he is well-experienced and respected internationally, particularly, in dealing with incompetent but cunning carless presidents of some poor African countries. He knows how to play into their nerves and pin them down conscientiously on what military dictators fear most; regime change/collapse.

That is the reason I am unhesitant to say that Mr. Thabo Mbeki of South Africa must be a silent tough man who knows how to tame troublemakers and train them to behave responsibly as statesmen. You can see how Mr. Pagan Amum has changed greatly after the agreed deals between Juba and Khartoum have been signed in Addis Ababa. From being a radical he came back as a moderate orator who has learnt to be a diplomat in his encounter with the opponents and the media. Perhaps, if he maintains this momentum he could gain confidence from some of us for future presidency.

Someone who is not interested in international history of conflicts and their comparative resolutions would tend to think that there was something new in Addis Ababa deals. Specifically, the SPLM novices in countries affairs might have got shocked to learn that history of inter-states conflict of interests did not and does not begin or end with them after achieving the dream of South Sudanese for a viable independent state.

Also most of those deals are what normally the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation of the Republic of South Sudan would have been drafting/pursuing instead of the unnecessarily usurpation by the SPLM Secretariat without any sufficient justification in meddling into government affairs.

Put in order of importance, the bilateral deals between the Sudan and South Sudan could lexically be arranged with comments as follows:

1 - The Agreement concerning Oil and related Economic Matters: It is the center and driver of all the agreed deals. It was forced into the throats of the SPLM and NCP by the International Community. It is known that hungry people could be angry revolutionaries and both Juba and Khartoum have already started sensing this. Thus, they were seriously obliged to get the needed petrodollars into their pockets first and then continue politicking later at leisure on other contentious issues. Suffering of the common people and begging while sleeping on a valuable resource is regard as foolish and intolerable by the fatigued world donors. Also fantasy and emotional drunkard decisions do not help bring genuine solutions to real problems. Hence, Juba was asked, first and foremost, to open-up the shut-down flow of South Sudanese crude oil to international markets via Sudanese ports. The United States of America and China don’t joke or lie when it comes to economy. It is either “do or die!” Now President Salva Kiir has learnt to take orders and heed to commands from world’s superpowers. He had tried to be tough headed as a show off for no dignified end. A Good Cowboy Now!

2 - The Agreement on Security Arrangements:  Not very different from that between Chad and the Sudan. The aim is to control rebels’ activities and discourage them from pursuing regime change in each other’s capitals. By this deal, Juba would help Khartoum control the activities of Sudanese rebels in Blue Nile, Kordofan and Darfur and discourage them from pursuing the change of NCP regime. On the other hand, Khartoum would neutralize the activities of South Sudanese rebels and discourage them from pursuing change of SPLM regime by barrels of guns. Looked at critically, this deal is nothing much really but survival strategy for the ruling parties in the two-countries-with-one-system. With this deal, President Salva Kiir can think of sleeping in peace and remove all the coup preventing road blocks around J-One and near his residence in Juba. He can also remove the fear of travelling freely to different parts of South Sudan, especially to Upper Nile State for graduation ceremony next time. On the other side of the lake, the deal will relieve President Al-Bashir from escaping to Kanana again in fear of direct attack from rebels inside Khartoum. But it will not save his neck from chains of the ICC arrest warrant though Ocampo is retired back to Argentine.

3 - The Agreement on Trade and Trade-Related Issues:  it similar to the ones done amongst many countries. It is about supply and demand with profitable but fair price to each trader and customer crossing to the divide-line. This deal will minimize the exploitation done on South Sudanese markets by the traders of East African countries and their local partners. Now they will face tough competition and diversification of commodities sources with low prices, especially the fuel and cement. Northern part of South Sudan and Sudanese traders will be the core beneficiaries of this deal.

4 - The Framework Agreement on the Status of Nationals of the Other State:  it is not very different (in principle) from that between Egypt and the Sudan, though its full implementation has never materialized up to the day. However, the four freedoms in the deal could work in terms of free entry visas to each other’s countries at any time and in any legalized place. It is a great relief to those who own properties and have business interests or investments across each the divide.

5 - The Agreement on a Framework for Cooperation on Central Banking Issues:  it is similar to the ones done amongst many countries. It is about controlling inflation and value of each other’s currencies. This deal is necessary for a viable trade between the two countries and easy facilitation of monetary transactions. Now a South Sudanese could give a bold head of Dr. John Garang to a Sudanese without any offense.

6 - The Agreement on Certain Economic Matters: Division of Assets and Liabilities, Arrears and Claims and Joint Approach to the International Community: It is a common normal practice worldwide between countries that have split peacefully. But this deal is of a great concern because it might involve international law suits, in case.

7 - The Framework Agreement to Facilitate Payment of Post-Service Benefits: It is a right, pursuable internationally whether there is agreement or not.

8 - The Agreement on Border Issues (including demarcation): Not very different from that between the USA and Canada (officially known as “the International Boundary” and the longest international border in the world). While Canada and the United States both boast their world's longest undefended border title today, final placement of the border has not been without difficulties. But most concerns there have been about what goes across the border instead of where the border actually is located. The Sudan-South Sudan boundary is the longest in Africa and it will take time for its disputes to get finalized. Why then stop the rest of state life running because of some areas of the unmarked borders? A game of Tom and Jerry could be played by Juba and Khartoum on the unmarked and un-demarcated areas while life continues in the rest of the settled areas. After all the SPLM and NCP leaders are like Tom and Jerry behaviorally.

9 - The Cooperation Agreement: It re-affirmed the commitment of developing political will between Khartoum and Juba that will enable creation of good neighborhood of two viable states. This is the normal duty of diplomats in their diplomacy. That is why the Government of the Sudan rightly appointed one of its top notch Ambassadors to come to Juba for this purpose though South Sudan sent a lowly experienced Ambassador to Khartoum out of nepotism and misunderstanding of the purpose of international relations. I hope President Salva Kiir could correct this mistake as soon as possible.

The NINE DEALS did not consider Abyei Area as part of the Republic of South Sudan yet until its status is finally decided either by a referendum as agreed in Naivasha as stipulated in the CPA or by another new method agreed by Juba and Khartoum. Although the gentlemen of Abyei got disappointed to see the agreed deals working without the fate of Abyei and Nine Ngok Dinka being known yet, this time they failed to insert Abyei problem as conditionality among the negotiated issues of South Sudan.

The mediator’s prudence had it that the Abyei Area issue be tackled separately on a different agenda as it has proven since Addis Ababa Agreement in 1972 to be a complicating factor in good relations between the South and North of the Sudan. Though many of the Abyei people would prefer to remain in the Sudan, I would love to see them joining their real blood brothers in South Sudan in near future.

As  for the former SPLM/A comrades, Malik Aggar, Yasir Arman and Abdelaziz Hilu, the time has come for Salva Kiir and SPLM in South Sudan to forget them despite the pledge at the independence declaration in Juba on 9th July 2011 that they shall not be forgotten. They need to get it well that the umbilical cord between them and South Sudan has been cut in Addis Ababa deals and there is no turning back. They have been left in the cold to carry their own crosses and survive on their own the wrath of genocidal regime in Khartoum. South Sudan can only afford to host them as unarmed refugees without any dignity of struggle against marginalization left in them.

This is bitter but the heroes of Ingassina and Nuba Mountains must be regretting the day they fought a treacherous war in the same trenches with the Mother SPLM/A of South Sudan. They are like intimate brothers who ended up as strangers. May be those who are after Popular Consultations in these two areas will win, though this has become an internal affair of the Sudan where Juba has no much to say but advice only.


Dr. James Okuk is lecturer in Juba University, reachable at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Reinventing the Wheel of Divide and Rule Policies in South Sudan

By Tongun Lo Loyuong

September 5, 2013 (SSNA) -- South Sudan is in a political purgatory at the moment that makes it easy to wave a white flag and resign to an inevitable future that looks bleak. From governance crisis to corruption to nepotism to cronyism to tribalism to inter-communal vendettas to cattle-raiding and child abduction to poverty to crime and gangsterism, to insecurity and lawlessness to human rights abuses to rebellions to oh dear, there is no end in sight. It is such that to avert suffering a stroke, throwing your hands up in the air and declaring: blessed are those who do not believe in South Sudanese human potential for positive social transformation and mutual peaceful coexistence seems comforting!

Discomfortingly, there is an increasing concern among many South Sudanese that “divide and rule” policies are being reprehensibly appropriated by the political leadership in South Sudan. On this score, it is exceedingly clear that the land continues to acutely suffer from the hangover of colonial legacies. There is an uncalled for continuity with the unjust and tragic history of Sudan here that must be immediately named and shamed. Reinventing the wheel of divide and rule policies in South Sudan is a red line. It is disheartening and overwhelming in all the least.

Should the “Mundukuru” (Arabic north of Sudan) be invited back to restore some sanity and the little South Sudanese unity that existed during the liberation struggle and prevailed in the overwhelming vote for South Sudan’s secession in the referendum or what (wele shunu ya jamaa)? Else, it seems complicated to build a nation in South Sudan under these circumstances, with the Dinka and Nuer cousins embroiled in a seeming irreconcilable and perpetual feud over who knows what. It is difficult to forge a nation in South Sudan while within the Dinka and Nuer ethnic groups there now appears to be a deep seated schism across clan and possibly political interest cantons. It is hard to dream of a nation in South Sudan where the Equatorians are largely and endlessly suspicious and distrustful of the Dinka, the Nuer and few other non-Equatorian tribes in between. It is near impossible to think of a nation in South Sudan while the Equatorians are perceived as foreign Ugandans, deserters and false beneficiaries of a freedom they never fought for and therefore do not deserve.

In this vein, it is not easy to imagine how a cohesive national identity out of the varied and many ethnic groups, mostly incoherent and with little or no commonsense of a unifying cultural bond and a sense of collective belonging can be crafted in this country. It is absurd and naïve that some continue to refer to South Sudan as a “nation.” What a nation?

Question is, how can a collective sense of urgency on the need to steer our people away from present increasing hostile vibes across ethnicities and sub-cultures, which make us vulnerable to external exploitation, be instilled among our people, including the “educated” internet warriors among us? And how should a collective sense of unity and nationhood be forged in South Sudan amidst the current challenges and the rife in social strife on mostly tribal basis? In all honesty I have no frigging clue on how to wrap my head around this!

Yet all considered it is cathartic to write and cling to the hope that current challenges will come to pass when there will be a national awakening in this beleaguered country one day, just one day. But writing about hope of a national awakening alone though cathartic at least on individual capacity, is insufficient. Reality remains, a collective South Sudanese effort must be committed to actualize this hope. And as a starting point, it must be accepted by all that it is our collective responsibility to redouble the efforts to begin to transition to a national awakening era in earnest. A national awakening that rises above the tribe and ceases from a vicious and endless cycle of apportioning blame and exchanging hatred.

South Sudanese and particularly our present political leadership must sincerely begin to think of creating a nation first. We must commit our hearts and minds in the service of working towards forging a national unity and identity that binds the diverse and colorful social fabric of South Sudan. Keep the cash but at least build a nation for future generations’ sake.

As things stand, current events in South Sudan are antithetical to anything peaceful, nation-building and reconciling. The present political path that is being treaded is an inversion of any efforts aimed at forging unity and commonsense of purpose and national identity in the land. More importantly and as noted above, it is an obnoxious political dispensation which is not short of a byproduct of various intractable colonial legacies in South Sudan that must be immediately shunned.

Whether it is based on ignorance or deliberate negligence blinded by lust for wealth and material accumulation that holds sway to our history and what we fought for, the present morally obscene political scene is unsustainable. It is an unbecoming of the tireless efforts of South Sudan’s founding fathers and mothers and selfless sacrifices of our previous generations of heroes and heroines to restore our human dignity. It is indeed a betrayal of the spirit of liberation and a re-inaction of colonial policies in South Sudan in our face by some poor, myopic, egotistic and power-mongers in our political leadership.

As many commentary entries have accurately concluded of recent, the present unfolding of polarizing tribal politics in South Sudan is a direct result of the so-called “divide and rule” policies which are being consciously or sub-consciously appropriated by our political leadership to serve their shortsighted parochial greed and political power interest. At the moment there seems to be little distinction between some of our present political leadership, namely the “liberators,” from South Sudan’s traditional colonial masters and oppressors.

For those blinded by wealth hoarding, they must be reminded that South Sudan is borne out of the resilient resistance to divide and rule policies, which were central to our downfall to colonial subjugation in the first place and which South Sudan has tirelessly toiled and ultimately liberated itself from. It is a known fact that the aspirations of successive colonial masters in consolidating political, geographic and economic power not only in the greater Sudan, but also in the African continent at large were significantly aided by inciting tribal hatred and fragmentation. Any new such attempts will equally ultimately be foiled.

In reminding ourselves about our tragic historic realities, the divisive colonial policies which seem to now find favor in current political manifest in South Sudan are thus, traceable to the first foot-imprint of the colonial masters—the Mundukuru when they first arrived in the Sudanese scene back in the 7th century C.E. Khartoum later perfected these policies, and sadly Juba seems to now follow suit.

The first batch of colonialists arrived brandishing the divide and rule policies with one intent and purpose: to loot and exploit the huge reserve of human as well as natural resources in the land. Their long term objective was, of course, to ultimately settle and rule the land indefinitely as “born to rule” as they are now doing, while aggressively embarking on cultural domination of Sudan through seductive or compulsive policies of Islamization and Arabization of the Sudanese. In this schema, converted local groups to Islam were (and are) given preferential treatment and afforded access to political power and resources in return for policing their disadvantaged compatriots in service to the colonial masters.

And as history records, despite initial local resistance, the project was always moving forward. Islamic enculturation and demographic transformation came to overwhelm the old northern Sudanese Christian kingdom of Nubia in old Dongola and Alwa in Soba further south not far from modern day Khartoum. As seen today, resulting from these historic processes, the northern part of the country, Sudan (which literally means the land of the black) is predominantly inhabited by the Arabaic people in the shape of Barabra ethnic group represented by Sukut and Mahas in lower Nubia. In upper Nubia there is the Ja’ali group, the nomadic or semi-nomadic Juhayna group and the Shayqiyya confederacy, who occupy the territory east of the Nubian land, known today as Port Sudan and Suoakin region.

While the locals exposed their vulnerabilities across ethnic divides, the Mundukuru settlers were busy hankering down and extracting the gold and precious stones known to be in abundance in the eastern region. They were also busy capturing and selling the locals for slaves, among other vices. The wicked lucrative slave business invited the Mundukuru to raid villages further south. This ultimately transpired in the cultural and demographic transformation of north Sudan as Mundukuru presence increased and local presence decreased. Waves of local migration to the south followed and those who remained in the northern areas have not only been enslaved, but also been absorbed into Arabism and Islamism.

As Ibn Khaldun, an Islamic historian writing in the fourteenth century is quoted by P. M. Holt and Martin W. Daly: “the clans of Juhayna Arabs spread over their country [Sudan], and settled in it, ruling it and filling it with ruin and decay. The kings of the Nubians set about holding them back, but lacked strength. Then they proceeded to win them over by marriage-alliances, so that their kingdom broke up, and it passed to some of the offspring of Juhayna…So their kingdom was torn to pieces, and Juhayna took possession of their land.”

As if this was not enough and sniffing the continued local vulnerabilities across ethnic groupings, Jallaba penetration continued further South under the leadership of Abdallah Jamma by 1504-05, where a fierce clash with the South Sudanese Shilluk kingdom in Funj is reported. The Arabs were severely defeated on that occasion, but the Funj kingdom also somehow ultimately succumbed and was “…soon after converted to Mahometism.”

As a side note, in this first phase of colonialism, the bitter irony is that the old Sudanese Christian kingdoms were left alone to fend off Muslim-Arab encroachment and expansionism, without any support from other Christian communities in the region. In a desperate attempt to preserve the old Sudanese Christian faith and identity, an envoy from the kingdom of Alwa was reported to have been sent to Ethiopia, a home to one of the oldest Christian churches in Africa requesting for priests to be sent to provide moral and spiritual support to their kingdom, but to no avail. Overall, divide and rule policies create disunity and incite hatred across ethnicities, which in turn were instrumental in the “successes” and “achievements” of the first campaign of colonial Islamization and Arabization of Sudan.

Divisive colonial policies continued to be significantly influential in subsequent colonialist agendas and were again favored and effectively used by the Turko-Egyptian colonial masters under the overall command and leadership of Mohammed Ali Pasha. Like its predecessor, the use of divide and rule policies in the invasion of Sudan in 1821 under the command of Mohammed Ali’s son, Ismail Kamil Pasha was primarily aimed at exploiting Sudanese human and natural resources. However, it was much less centered on cultural and religious expansion as an agenda. In seeking to serve this resource exploitation purpose through divide and rule policies, Mohammed Ali’s son installed local puppet client-rulers, the likes of Mak Nimer. Though Mak Nimer ultimately rebelled and assassinated his master, Ismail Pasha by burning down the house that hosted him and some of his cohort to ashes. Mohammed Ali’s administration also worked closely with the ilk of Zubeir Wed Al Rhama, the notorious Ja’ali slave trader, who wreaked havoc in Bahr el-Ghazal and Darfur regions.

The wheel of divide and rule policies was reinvented in subsequent generations of colonialisms in the Sudan from Anglo-Egyptian rule in 1898 to post independent Sudan from 1956 to the seeming current appeal to this policies in post independent South Sudan by our rulers. In his Complex Emergencies, David Keen aptly drove the point home. He maintained that, “using one ethnic group to police another was a common imperial tactic. For example, during the gradual imposition of British rule in Sudan from the end of the nineteenth century, elements of the Baggara cattle herders of western Sudan were used to quell southern Sudanese groups who were resisting colonial rule, and the use of southern slaves among the Baggara was tolerated by the British. Since the Baggara were themselves a potential threat (particularly after their role in the 1883 Mahdist uprising), this strategy offered to reinforce colonial rule on two fronts.”

Indeed the whole marginalization and center vs. periphery dynamic which was one of the underlying causes of the north-south divide was a product of colonial divide and rule policies. Our British colonialists saw to it that Khartoum was given preferential treatment where colonial administration in the Sudan was concentrated and left in the control of elite few from the north after the independence in 1956, at the expense of the peripheries. As Alex De Waal puts it, “the country’s wars are logical continuation of historic processes of asset stripping and proletarianisation of the rural populace which began in the nineteenth century and which has continued during war and peace alike.”

In her article “A Curse from God? Religious and Political Dimensions of the Post-1991 Rise of Ethnic Violence in South Sudan,” Sharon E. Hutchinson underscores Khartoum’s present continuity with and scaling up of the practice of divide and rule policies, now known by the Mundukuru as “killing the slave through a slave.” “Mounted on horseback and wielding government-supplied AK-47s,” Hutchinson observed, “cattle- and slave-seeking raiders declared a jihad against a southern civilian population armed with little more than spears. Trained in counter-insurgency methods by the Sudanese army and entrusted with the task of depopulating the oil fields north of Bantiu, these Baggara militias began to kill, rape and enslave hundreds of unarmed Nuer and Dinka women and children in a dramatic breech of previously respected ethical limits on inter-tribal warfare in this region.”

Ask Eric Reeves and he will sit you down. The trend of divide and rule continues in Darfur and elsewhere in Sudan, as well as in Jonglei State and elsewhere in South Sudan through the arming of David Yau Yau’s forces and others before him as is well-documented. These policies are now feared to be appropriated by South Sudan’s political leadership in current political calculations. I am not easily bent on dwelling on history. But our present government owners in Juba must be careful not to be equated with South Sudan’s traditional colonial masters. In their policies, they must refrain from invoking the bitter and unjust colonial history that was primarily based on divide and rule policies and that was thought to have finally been overcome with the independence of South Sudan. There are limits. Reinventing the wheel of divide and rule policies in South Sudan is one.

Tongun Lo Loyuong is reachable at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it ; and can be followed on twitter @TongunLoLoyuong. This and other pieces are also on his blog:

Page 284 of 510

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.