South Sudan News Agency

Friday, Oct 24th, 2014

Last update08:29:40 PM GMT

You are here: News Articles

The UN Security Council has the power to veto the “rogue IGAD club” and it must do so now!

By Margaret Akulia, Canada

October 16, 2014 (SSNA) -- “African solutions for African problems” the “rogue IGAD club” mouthed off knowing full well what such a bigoted statement conjures. The powerful “race card” that is often abused by Black African hooligans to bully White people into silence and inaction! By making such a racist statement, the “conniving club” was purposeful in “blackmailing” the United Nations Security Council into going along with its unscrupulous perversion of Chapter VI of the Charter of the United Nations. That is why it must now be put to the strictest test of the same Charter and disqualified without further delay.

CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS CHAPTER VI: PACIFIC SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES

ARTICLE 33

1. The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.

2. The Security Council shall, when it deems necessary, call upon the parties to settle their dispute by such means.

ARTICLE 34

The Security Council may investigate any dispute, or any situation which might lead to international friction or give rise to a dispute, in order to determine whether the continuance of the dispute or situation is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security.

ARTICLE 35

1. Any Member of the United Nations may bring any dispute, or any situation of the nature referred to in Article 34, to the attention of the Security Council or of the General Assembly.

2. A state which is not a Member of the United Nations may bring to the attention of the Security Council or of the General Assembly any dispute to which it is a party if it accepts in advance, for the purposes of the dispute, the obligations of pacific settlement provided in the present Charter.

3. The proceedings of the General Assembly in respect of matters brought to its attention under this Article will be subject to the provisions of Articles 11 and 12.

ARTICLE 36

1. The Security Council may, at any stage of a dispute of the nature referred to in Article 33 or of a situation of like nature, recommend appropriate procedures or methods of adjustment.

2. The Security Council should take into consideration any procedures for the settlement of the dispute which have already been adopted by the parties.

3. In making recommendations under this Article the Security Council should also take into consideration that legal disputes should as a general rule be referred by the parties to the International Court of Justice in accordance with the provisions of the Statute of the Court.

ARTICLE 37

1.Should the parties to a dispute of the nature referred to in Article 33 fail to settle it by the means indicated in that Article, they shall refer it to the Security Council.

2. If the Security Council deems that the continuance of the dispute is in fact likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, it shall decide whether to take action under Article 36 or to recommend such terms of settlement as it may consider appropriate.

ARTICLE 38

Without prejudice to the provisions of Articles 33 to 37, the Security Council may, if all the parties to any dispute so request, make recommendations to the parties with a view to a pacific settlement of the dispute.

The above is the specific Chapter of the Charter of the United Nations that the “rogue IGAD club” has been perverting to abuse the people of South Sudan and to force itself on them illicitly! Just like Kiir's delinquent and irregularly constituted so-called democratically elected presidency, the role the “rogue IGAD club” arrogated to itself hurriedly was also improperly constituted which makes its so-called intercessory role as illegitimate as Kiir’s unlawful presidency!

Contravening or causing to be contravened the May 9, 2014 legally binding agreement between Kiir, Machar and their cohorts by standing by as essential stakeholders are prevented from travelling to the so-called South Sudan Peace Talks should have effectively disqualified the “rogue IGAD club”.

Full text: ‘Agreement to Resolve the Crisis in South Sudan’
Politics: UDF chief blocked from traveling to Addis talks
PPLF leader stopped from traveling to S Sudan peace talks
Diplomats ‘concerned’ after S Sudan politicians blocked from traveling to peace talks

There are three parties to the South Sudan dispute, namely all the people of Bahr el Ghazal, all the people of Equatoria and all the people of Upper Nile. Two of the parties to the dispute have predominantly elected the use of force to settle the bloody conflict while the people of Equatoria as a third party to the dispute have predominantly elected the use of dialogue. However, the “conniving IGAD club” has tacitly excluded this third party from participating in the solution to the South Sudan carnage which exclusion has become an imminent threat to the international peace and security that the Charter of the United Nations seeks to pre-empt because by the “conniving club”’s inferred approval of lawlessness and reward for violence, “the club” is “encouraging” the people of Equatoria to take up arms!

After the “conniving club” was “stripped naked” before the whole world, the United Nations Security Council should have vetoed its dishonest role immediately because no amount of covering will obliterate the “scheming club”'s collusion with Kiir's genocidal so-called democratically elected presidency. That is why the club’s lame attempt to hide from the world's “prying eyes” and representatives of the global community by fleeing to the lakeside city of Bahir Dar backfired and confirmed it as the most “incompetent” regional agency or arrangement” of all time! Consequently, the club’s treacherous debauchery “African solutions for African problems” that is often yapped while holding guns to their citizens' heads must now be put to the strictest test of the Charter of the United Nations. 

https://radiotamazuj.org/en/article/s-sudan-peace-talks-transferred-bahir-dar

The Statute of the International Court of Justice which is dragging President Uhuru Kenyatta to court for alleged crimes against humanity is an integral part of the Charter of the United Nations and the same Statute ought to be applied to perpetrators of crimes against humanity in South Sudan so that the suffering masses of South Sudan can be vindicated, especially unarmed civilians,children and the vulnerablewomen referred to in the gut wrenching article titled “UN envoy urges S. Sudan’s warring parties to end sexual violence”. Shame on the barbarians who prey on women and children! Shame on the Black African hooligans rebuked by Archbishop Desmond Tutu in the article titled “African Union leaders accuse ICC of discrimination”. If President Uhuru Kenyatta can be summoned to appear before the International Criminal Court, so can Kiir who must be stripped of the unlawful and perverted presidency he is using to abuse and orchestrate murder and sexual violence in South Sudan.

UN envoy urges S. Sudan’s warring parties to end sexual violence
African Union leaders accuse ICC of discrimination

Kiir's so-called democratically elected presidency has been illegitimate all along making the persistent “barking” and “duping” referred to in Elhag Paul’s article titled “The construction of future conflict in South Sudan” as idiotic as the makers of those twisted noises. It is now time to put this so-called democratically elected presidency to the strictest test of the law and let it collapse legally.  South Sudan is full of brilliant people but the idiotic noise makers hijacked the country and shamelessly shattered a people's dream through barbarism. They jutted the wrong image of South Sudan for decades and “allowed” the “conniving IGAD club” to abuse the people of South Sudan that is why they are unfit to negotiate on behalf of the people of South Sudan. They must now be stopped legally so that the people of South Sudan can be protected from satanic agendas and activities.

The construction of future conflict in South Sudan

Enough of the self-entitlement to South Sudan because the country belongs to the people of South Sudan and not anyone else! Enough of the “rogue IGAD club”'s bullying and self importance in playing God with a sovereign nation and its people. Enough of the perilous hooliganism that keeps dragging the so-called South Sudan Peace Talks and protracting the people’s suffering!

 South Sudan peace talks not expected to resume on time

The people of South Sudan are very capable of resolving the country's dispute without guns. However, the SPLM needs to take its “blood soaked hands” off the “steering wheel” and the “rogue IGAD club” needs to stop “patching” a blood stained party. Let the people drive the country's agenda without a bunch of blood sucking “vampires” running around with guns or actively participating in crimes against humanity. It is the way of the democracy people gone before us sacrificed their lives for; a way that did not come cheap because it was paid for with human blood. Stop defiling the memories of the martyrs or incur the wrath of God!

South Sudan has caring, responsible, and knowledgeable people who will make the right decisions about its well being and welfare. The people of South Sudan and their friends are waiting to build a model state, beginning with the initially agreed principle and arrangement of bringing all the people (stakeholders) together to deliberate on a way out including discussions on concerns raised and solutions offered by international friends who are being maligned by Kiir and his lawless cronies.

Full text: ‘Agreement to Resolve the Crisis in South Sudan’
Friends of South Sudan” Warned Of Serious Consequences If ‘Significant Changes And Reform’ Are Not Made
Canada calls for ‘accountability’ in South Sudan, not just peace
“U.S. Policy on Sudan and South Sudan: The Way Forward, by Donald Booth, US Special Envoy for Sudan and South Sudan” to the Atlantic Council –Washington, DC 9 October 2014.
Makuei Lueth: US, UK and Norway wants a regime change in South Sudan

The United Nations Security Council must immediately take steps to veto the “rogue IGAD club” from continuing to parade itself as the only regional agency or arrangement, or other peaceful means for resolving the South Sudan carnage. The world agency cannot continue to stand by after it has become blatantly obvious that the “conniving club” has been wilfully colluding with a genocidal so-called democratically elected President to pursue agendas that are harmful to the people of South Sudan! It needs to re-orient itself to the original object of the Charter of the United Nations for the sake of our world!

Enough of the abuse that has reduced the world body to a full-fledged prison management agency elsewhere and in South Sudan as outlined in Elhag Paul’s article titled The UN’S conversion into a prison management agency in South Sudan”. There is no excuse for such “collusion” with Kiir’s genocidal government and it is time the United Nations Security Council examine its own role in violating the Charter of the United Nations.  “Allowing” the “rogue IGAD club” to continue mouthing “African solutions for African problems” while feigning “incompetence” and “dysfunction” to advance injurious agendas to the people of South Sudan is in itself a crime against humanity.

The UN’S conversion into a prison management agency in South Sudan

The protracted war in South Sudan would have ended a long time ago and the suffering masses of South Sudan would have obtained restitution by now had it not been for the premeditated “dysfunction” and “incompetence” by the self appointed so-called mediators of the South Sudan carnage. Kiir and his cronies have lost the rights and privileges of membership in the United Nations and they cannot claim immunity from prosecution by the International Criminal Court. The “rogue IGAD club” can and should be vetoed by the United Nations Security Council so that the three parties to the South Sudan dispute, namely all the people of Bahr el Ghazal, all the people of Equatoria and all the people of Upper Nile can “seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice” not a mixed-up self-established conniving “cartel”!

Aluta Continua.

CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS

Margaret Akulia is co-author of the sequel Idi Amin: Hero or Villain? His son Jaffar Amin and other people speak. She brings to the South Sudan dialogue a multidisciplinary professional background including but not limited to “grassroots activism”. Additional information at: https://travellinglearningcircles.com/Save_South_Sudan.html AND http://www.savesouthsudan.com/home.html

Why the current conflict is a catalyst for positive change in South Sudan

By Tut Pal Ding

October 15, 2014 (SSNA) -- It is regrettable that events such as the Juba massacres that triggered the current civil war in South Sudan are at what it takes to end an autocratic regime like that of Salva Kiir. But as the saying goes, ‘freedom is not free”. Looking beyond the battle lines and the trenches of the two SPLAs, South Sudan future is not so much doom and gloom. After all, the milieu and the context in which the current game of play is taking place have the hallmark of a nation in transition from one form of rule to another.

South Sudan, observers agreed, has had a bad start. After a hard won independence, the national leadership failed to translate that price into freedom for citizens, the sole rationale on which previous wars were fought. Politics turned tribal, leadership positions became tokens for favours or for return of favours. Only very few hardcore regime insiders, individuals or groups have access to economic resources, jobs, contracts, scholarships, land and investments opportunities. Most of these privileges and who accesses them are often based on unofficial links to the politico-military leadership of the SPLM/A. The country is divided in all conceivable senses. Ordinary citizens are either rich or poor, no middle class. Every political/social science student will tell you this is a formula for oppression. It was a short ugly leadership overture in the SPLM/A that could only change through an uprising.

Sadly, the change had to happen this way. The regime concluded it would not tolerate diverging views. Those who dare speak do so at their own peril. Alternative media is restricted and civil society groups are harassed and threatened with persecutions, or worst. Even the Courts and the Parliaments have not been spared from this thuggish assault on the right of people. The leadership had grown intransigent at the expense of the citizens. There simply is no space for a meaningful debate to contribute or challenge the regime’s public policies. But thanks to the regime’s own miscalculation, in lights of all that is happening now, they have got the message that they will not in their own right stay in power for far longer.

Even as difficult as it is predicting political events in South Sudan, it is clear the stage is set for a change. There is a strong civil population actively behind the opposition, including its armed wings. More than 4 million people, nearly half the country’s population, are sincerely tired of Kiir’s repressive government. They have been forced to make it clear they are not willing to accept oppression from a government they elected. The same way they stood against previous vindictive authorities, they are determined to stand against this one and reject its injustices. It would be implausible to think there could be a military victory against this population.

There has been a vacuum of a credible opposition for the last eight years, and the regime probably thought they were untouchable. So far that void has since been filled by the SPLM/A outside government. However, it usually needs more than just an opposition to remove a bad dictator from power. By luck and sheer naivety, the regime has created its own alternative. The SPLM/A leaders including, those now in armed opposition led by former Vice-President Dr Riek Machar, wanted democracy installed. It is a group of elites and intellectuals; some with distinguished military careers, that are bound by democratic principles. Salva Kirr is probably surprised these individuals have successfully managed to remain united under one position, calling for an overhaul of the governance system in the country.

Here is why the regime will crumble soon due to its own making, and a better South Sudan will emerge from these ashes. The status quo started to shift with split within the regime’s own armed forces. This was rapidly followed by loss of a significant public support that degenerated into civil violence, engulfing most parts of the country. There is looming economic collapse, aggravated by international community threatening to consider broader sanctions. Moreover, the strained relations with the Sudan threatens the national sovereignty. Sudan had in the past threatened to block the oil flow through its territory, and the regime knew well the economic consequences. Salva Kiir’s regime is cornered and soon will find that there just isn’t any other way rather than to work with the opposition and help construct a new state based on universal suffrage.

The division in the military has dealt a blow to the regime’s military’s support base. Those who orchestrated the Juba massacres would have hoped the army stuck together, silence the opposition and quell, or at least contain squabbles like they did to Yau Yau, Gatluak Gai, George Athor and Olony. Unfortunately, this time the regime has lost a significant portion of its organised forces to the SPLA in opposition. The government’s reliance on foreign militaries and on a loosely knit militia groups is deemed not indefinite. And, it’s going to get more difficult for the government as the opposition forces appear to grow stronger, more organised and continue to acquire a sustainable supply of military hardware. The military threats are genuine and observers predict the regime will be weakened to the point its war capabilities will be limited to only defending their own garrisons.  

The troubled relationship with The Sudan is not helping Kiir’s tyranny. From day one, this has been a clear threat to the national sovereignty, and it is far more serious than the regime would like to admit. Only last year 2013, before the current civil war, the regime went silent on Abyei issue. They budged and refused to recognise the results of Abyei plebiscite which was granted in the CPA. Unfortunately, sticking one’s head in the sand doesn’t make issues go away. Abyei still presents an antagonistic predicament for the two countries. It currently seemed to have been ushered underground while each of the two countries deal with immediate threats posed by their own internal rebellions. But it’s only a matter of time before it erupts and ignite the unwanted confrontation that South Sudan will find hard to deal with, especially if the leaders continue to render a confused strategy on this important region.

Worst still, there are far more disturbing ideas floating around about Sudan-South Sudan relations. For example, Eric Reeve, a Sudan Scholar wondered what those of the Greater Upper Nile might do if Juba regime refuses to heed to federalism and democratisation demanded by the opposition groups. The result could be catastrophic. South Sudan could, God forbid, disintegrate into smaller independent regions, or lose its territories to Sudan, and possibly to Ethiopia and Uganda.

By all indications, the young nation is in grave danger of economic collapse. More than 98% of the government revenues come from two oil-producing regions. One of oil the fields in Bentiu, due to the current conflict, has been shutdown and deemed inoperable for a foreseeable period. The second and the only remaining lifeline to the government’s purse is under a credible threat from the opposition forces. If they (opposition) succeed in shutting down Paloch Oil Fields, an economic disintegration would be eminent and the government’s war effort will be seriously undermined. Therefore, fully aware that Paloch faces real threat as it is, it’s then only a matter of common sense that the regime recognise that they have no options but to negotiate a transition and immediately agree to form the proposed Transitional Federal Government of National Unity (TFGNU). This will not only save them an embarrassing military defeat but will save the lives of ordinary citizens and their properties.

The stakes are high. As the foundation of this young nation remained unsteady, one wonders what chances the country has in overcoming these myriads of problems. History and theoretical narratives provide a glimpse of hope. Building democracies is neither quick nor easy and certain conditions have to be in place to undertow that process. The current conflict has created those conditions outlined above; suggesting South Sudan has in deed began a transition to a better society based on fairness, justice and equality.

The threats are real and the consequences will be far reaching. The opposition groups, other South Sudanese stakeholders, analysts and international community hope the regime recognise the reality that the country is at a serious risk of total breakdown and act while there is still a chance. Rationality would suggests the government will see this coming and join the opposition towards transformation and South Sudan will be a free nation characterised by rights, justice and equality. As the “fighting season” approaches, and while the regime still calculates its next move while stalling the talks in Bahir Dar, Ethiopai, all of us will know very soon what the next South Sudan will look like.

The author is the Chairperson of SPLM Chapter Victoria in Australia. He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it . The views expressed here are those of the writer’s personal opinion and are not endorsed by the SPLM.

South Sudanese ‘Peace Talks’: what we need to know

By Kuir ë Garang

October 12, 2014 (SSNA) -- In my last appearance on Lagos based TVC news, I sounded a little more optimistic regarding the prospect for ‘peace’ in South Sudan, a position that’d sound naïve to anyone who’s familiar with the intransience and job-focused nature of politicking in South Sudan. Anyone, who takes what South Sudanese politicians say literally, risks falling into the unforgiving side of history. That is a good thing to remember when it comes to South Sudanese political mechanics. However, that shouldn’t mean a good step taken shouldn’t be acknowledged despise the constellation of obstacles facing the peace process.

The Obstacle: Jobbization of National Agenda

The talks in Ethiopia are indeed about the future of South Sudan. However, they are by no means tailored towards the future of the average South Sudanese. The talks, mostly about jobs and not peace, are purely about personal ambitions and political positions. What Dr. John Garang De Mabior saw as jobbism disguised as patriotism among the Anya Anya II leaders is what’s characterizing the current conflict. Almost everyone in the SPLM in opposition has grievances about a job lost or a job one didn’t get. On the government side, it’s about protecting one’s job not necessarily about standing up for the people of South Sudan. This is a great obstacle for peace in South Sudan. As long as both parties don’t see something written down, something that guarantees them government jobs and ensure job security and longevity, we wouldn’t see the peace signed soon.

The Obstacle: IGAD, Medley of Incompetence and Dictatorship

Inter-Government Agency on Development (IGAD) is credited as having successfully mediated the peace process that culminated in Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in 2005; and eventually ended with the peaceful secession of South Sudan from Sudan. However, a number of things have to be considered before that assumption takes hold in history as having a definitive Truth Value.

CPA was realized because of a number of factors we don’t see now in Ethiopia (Addis Ababa and Bahir Dar).

- The documents aren’t drafted by the very people who know why the war started in the first place. The warring parties just receive IGAD drafted documents.

- IGAD isn’t mediating but dictating the terms. A credible mediator doesn’t threaten but convinces the warring parties. The fact that IGAD threatens the warring parties is a clear indication of mediation and mediators’ failure.

- The key players in Sudanese war took charge of the peace negotiations in Naivasha and no great consultations were required outside the peace venue.

- When Dr. John and Taha took charge of the talks, the world knew that the ideologues behind the Sudanese religio-military, socio-economic and politico-racial dimensions were at the table and could adequately reconcile the war paradigms and dimensions.

- Taha and Garang struck a cordial working relationship that, to everyone, indicated that the language of peace was here and that ‘peace was coming.’ We don’t see that now in Ethiopia.

- CPA wasn’t about who gets what job-wise, but the security of the agreement, fail-safe mechanisms for referendum, resources sharing and everything that was in the interest of the people of South Sudan. Now, in Ethiopia, it’s all about JOBS.

IGAD has proven itself to be an utter failure. Garang and Taha were the ones who brought the CPA. The leadership, moral courage and patriotism shown by Garang and Taha have been replaced by self-interest driven talks meant to secure one’s political survival. Mediators should create an enabling atmosphere for peace to blossom. Instead, IGAD has created a poisonous atmosphere where the warring parties don’t trust it. How can an organization mediate between two parties that don’t trust it? This is a fallacy IGAD isn’t ashamed to maintain.

But what did we expect from the likes of Yoweri Museveni, Paul Kagame, Omer Al-Beshir, Ismael Guelleh, Isaias Aferweki, Haile Mariah Desalegn …among others? These are leaders with sorry-state human rights records. How can we possibly expect them to care about South Sudanese if they don’t even care about their own citizens? Anyone who checks the human rights records of these leaders and their political control mechanisms would just feel sorry for the people of South Sudan.  How can these leaders give South Sudanese something they don’t have in their own countries?

Why would they allow President Kiir to stop what they actually cherish: Absolute Totalitarianism and Unquestionable Leadership for Life?

Lack of Accountability

South Sudanese leaders aren’t accountable to anyone. With no doubt they can do what they want and when they want. It’s regrettable that they have extended this state of mind to regional and world leaders. They duped South Sudanese, plunged them into perpetual misery and poverty, and proved to the world that civilians don’t mean anything. The Cessation of Hostilities agreement was signed on January 23 and Cease Fire agreement signed on May 9 by the two Principals, all of wish were violated with no consequences. The leaders recommitted themselves in June to sign the agreement and end the war by August 10. That day came and went. Then recently the leaders of IGAD (naively, I think) conditioned the two Principals to sign the agreement in 60 days. This day came and went on October 9.

Despite the threats of sanctions and the threats of famine on the people of South Sudan, the two warring parties refused to sign the agreement. And they have done so without any consequences.

One is left to ask: Why would these people sign any agreement if they face no consequences. They treat the people of South Sudan like dirt and insects and get away with it. And they are doing the same thing with world leaders. Like South Sudanese, the world and regional leaders are just as helpless.

Why would the regional and world leaders expect leaders to comply when they aren’t accountable to anyone but themselves?

Glimmer of Hope

Despite all the dishonesty and lack of concern, South Sudanese leaders seem to have taken a small step towards peace and that is something worth noting. Federalism and creation of the position of Prime Minister were dismissed outright by the South Sudanese government side. Accepting these controversial issues is a step in the right direction.

I have come to realize that South Sudanese leaders say a lot of things they don’t mean and even things they wouldn’t do. Michael Makuei Lueth, the South Sudanese minister of information and the current spokesperson of the government, talks in a manner that makes it hard for people to believe him. I have ceased to take him seriously. A man with no sense of courtesy towards others, doesn’t care about the consequences of what he says, is not someone you can take seriously.

He says a lot of things that are not only detrimental to the government but to South Sudan as a whole. However, I’ve come to realize that it’s what is signed in Addis that matters rather than what the perpetually disgruntled Makuei says.

And in an equally annoying manner, Mabior Garang De Mabior, the opposition PR person, says a lot of things that are dangerous for peace in the country. Mabior has great potential to positively contribute towards socio-economic development in South Sudan; however, the young man is filled with mysterious bitterness and anger that undermines the supposedly national interest he’s fighting for.

I have therefore started to see these two men as talkers rather than men whose ‘settling of scores’ statements mean anything. My glimmer of hope therefore rests with the papers signed rather than what these two men say. They are meant to talk and propagandize ad infinitum and so far their talks mean nothing.

And US’s Stephen Rapp beautifully summarises, while speaking in Juba recently, the risks of focusing on the elite power-sharing while excluding the needs of the average South Sudanese due to lack of accountability.

“But the point is if this conflict will end just with some kind of deal between elites, or some kind of power sharing, that will not bring peace to this country. It will indicate that in the future, acts of violence could be rewarded. And so genuine peace requires that accountability element...”

There are indeed on-and-of talks in Ethiopia; but they aren’t necessarily talks about peace or the well-being of South Sudanese but jobs, simple callous quest for jobs.

Kuir ë Garang is a South Sudanese writer and author living in Canada. For contact, visit www.kuirthiy.info

More Articles...

Page 1 of 266

  • «
  •  Start 
  •  Prev 
  •  1 
  •  2 
  •  3 
  •  4 
  •  5 
  •  6 
  •  7 
  •  8 
  •  9 
  •  10 
  •  Next 
  •  End 
  • »

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.