South Sudan News Agency

Tuesday, Sep 02nd, 2014

Last update03:31:03 AM GMT

You are here: Opinion Editorials

South Sudan: A Tumultuous Mixture of Raw Human Hatreds (Part 2)

By Wani Tombe Lako

June 18, 2013 (SSNA) -- In part one of these series of articles, I said that, “if David Miliband and Ed Miliband were South Sudanese brothers; the Milibandfamily would have been destroyed for good. Thanks God, these young men areBritish nationals, whose society knows the meaning of self-determination andassociated freedom of expression. This means that, these Miliband brothers, donot suffer from herd mentality and herd morality. In fact, their supporters didnot, and do not suffer from the same problem. South Sudan can only be saved ifwe despise raw human hatreds. You cannot want to kill another South Sudanese just because the way he/she thinks, does not make you happy, or, it is toocomplicated for you to understand, its various dimensions”.

For the interest of clarity, these Miliband brothers, are Labour Party politicians in the UK. When the leadership of the Labour Party fell vacant; after the defeat of the Labour Party British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, in the last general election in the UK, the two brothers, put their names forward, as candidates for the leadership of the Labour Party. David Miliband is the older brother. At the end of the contest, Ed Miliband emerged as the new leader of the British Labour Party, and now, the Leader of British Opposition, in the House of Commons. The two brothers are still alive, they have not killed themselves because they held different political opinions on how best to run the Labour Party, in the best interest of the British peoples. This is the true meaning of freedom of expression within the ambit and remit of self-determination.

Emotional policies and politics in South Sudan

In the UK’s types of politics, you hate the ideas of your political opponents, but, you do not plot to kill your political opponents, nor do you hire others, to brutalise them. In fact, in the UK, political differences between two politicians do not become the cause for communal mobilisation for a total communal warfare. However, in our emotionally charged politics in South Sudan, complete with our primordial and parochial herd mentality and associated herd morality, such political differences become the kernel, and the cardinal reasons, for tribal mayhem, and human carnage.

Just go through various articles, in various electronic websites, and you will have the feel, and know the intrinsic meaning of herd mentality and herd morality, fueled by raw tribal human hatreds. Go to Juba in South Sudan, and you will come away with a shattered political and human heart, because, the country is being torn asunder by raw politicised human hatreds, masquerading as political manifestos, in sovereign South Sudan. The human, legal, moral, and constitutional paradoxes are that, today’s South Sudan is purported to be, the offspring of the sacred doctrine of self-determination, as the ultimate driver and dynamo of universal human rights.

Alas; in South Sudan, the supposed self-determination’s gift to humanity; herein, there is the entrenchment of the culture of particular human rights, and the catering for the interests of a particular people; within the peoples of South Sudan. This is where, the doctrinal definition of “people (s)”; within the remit and ambit of the doctrine of self-determination; has gone bonkers and dangerously soar in South Sudan. Raw human hatreds, dangerously delivered via the conduits of herd mentality and herd morality, has left the regional and international friends, of the downtrodden and subaltern peoples of South Sudan, trembling with rage and incredulities.

Nowhere in the whole wide world, are human persons, condemned and criminalised, for discharging their constitutional rights, duties and obligations; as do happen in South Sudan. No where in the whole wide world, are human persons, expected to behave, and think uniformly, as we are expected to do in South Sudan. Thanks to herd mentality, and herd morality as the operationalisation of tribal, primordial and parochial folklore culture. This folklore culture is, forcibly and unconscionably, being rammed down our enlightened and intellectual political throats and consciences; as genuinely palatable and nutritious political diet, of the nascent sovereign nation of South Sudan. God Almighty, we are dangerously constipating in South Sudan.

Many of us in South Sudan have been refugees in many continents. For those of us who were in Europe for example. Therefore, the very Refugee Convention of 1951, and its Protocol of 1967, these documents, were purposively written, by mainly white Europeans, for the protection of political, linguistic, racial, ethnic, religious, and conscience differences. Europe became Europe, as we Africans in general, and South Sudanese in particular, love it today, because, the Europeans, allowed themselves, to peacefully differ continuously; for the perfection of human reason. That is the essence of the doctrine, of this moral/legal animal; called self-determination, which, we are misusing an abusing in South Sudan.

For example, the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) of 2005, which ended the non-international armed conflict in the hitherto united Sudan, became the main source of the Interim Constitution of hitherto united Sudan, during the interim period 2005-2011. This CPA, commanded the peoples of South Sudan, to vote in a referendum, in 2011, to decide whether, they wanted a separate sovereign state of their own, or they wanted to remain in a united Sudan. The peoples of South Sudan voted overwhelmingly for secession, from the rest of the Sudan, and the creation of their own sovereign State of South Sudan. This was, and is, a constitutional, and legal right, which is to be respected and protected.

However, emotional politics got the better of some South Sudanese, to the extent that, they individually, and as a group, interpreted the CPA, as meaning that, all peoples of South Sudan should have, on the day of referendum, voted for the secession of South Sudan, from the rest of the Sudan. Not only that, for those South Sudanese, who openly voted for unity with the rest of the Sudan, for perfectly objective reasons, this group of South Sudanese, in accordance with this kinky interpretation of the CPA, must be criminalised and labeled traitors. This is the meaning of emotional policies and politics in South Sudan. They are dangerously value loaded, evilly subjective, and self-destructive. This is where the notions of herd mentality and herd morality come in to play their dangerous roles.

Emotional policies and politics saw to it that, champions of self-redetermination as external self-determination, for the establishment of the sovereign Republic of South Sudan are mistreated and tortured with impunity. For example, Justice Peter Abdel-Rahman Sule is languishing in Juba dungeons, for standing up against the abuse and misuse of the doctrine of self-determination, by some of the rulers of South Sudan. These rulers of South Sudan, are filled to the brim, with raw human hatreds, sustained by herd mentality and herd morality. 

Not only that, but, there are senior SPLM former, and current ministers, who spoke openly against the secession of South Sudan from the rest of the Sudan, and they are being rewarded with membership of Parliament of South Sudan, and others, being assigned to UN posts, representing South Sudan, while champions of secession like Justice Peter Abdel-Rahman Sule, are maliciously, categorised as enemies of the State. These are emotional policies and politics in dangerous operation in South Sudan.

The State of South Sudan, which interests have been culpably married, to the interests of specific individuals in South Sudan, is becoming a dangerous place for the majority of South Sudanese. This means that, if you politically, annoy this particular group of people, you automatically annoy the State of South Sudan, and thus, the instruments of violence, owned by the State of South Sudan, are unleashed against you, because, the State of South Sudan is angry with you. This is reminiscence of the statement by Louis XIV of France, in which he said, “I am the law, and the State, and the thing is right because I said so…”

Justice Peter Abdel-Rahman Sule is languishing behind bars, in Juba dungeons, because, the rulers of South Sudan, decided to apply the political amnesty, proclaimed by the President of South Sudan, subjectively, influenced by raw human hatreds, sustained by herd mentality and herd morality. There is no objective consideration, for the comprehensive interest of South Sudan as an amalgam of heterogeneous tribal groups, who are supposed to coexist within the framework of reciprocal human communities, in multicultural and multi-tribal South Sudan.

For example, when President Salva Kiir, was still Commander Salva Kiir, and during the Rumbek Meeting of November 29th to December 3rd 2004, he said: “If we are national leaders, which I don’t believe we are because we have no cohesion within our leadership structure, let us be sincere with ourselves. After meetings are conducted, we run to foreign countries. There is no code of conduct to guide the Movement’s structures. When the Chairman leaves for abroad, no directives are left. And no one is left to act on his behalf. I don’t know with whom the Movement is left with; or does he carry it in his brief case?” (See page 2 of the confidential minutes).

The then Commander Salva Kiir, and the current President of the sovereign Republic of South Sudan also said that, “…The Chairman is everything, from a Finance officer to one at the lowest level. Corruption, as a result of the lack of structures, has created a lack of accountability which has reached a proportion that will be difficult to eradicate”, (see pages 2 and 3 of the confidential minutes).

The above quotations from the speech of the then Commander Salva Kiir, and the current President of the sovereign Republic of South Sudan, raise several fundamental issues related to the then, and current integrity of the SPLM/A; as the ruling political party and army in South Sudan. Issue one is connected with the fact that, the then Commander Salva Kiir and as the then number two man in the SPLM/A, lacked confidence in the leadership of his political part and army. Alas, this same lack of confidence in the current SPLM/A has also invariably been raised by the current number two man in the SPLM, Dr Riek Machar.

The fatal and dangerously low level of political morale, exhibited by then number two man in the SPLM/A, is now being shown by the current number two man in the SPLM. This sent out, and is sending out, the most glaring signals that, the SPLM/A was, and is, overwhelmed, and riddled with internal feud and disorientation.  It is therefore, extremely questionable, as to whether, the top echelons of the SPLM/A, are capable of maintaining the SPLM/A, as viable political and army, machineries, for the positive administration of the sovereign Republic of South Sudan?

It is obvious from the above quotations that, there was no cohesion, and in fact, and indeed, there is now no cohesion within the SPLM/A. Therefore, if the SPLM/A lack the necessary cohesion how do they positively enthuse the peoples of South Sudan, with the prerequisite culture of socio-political cohesion, which is badly needed, by the peoples of South Sudan, to remain as one people; for positive coexistence and development? I submit that, emotional polices and politics, within the SPLM/A created dangerous fractures in the past, and are now creating more dangerous factures within the peoples of South Sudan. I further submit that, now, it is impossible for the SPLM/A, to act as the symbol of South Sudanese unity; given their own disunities.

Issue two, within the remit of the above quotes, is the fact that, there appeared to be a total lack of culture of order and procedural exercise of authority and discipline within the SPLM/A.  Alas, it is also ubiquitously clear that, there is now, no procedural exercise of authority and discipline, within extant structures of the SPLM/A as the ruling political party and army in South Sudan. I can strongly and validly argue that, this chronic and entrenched absence of functional structural formations, within the SPLM/A, and within the governance of the sovereign Republic of South Sudan, by the SPLM/A, is also entrenching political, economic, financial, socio-cultural, security, moral, and administrative chaos in South Sudan.

I am also justified to worry as to whether; the SPLM/A have the necessary political wills and moral capacities, to govern the sovereign Republic of South Sudan, along democratic                 principles. I can argue and adduce comprehensive variables to the fact that, the SPLM/A themselves, do not believe in structural formations, and variables of order and rule of law, that are the bedrock of democratic institutions worldwide.

Issue number three, within the narratives of the above quotes is that, there was, and, in fact, and, indeed, there is, a dangerous culture, and insatiable love, for absolute and zero-sum monopoly of political, security, military, economic, financial, tribal, socio-cultural and administrative powers, by the managers, and operatives of the SPLM/A, to the exclusion of other South Sudanese.

For example, commenting on the same problem of monopoly of the SPLM/A by the late Dr Garang, the then, Commander Jadalla said, “…you think you are the founder of this Movement and as such, that you can do what you want without consulting people? The public is not ready for more problems’, (see page 10 of the confidential minutes).

I am sincerely justified in arguing that, this cancerous culture, and insatiable love, for monopoly of power and wealth, has dangerously spread, to all other members of the SPLM/A as a political part and army. This being the case, I can strongly and confidently argue that, unless the peoples of South Sudan reclaim their rights, via the ballot boxes, they are doomed to comprehensive eternal instabilities in South Sudan. It must be said loudly that, running governmental institutions, is extremely different, from controlling some rebel movement.

It is true that, many rebel leaders become presidents and ministers. However, they then continue to run their governments and ministries; as though they were still pursuing their revolutionary wars. The tumultuous end results are that, the country falls to pieces, and /or is turned into a privatised property, for a few individuals, at the expense of the bulk of the citizenry. This is exactly the situation in South Sudan.

For God’s sake SPLM/A, do not let the peoples of South Sudan down, as a result of your internal political feuds, and personal bad blood. Please, do not aspire to turn, these murderous feuds, into national feuds and bad blood. We want a South Sudan that is inclusive; and where participation by all peoples, is the byword, in all its governmental structures. We do not want anybody, to lock South Sudan in her/his briefcase, when she/he leaves for medical treatments abroad, or, when she/he tours world cities, checking on her/his foreign bank accounts, and children, in various boarding, and other schools, because, South Sudan lacks good hospitals, and good schools, and because, the banks in South Sudan, are not secured enough, for his million/billions of foreign currencies.

Issue number four emanating from the above quotes, from the then Commander Salva Kiir, and the current President of the sovereign Republic of South Sudan is the insatiable appetite, within the SPLM/A, for public funds. One shares the worries of the then Commander Salva Kiir that, no peoples want to see their leader doubling as the finance minister, director for finance, booker keeper and cashier at the same time. It is bad for the nation, and bad for the money in question.

I can then objectively argue that, this SPLM/A propensity to privatise South Sudan, has got its precedents, in the fashion in which, the current rulers of South Sudan,  privatised the affairs of the SPLM/A, in the bushes of South Sudan, to suit individual interests, and which almost, made them, to annihilate themselves, in the said bushes. Thanks to the CPA, it rescued many of the current SPLM rulers in Juba and elsewhere.

For example, regarding the danger of individuals enriching themselves at the expense of the peoples of South Sudan, using the resources of the SPLM/A, the then, Commander Salva Kiir, and current President of the sovereign Republic of South Sudan said, “…I would also like to say something about rampant corruption in the Movement. At the moment some members of the Movement have formed private companies, bought houses and have huge bank accounts in foreign countries. I wonder what kind of a system are we going to establish in South Sudan considering ourselves indulgence (sic) in this respect’, (see page 4 of the confidential minutes).

On the same issue of corruption in the SPLM/A, the then Commander Wani Igga, and the current Speaker of our Parliament in Juba, said, “…. Corruption remains rampant in the Movement. Corruption must be fought for example, some years back the Chairman in a meeting informed us that Commander Deng Alor brought some money from Nigeria, but how that money was spent had never been explain to us again. I ask the question where is the transparency and accountability we talked about?” (See confidential minutes page 18).

Therefore, this ridiculous and dangerous culture of individuals, enriching themselves, at the expense of the poor, and the subaltern downtrodden peoples, of South Sudan, is not new then? So, therefore, these SPLM/A rulers, in Juba, and elsewhere, came to town, complete, with their moral arsenals of corruption. This means that, they did not learn it from the Jallabas in Khartoum, during the CPA interim period then? What about this, political rhetoric, and polemics of emancipatory language? I mean the language, employed by the so-called liberators of the SPLM/A; who appear to worry more, about their own happiness, than the overall welfare of the peoples of South Sudan.

On the issue of privatisation of the SPLM/A, the then second in command, Commander Salva Kiir, and the current President of the sovereign Republic of South Sudan, said, “…The Chairman seems to have taken the Movement as his own property. As we leave Rumbek after this meeting, I would like to see that all our administrative issues be addressed and implemented following this meeting’s resolutions’, (see page 3 of the confidential minutes).

These worries expressed succinctly by the then Commanders Salva Kiir and Jadalla; have in a nutshell, turned into our comprehensive nightmares today in South Sudan. Reading between the lines, all those who spoke in that meeting, invariably, accused the late Dr Garang of some degree of selfish attitude, to put it mildly. It can be strongly argued that, these worries expressed by these former commanders of the SPLM/A, as regards the possession and ownership of the SPLM/A, by the late Dr Garang, were some of the very reasons that, kept many South Sudanese away, from joining the SPLM/A, and they were the very reasons that, made many South Sudanese to leave the SPLM/A.

The fundamental worry is that, those who survived the late Dr Garang, transferred the very attitudes they were complaining of, to the governance of the sovereign Republic of South Sudan. I can painfully argue that, if the SPLM/A continue, with these attitudes, in their management of South Sudan, then, there is no doubt that, the SPLM/A shall be the main reason for the demise and undoing of the sovereign Republic of South Sudan. These attitudes shall also be the comprehensive factors of disharmony of the peoples of South Sudan.

It is so unfortunate that, for some of us, who have been watching, and studying the SPLM/A for a long time, it is sad to say that, the leaders of the SPLM/A, assumed the leadership of the sovereign Republic of South Sudan, without waning themselves of, as well as cleansing themselves of, all those counterproductive notions of owning the place, to the exclusion of others.

These issues must be pointed out and discussed, so that, the current leadership of the SPLM/A know that, South Sudanese are very concerned about this type of leadership style. The leadership of the current SPLM/A have abysmally failed, to demonstrate to the general public of South Sudan that, the SPLM/A is there for all the peoples of the sovereign Republic of South Sudan.

The author is Professor of Social and Rural Development and Lecturer in Laws. He be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

South Sudan will be a good spectator, while its oil follows

By: Justin Ambago Ramba

June 17, 2013 (SSNA) -- President al Bashir’s outburst at a rally in Khartoum North on 8 June, 2013 was yet one in hundreds of occasions on which he often gets carried away by not exactly a bravado so as to say, but it is one of these things engrained in his Arabized Nubian [Arabs of Sudan] mentality where a warrior would dance and boast of his knighthood in front of his tribe’s women.

To those who know him well, they know that this is not the man’s first time to use the wrong place and the wrong platform to issue such orders which often has far reaching consequences on his country. He again made it to the news headlines when he told that rally in Khartoum state that he had ordered his oil minister Awad al-Jaz to block the pipeline carrying landlocked South Sudan’s crude to Red Sea coastal city of Port Sudan, accusing Juba of continuing to support to the Sudanese rebels.

This is what al Bashir of Sudan said:

"O’ Awad [oil minister] tomorrow direct oil companies to close the pipeline and after that let them [South Sudan] take it via Kenya or Djibouti or wherever they want to take it", the Sudanese president said. And you can imagine him shouting, and dancing his stick dance.

"The oil of South Sudan will not pass through Sudan ever again," Bashir added.

In the early 1970s  and 80s it was the Libyan strong man the late Mouamar al Gadhafi who was known to be the crazy man of the continent, for he had demonstrated a completely an unorganized type of  diplomacy. Thank God, he is dead now, but of course the scene is still full of his kinds.

The 27th September 2012 cooperation agreement between Juba and Khartoum was an agreement which took the whole of the international community a lot of effort to hammer. It has matrix for implementation as well as channels for complains should one side feel that the other isn’t being unfaithful.

In spite of all this well written document, it is unfortunate to admit that it failed to prevent president al Bashir of Sudan to revert to the ‘al Jaalein –way’ of doing things, when he turned to a mob of supporters in Khartoum Bahri (North), to not only accuse the Republic of South Sudan of helping the Sudan Revolutionary Front (SRF) rebels, but it was here that he decided to terminate his country’s obligation to the cooperation agreement.

Al Bashir went on and stressed that the oil of south Sudan will not pass through Sudan ever again – read the above quote. This far was al Bashir’s official stand on the issue of relationship with its southern neighbour, and whatever modifications that he came up with in the following few days shouldn’t really be taken seriously if we are to take al Bashir himself seriously.

The sixty days grace period in which the oil of South Sudan will still continue to follow through the Sudan to the Red Sea port of Port Sudan, should better be understood in its true context. These sixty days is the time period allowed for in the agreement, whereby in an event of final decision to scrap the cooperation agreement. 

In this period south Sudan continues to enjoy the right to export it oil through Sudan and thereafter for the oil to be shut down in case such a decision has been arrived at by all the stake holders – Sudan –south Sudan – the various oil companies – the African union peace and Security Council (AUPSC).

However since it seems that al Bashir is keen to reverse his negative stand albeit on a condition that South Sudan stops its support to the SRF rebels, then we can say that the oil will continue to follow through the Sudan as it used to until such a time in the future when South Sudan decides otherwise.

This is simple logic and Khartoum knows that it is not concerned about the role of South Sudan as a government here, but rather it seems to be accusing certain individuals in Juba, that they continue to support the rebels.

First it was the RSS government and now it is some individuals or circles in Juba who are believed to be the ones supporting the Sudanese rebel groups. This being the case it can be reasoned out that even the degree of such kind of clandestine support if any does really exist,  will obviously not be a thing to upset the balance of power in the Sudanese civil war.

But let us also reason out the issue from a more objective view point, and in this case if it is true that a few individuals’ support to the SRF is capable of sending the entire government insane, then Khartoum is already suffering a serious war fatigue.  Because  otherwise how would you explain the mental state of such a clique that has fought wars against its own people since 1955 - till today [2013] to remain sound?!

Khartoum however has never hidden its hopes for a return to good relationship between the two countries. Its officials who know the real truth, but are unable to criticize their president over his amateurish reaction that has now brought the two countries at the verge of a diplomatic row and likely to lead to another military confrontations, coupled with the huge negative impacts that these can have on their country’s already ailing economy;   have expressed their will to see that the oil of South Sudan continues to flow.

To do this without making al Bashir look foolish in front of the world audience, the NCP officials chose the easiest thing to do and that is to push the whole situation into a corner where repeated meetings between Sudan and south Sudan will appear to have solved the problem.

Those who read the extract of the speech by NCP media secretary Yasir Youssef [ST], who spoke at a regular meeting of the NCP political sector committee, will appreciate that Khartoum is now looking for an exit strategy after realising how detrimental to the country, al Bashir latest rhetoric on closing the RSS oil is.

Youssef who will never dare of course to change the official position of his country, held on to the erroneous argument that Juba’s support to the rebel groups is the main difference between the two countries.

But even if certain circles in Juba were to be supportive of the Sudanese rebels, how does that become the main difference between the two countries, if as you read these lines, many South Sudanese rebels who had been receiving regular support from Khartoum in order to topple the RSS government are currently in Juba seeking integration. So for argument sake, who is now better than whom?

Still it could be a sign that Khartoum is back to its senses and acknowledges that there are mechanisms within the so-called cooperation agreement that needs to be exhausted first, when he [Yasir Youssef] said:  "Any mechanism conducive to stop this support is welcome, whether it comes through visits, dialogue or proposals, provided that it leads to stop this support," .

However President Kiir has repeatedly denied allegations by Bashir that his government backs the Sudanese rebels. “We have repeatedly made clear our disengagement with the SPLM-North and have offered to mediate a peace process between them and Khartoum,’ Kiir said.

“Those grievances [allegations levied by Khartoum on South Sudan] should be brought before the Joint Political Security Mechanism (JPSM). The allegations should then be investigated by the Joint Border Verification and Monitoring Mechanism (JBVMM) or the Ad hoc Committee,” he said.

On the other hand the SRF through one of its leaders, Yasir Saed Arman has already expressed the group’s position on the new African Union mediation initiative that has been presented by Thabo Mbeki to the two partners as a way forward. Arman confirmed that his party welcomes the proposals made by the AU as it aims to investigate the accusations being traded between Khartoum and Juba over support to rebel groups.

The truth being  said, for as long as the SRF rebels operate in the Sudan, the Sudanese confused leadership will always look for someone to blame for its military defeats.  The bottom line is that, either al Bashir militarily defeats the SRF[ and he knows that better], or he reaches an agreement with them or worse still he runs away and leaves the seat of power to them. In all these scenarios RSS has the much obliged role of playing a good spectator, while its oil follows.

Dr. Justin Ambago Ramba is the Secretary General of the United South Sudan Party (USSP). He can reached at: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

On Abyei: Enough is Enough

By: Deng Vanang

June 15, 2013 (SSNA) -- No one whether locally or internationally can still argue there is more hope to resolve Abyei stalemate peacefully. It has been everybody’s wish that dialogue could prevail over wrangling and peace over war. But all the well wishers, South Sudanese and Sudanese of good will are put to shame by intransigence of some of ruling elites in Khartoum. For many peaceful options were suggested and equally exhausted that resulted in failed negotiated settlements. These were Comprehensive Peace Agreement, CPA that devoted one of its protocols on Abyei referendum in tandem with that of Southern Sudan in 2011, Abyei Boundary Commission, ABC whose findings were rejected by Khartoum, The Hague Court of Arbitration whose ruling remains gathering dust on the shelves due to Khartoum refusal to implement it. Then, came Khartoum invasion of Abyei in response to its alleged provocation by Juba in the run up to independence declaration. The whole world weighed in to resolve the crisis, urging both side to establish the Abyei joint administration and keep off the area militarily, but Khartoum refused the proposal while Juba has ever since been begging the AU and UN to either sweet talk out or flash out Sudan armed Forces all in vain. This resulted in recent out bust by President Kiir in accusing the two bodies of bias.

That is true because when South Sudan was allegedly invaded and took over the oil field of Heglig, the whole world was on her neck while condoning the same invasion and takeover of Abyei by Sudan. Khartoum has not only taken over the urban parts of the disputed territory, but further urges Miseriya Arab to drive out the Ngok Dinka from their remaining ancestral rural land. One of these atrocities is recent cold blood murder of Ngok Dinka paramount chief, Kuol Deng Kuol not in his own house, but in the hands of AU peace keeping troops who supposed to protect him.

If such atrocious killing could not jolt AU and UN into action, then what else? The gruel act has caused President Salva Kiir Mayardit and all concerned patriotic South Sudanese to question the AU/UN’s motive of lulling us into deep sleep while Miseriya are busy ethnically cleansing Abyei of all Dinka Ngok people over night. The same concern has made leader of Minority party, SPLM-DC in parliament, Honorable Onyoti Adigo to propose the transfer of Abyei to a neutral administration run by UN and AU so that Abyie referendum takes place in October as planned. This is normal procedure in UN system whereby two rival groups over a disputed territory are asked to vacate it in order for a peaceful referendum to take place whose verdict shall be respected by both sides and problem solved once and for all. It happened in colonial times back in 1940s – 1950s and recently it was the case in Estimore, Indonesia and Kosovo. Then, what is unique about Abyei’s issue which is even more genuine and complicated to attract action than that of Estimor and Kosovo. Unlike Ngok Dinka with Arabs, Estimoris are from the same Asiatic race with Indonesians as is the case with Kosovars and Serbians.

My own proposals

Due to Khartoum’s intermittent failure to listen to the voice of reason, South Sudan government should redirect its efforts in the following alternative avenues:

One, issues an ultimatum to Federal Republic of the Sudan to withdraw from Abyei within specific time frame for UN-AU to take over and organize a free and fair referendum as scheduled.

Two, failure of which it shall tantamount to declaration of all out war by Sudan against Republic of South Sudan.

Three, South Sudan should by now begin sending troops and essential relief items for the returning Ngok Dinka to Abyei.

Four, due to austerity biting government and everybody, all South Sudanese citizens in and abroad should be asked to contribute whatever they have, be it Dura, clothe, fair of shoes, money, medicines, etc. as part of general efforts towards an impending war with the Sudan.

I proposed all the above simply because Sudan is gravely exploiting vulnerability of South Sudan. This vulnerability is in form of our dependence on Sudan as our main supply route for cheaper consumer goods and source to which our oil pipelines are connected besides our current economic depression.

All these weak points have made South Sudan beholden and slave to Sudan. Therefore, it is high time for South Sudan to choose between food and her dignity. Now it is up to the South Sudan to assert sovereignty by relocating her business interests to neighboring East Africa and like Jews leaving Egypt never to look back again. Or failure to do so, South Sudan shall remain deprived of her valuable territories through black mails by using food and oil pipelines, confined in an abject poverty and virtually bartered at will.

South Sudan is land birthed out of our nakedness and nothingness and what brought her into being was our sheer determination to be free and honored in the community of nations that cherishes freedom and sovereignty as the only means to an end: material needs.

And those who may say they are too hungry to fight for their right, like Fidel Castro who opened leeway to Cubans clamoring for cheap life in the west, President Kiir should allow them to leave South Sudan alone and freely for anywhere of their own choosing.

These terrorists, who burn innocent children, old women and men in their sleep in Abyei, need to be taught one or two lessons as they so wish. Of course they may go to Arab cousins in the Mideast, urging them to wage a holy war against us. This is nothing new. As for us there is nothing holy about an exercise that snubs life out of human being. Which was why South Sudan won the war full and square because what they call holy, God’s spirit was not with them anyway. These are just bunch of terrorists hiding behind all the glorious terminologies of God they can lay their wagging tongues on. In response, we must call up on the west to help us so that the next phase of fighting the Sudan as terrorist state of her likes has begun in earnest. Sudan is hell bent on denying us peace and development she jealously enjoys.

Deng Vanang: Journalist and Executive member of South Sudan official opposition, SPLM-DC. He can be reached at: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

NB. All the words expressed in this opinion piece are solely mind and cannot be attributed to SPLM-DC as the party.

More Articles...

Page 36 of 85

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.