South Sudan News Agency

By: Justin Ambago Ramba

January 30, 2012 (SSNA) -- This is not in anyway an attempt to suggest that there do exist some conspiracy theories within South Sudan’s polity, but since  much rat can already be smelt in what is now the earliest steps in the long preparation to write the country’s so-called Permanent Constitution, such propositions become to hard to resist. Like many other fellow compatriots, we all had hopes that the heavy engagement of the international community in helping this nascent nation would help redeem and rectify all the evils that befall our leaders as a resulted of their wrong policies over the past seven years :- the wrong census, the flawed elections, undemocratic transitional constitution, the lack of broader participation in government, the sluggish decision taking process and worst still the rampant corruption and impunity that goes with it. Now sad though  nothing seemed to have  worked  and we are now faced with yet an alarming  situation where things are fast moving from bad to worst.

It can't be  over-stressed  that to date as our people remain galvanised and polarised, the insensitive SPLM leadership finds no shame in gerrymandering every bit of the post independence recovery process the countrywide. We know well  that it is their only way to cling to power as they desperately seek to survive in face of the mounting opposition to their ‘unchartered’ style of rule. Some may  argue  otherwise, but the proof to this can be seen, even by a no-brainer as  every rotten act that was committed in the transitional constitution’s draft process has unfortunately found its way back into the proceedings of the Permanent Constitution and with the same insensitivity, if not worse.

In the past few weeks many voices have come out condemning the exclusion of very important sections of the community who were denied representations on the  Permanent Constitution Review Commission, especially so  in the Permanent Membership of the National Constitution Review Commission [ political parties – women groups – civil societies – youth organisations etc …etc].  It is thus the author’s wish not to bore the reader with that version of the argument as it has already been dealt with elsewhere.

Nonetheless as obvious as it is,   this same leadership which is never ashamed to deny the true sons and daughters of this land a fair representation and participation proceeds to take comfort in what amounts to a gross adulteration of the free peoples’ national history. The weird move by the SPLM to appoint representatives from the all too known pan-Arabists and pan-Islamists in the Constitution Commission clearly embodies this trend. And it further goes on to highlight that the presidential decree that qualifies the memberships of the National Islamic Front [NIF] and its tributaries, the National Congress Party [NCP] and the Peoples’ Congress Party [PCP] of sheikh Hassan al Turabi to join the Permanent Constitution’s Commission is in its least evaluation an act of insult to our sense of independence from these bigots.

To put it mildly, one can only say that those who continue  to  display affection to or do business with these groups [Islamists & Unionists] who  undeniably  preach political Islam or any re-unification with the Arab Islamic ‘North’,  are undoubtedly  not only serving the interests of a foreign state  which recently claims  itself  as our  number one  real enemy of all times , but  are  indeed   obstacles that if not taken care of will for sure abort our  national efforts towards  de-colonisation, de-Arabisation, de-Arabicisation, and above all the de-radicalisation amongst the various  religious believers.  

In other words, the fact that a presidential decree has gone to recognise the different factions of the National Islamic Front [NIF] as an integral part of the sovereign state of South Sudan, then the true meaning of our five decades of struggle has grossly been compromised if not entirely defeated. This must be understood as such regardless of who issued that decree. It is for the people of  South Sudan  to know these things and whether it is a party's, a few individuals' or a single person’s  misjudgment  that would want to derail our hard won independence, they must be told in their face and further be  held to account.

As a secularist myself, one feels deeply offended by this new trend in events. However no one can tell us that the Islamic Charter of Hassan al Turabi that went on to become the National Islamic Front [NIF] and then the “Ingaz Military Rule”, then lately bifurcated into the National Congress Party [NIF] and the main stream People’s Congress Party [PCP] are NOT the same ideological bigots who are seeking by all means including force, terrorism and military coups to force political Islam through our throats.  This must clearly have no place in the post independence South Sudan.

The Sudanese Communist Party [SCP] on the other hand has it share of the blame to shoulder for historically it has opposed the struggles of the People of South Sudan for an independent state of their own. The so-called Sudanese Communists (northerners or southerners) waged ruthless wars both verbally and diplomatically against our Just struggle and it did much to distort our genuine cause. 

They(the communists) are on record for portraying South Sudanese freedom fighters as mere reactionaries and even tried to redefine the injustice that was imposed on us throw their own narrow literature to suite pedagogues in Moscow and beyond. Today we are an independent South Sudan Nation. We see all unionists with scepticism for reasons obvious and unless they come out clean and truly converted to support our irreversible sovereignty, our paths will never meet theirs.

Last but not least our message is a clear one and no authority how high it perceives itself shouldn’t be allowed a free hand to lure us into policies which only allow for the ‘breading, incubating and empowering’ “dangerous groups” which are more likely turn around and reverse our political and socio-economic divorce with fanatic Islamism, the international communism and the others. Nor should our people be silenced or blindfolded into "laying red carpets" to well known unionist groups who for their own inherent lack of pride into what is indigenous and African are forced to continue looking towards the Arab Islamic Middle East. Thus any attempt by the SPLM leadership to start the Permanent Constitutional Review process with these pro-North representatives on board only works to confirm our fears of the much unpopular ‘United New Sudan Vision’.  And thereafter it remains in the centre of our national sovereignty’s interest to block it – or go for a total boycott should the government not re-think its position! 

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

By: Peter Lokarlo Marsu

January 30, 2012 (SSNA) -- The new proposal advanced by the African Union High Level Implementation Panel (AUHIP), and designed for a feasible panacea to settle the oil dispute between the Republic of South Sudan and the government of Sudan does perceptibly make intriguing loci for deliberations. On the outset, it would seemingly be noteworthy to explore the gist of the draft proposals, as this could enable anyone to determine the substance of the entire proposal put forward by Mr. Thabo Mbeki, the chief mediator mandated by the African Union to reconcile the interpretations of the parties at dispute, namely the government of South Sudan and the government of Sudan in an attempt to construct a mutually-shared perception in a bid to affably resolve their oil dispute. The proposals submitted by AUHIP to the parties as stated in the next paragraph below visibly call for profound and painstaking scrutiny.

The African Union proposed that the government of South Sudan be allowed to export its oil without any portion of it being seized by the government of Sudan and that the Republic of South Sudan would then provide Sudan with 35,000 barrels of oil per day for Khartoum’s sole needs. This would next be followed by time-framed negotiations on the transit fees to be paid to the government of Sudan for the use of its pipelines. Apparently, this proposal appears to be quite fascinating in that it leads one to wonder whether the time frame recommended by the AUHIP’s mediators would emphatically see an end to the protracted wrangle between Juba and Khartoum without first cautioning Khartoum about its demand for the $32 in a barrel. I must first pose the following two questions:

1. What makes the AU mediators so confident that the two parties would make a swift rapprochement leading to constructive adjustments and consequently the resolution of the dispute, given the huge ambiance of mistrust between the two parties that emanated from half a Century of Khartoum’s ruthlessness on the people of South Sudan?

2. What if the parties don’t reach an agreement owing to largely Sudan government’s unmitigated lack of correct judgment faculty and fair-mindedness reflected in the country’s conduct that led it to demand from South Sudan the bizarre and unmatched price of $32 per barrel?

Apart from paying Khartoum for the refinery and pipeline rental, giving Khartoum 35,000 barrels per day does not make sense at all. South Sudan should not be made hostage to Khartoum and asked to treat Sudan preferentially. Khartoum had filched and still continuing to steal South Sudan oil. Why would the AU advise the government of South Sudan to offer Sudan 35,000 barrels per day in addition to the official fees to be agreed upon? This is where the AU mediators need to learn and value the art of evenhandedness. South Sudan, albeit a new nation on the globe, would never accede to being treated underhandedly. Has the AUHIP ever wondered as to why Khartoum insists on charging the Republic of South Sudan the most excessive and unparalleled price of $32 per barrel for transit fees. Again this is where the AU has to be in the dock for applying asymmetry or lopsidedness in its dealings, thus forming the main cause for some of its failures in addressing the continent’s problems.

Second, the fact that on countless occasions, various Sudanese governments and politicians had concluded numerous agreements with South Sudanese leaders and shortly thereafter abrogated them without the slightest prevision as to future implications, question both the credibility and practicability of the AU’s the proposals currently on the table in Addis Ababa.

It was nearly four decades ago when the African Union’s predecessor, the Organization of African Unity oversaw an accord that was to be short lived. This was the well publicised Addis Ababa Agreement of March 1972. While the peace Agreement between the government of Sudan and the South Sudan Liberation Movement (SSLM) was acclaimed as a distinctive paradigm of a negotiated peace settlement in Africa and the third world in general, it was actually ephemeral, only to be consigned to the garbage bin of history eleven years later by the government of Sudan. It seems that an identical scenario is reemerging, involving almost the same players, but two of the actors slightly bear modified labels, namely: the government of the Republic of South Sudan (formerly SSLM, then the Southern Sudan regional government), the African Union (the Organisation of African Unity) and the government of Sudan. There is no way that the government of the Republic of South Sudan would consent to being pressed hard by the AUHIP to reach a pointless agreement with the government of Sudan, and only to be ditched in a short while.

Third, the government of South Sudan has inked an initial agreement or what might technically be described as a memorandum of understanding with the government of the Republic of Kenya, to the effect that an oil pipeline would be constructed from South Sudan to the port of Lamu in Kenya, which will certainly be in the best interest of the two countries. To demonstrate their serious intentions the South Sudanese authorities have shut down oil production in the entire country, protesting the theft of its oil by the government of Sudan and it is very unlikely that the oil would again be exported through Sudan. Now another question is: Where do the AU’s lopsided proposals fit in this highly charged political matrix?

Do the AU mediators intimate that South Sudan should retract its clear objective of shutting down the oil production in the Republic of South Sudan and allow once more the oil to flow to the international markets through Sudan’s pipelines? What guarantees do exist to ensure that Khartoum would not again resort to diverting millions of barrels of South Sudan oil to its secret underground storage facility? Apparently, such proposals by the AU mediators are seemingly skewwhiff and thus should be spurned by the government of South Sudan.

Forth, the same AU is advising the government of South Sudan to pay $4 billion to the government of Sudan to fix the latter’s pathetic fiscal gap. This notion definitely sounds ludicrous. In the first instance, it is not incumbent upon the government of South Sudan to salvage Sudan’s economy. The regime’s obsession with multiple wars and penchant for brutality are to blame for the status quo. Up to this moment, the government of Sudan is zealously bent on destabilizing the Republic of South Sudan. Khartoum has recently bombed South Sudan’s territory and the AU has not even raised a voice of condemnation of Sudan’s barbarity and its absolute absence of conventional norms. South Sudan should never pay Khartoum free money as maintained by the National Parliament of South Sudan. I would rather suggest that such considerable sums be spent on other expedient programs which could feasibly include purchasing of a credible and effective anti-aircraft defence systems such as the Russian S-300 currently in use by a number of countries including Brazil, and other relevant western systems for the South Sudan army in order to daunt Khartoum’s relentless aerial assaults on the people of South Sudan along the common border.

The AU must comprehend that giving Khartoum such staggering amount of money would actually:

i. Bolster the regime’s capacity for Killing its own citizens as well as the civilian population in the Republic of South Sudan;

ii. Enable the government of Sudan to revive its program of offering illimitable support to the Uganda’s notorious LRA rebels alongside other subversive groups operating in South Sudan to destabilize the latter as is the case at the moment;

iii. Encourage the regime in Khartoum to Fund and fan tribal wars in the Republic of South Sudan to demonstrate to the world its misgivings about granting independence for South Sudan.

Ultimately, filling the coffers of the adventurous regime in Khartoum is tantamount to funding the killing spree, the maiming, the extrajudicial slayings and the countless instances of rape in South Kordofan, the Blue Nile and Darfur regions. I hope the AU mediators would think twice and swiftly refrain from being a party to such a horrifying drawing by asking Juba to pay the $4 billion of free money to Khartoum.

Hence, it becomes a tricky business to grasp the philosophical wisdom involved in the AU thoughtless prescription and guidance. If anything, the African Union should consider a substantial and broad package of sanctions against the government of Sudan for being the source of instability in the region, and not the award of massive funds to the regime that is obsessed with administering and superintending killing theatres.

Additionally, the AU mediators must realize that it’s South Sudan’s destiny at stake and Juba would hardly afford to succumb to another stint of fiasco on the negotiation table as it did occur in Addis Ababa in 1972, this time by signing a detrimental oil agreement under the aegis of the pestering and less politically sensitive continental organisation. Furthermore, I piquantly stand by the government of South Sudan, firstly in its stupendous decision of stopping the oil production in the whole country, and secondly for unfalteringly declining to reach an agreement with the government of Sudan in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Alas, there is yet another worrying issue that Juba must prioritize and follow up to ensure that South Sudan’s oil is secured from being purloined by unknown banditti, and that is: to make regular and surprised inspections on the oil sites. Such vital tasks must be carried out by South Sudanese technicians so that those oil fraudulent companies are prevented from illegally pumping out the oil in collusion with Khartoum.

Furthermore these oil companies must be sternly warned of severe consequences if apprehended in the act of stealing. One is saddened to learn that Petrodar Oil Company still as of 27 January 2012 involved in pilfering the oil in Upper Nile state as disclosed by South Sudan’s minister of petroleum and mining Mr. Stephen Dhieu Dau and that 40,000 barrels per day were being illegally pumped by the company. This must immediately stop or else Petrodar or any other company involved in unauthorized acts risk being shown the door, as there are hundreds of oil companies waiting on the fence. As the oil wells remain closed, there would be no need for the company personnel including the engineers to reside at the premises, only South Sudan government soldiers should be permitted to guard the various sites until the companies are told what Juba has decided upon, as they take their orders from the government of South Sudan and no longer from Khartoum.

Finally, I implore the people of South Sudan particularly our national Parliament in Juba to stand firm and refuse to be swayed by anyone or submit to unwarranted pressure from any party, whether the AU, UN or Khartoum and whether through sheer brinkmanship in the case of Sudan or the application of undue pressure and cajoling by the other parties. I suggest that the National Parliament and the Council of state craft a bill and pass it speedily to the effect that the two Houses support the signing of the oil pipeline memorandum of understanding with the government of Kenya. This action could assist the government of South Sudan in transacting its business normally with other parties such as the AU or the government of Sudan as it is blessed with a mandate from Parliament. My country men and women, South Sudan is definitely destined to become a great nation on the African continent despite the grim portrait being displayed. Therefore all must work together with the leadership of the country in order to realize that impressive dream.

END

The Author is a former Casual Lecturer in the Graduate School of Business and law (GSBL) at RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia. He can be reached at: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

By: Daniel Abushery Daniel (USA)

“Your life doesn't get better by chance, it gets better by change." Jim John.

January 30, 2012 (SSNA) -- I am pretty sure that there are many words that could be used to describe our life experiences. Most of all, I know that all of us have a thing or two that we can be proud of in our past, or what I always referred to as " Good old days."

Growing up in Nasir and other places in South Sudan, I remember quite vividly some of the old tales from elders about a one universal ethnic group in ancient times that; all human beings spoke the same language, then they decided to build a tower to reach the heaven connected with the Almighty God. The construction goes smoothly in the first few days until they reached a certain level of advancement, then God said; Human being is complex and disturbance.

Along the way, God Almighty, for reasons only known to Him, created different languages, while folks were in the middle of excitement to finish their tower. Unfortunately, things didn't go well, they couldn't understand one another, because the communication process was broken, which caused a whole hosts of disagreements and confusion among them, which eventually resulted in the cancellation of their task, and to the failure of the project. And that was the beginning of the different tongues and languages in the world.

The questions that I am asking our human race with are that: what can we do to speak with one universal language again like the way it used to be? And how can we eradicate and root out all forms of tribalism, sections and nepotism of our society?

You weigh in!

Thus, I'm truly blessed to have the opportunity to witness the greatness of the generation of my father, who carried themselves with respect, dignity and honour. For example: I have never ever heard my dad saying something negative about other community member including foreigners. We were constantly reminded to respect anybody that’s older than you. Today, what some of us do is diligently poisoning the minds and hearts of our children with negative adjectives about other tribes, such as: " Our tribe is better then the rest.", “we are the warriors”, “we are the liberators, and those are traitors." The list of negativity goes on and on.

To this very moment, I remember one of my dad's best friends, who happened to be from the Murle tribe, Ustaz David Arrani. He was at Malakal Teachers Institute. I thought that uncle David was my blood relative, until some years later when I grew up and met his son, John in Nasir.

Also, I will never forget my neighbours, Ustaz Manasseh, the father of my friends, Kuol and Malak, and the late uncle Nicodemous Arou, the father of the prestigious journalist, Ustaz Majok Arou. In addition to our school Head Master uncle Burnaby Anguuoi, and many more. Honestly speaking, we had lived like a one big family.

Thus “good old days " were truly and really golden in every way. They were just like when you want to find some information on something, which was called the Internet that has now become the daily basic needs, not to mention that fact that it is our dictionary that allows us to check out the difficult words, encyclopaedia, and every possible way to be updated.

Recently, I saw an ad of a kindle book that you can start reading anything on the new iphone, android phone, or blackberry phone etc.... accessing the information is about everything, and giving the universal access to a gold old book is another. It’s just like a review, survey, or contemplation of things in the past which we realize and say;

The old days will remain golden days.

Frankly speaking, what is now going in South Sudan is tragic. From the mass killing of helpless civilians, and lost of properties between different ethnic groups in our homeland, is simply obnoxious, disgusted and brutal, just to say the least. I lose sleep over it, and it's a fire in my bones, and I can't remain silent, something must be done now before it’s escalation like a wild fire to the other parts of our beloved country. The golden phrase says; “prevention is better than cure”.

Compatriots, what I am trying to address here is to appeal to President 1^st Let. General Salva Kiir Mayardit, the president of the republic of South Sudan to implement a decentrelization system, then,  consider a random appointment of counties commissioners, heads of the states and public service personnel from across the republic of South Sudan. Beyond a doubt, such policy will not only help in the reduction of tribal sensitivities that are happening today, but it can also subdue, and minimize corruption.  It’s time to go back to the old system that has proved to work diligently.

Can we all just say; enough is enough of these tribalism, sectionism, nepotism, and corruption and just focus on the goals that will unite us as one nation? Can we turn around to the good old days in our lives? Yes, we can.

This is my prospective.

The author is south Sudanese citizen, and can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

By: Gatkuoth Kedok De –Lew

January 27, 2012 (SSNA) -- First and foremost, I am more delighted to lauding the strategic efforts taken at the eleven hour by the political executive of the Republic of South Sudan to shutdown the wells in the oil-fields of Western and northern Upper Nile regions as well as discontinuity of refining our crude oil through Khartoum‘s rude refineries and/or piping it via port Sudan and subsequently  exporting it to international investors at Rea Sea coast as usual a procedure recently overshadowed by the shameless theft and robbery in the greater and broader daylight by Khartoum Government.

All in all, I am so sympathetic and up to my neck with my spiritual support towards this overdue strategic decision of shutting down the oil operation permanently till further solution or alternative be found.

It is a great dozens of dose of malarial tablets to be swallowed bitterly by Khartoumers with a lasting effect.

It would be wise indeed for us to remain rigid enough without relenting again to the exploitation of our own making.

We fought Khartoum without oil for a half of good century and we managed to procure some modern arms not with oil money. It is them the people in the ilk of Imam Omer Al Bashir and Uztaz Osman Taha who know how sweetest and most rewarding the oil money is because they have been enjoying innumerable goods at the expense of oil incomes and returns for donkey‘s years unabated.

Furthermore; if we had been surviving and thriving without oil for a half of decade and notwithstanding; were able to invariably secure all types of weapons, why not shutting down that profitless operation of oil till we build our own pipelines at both Port Lamu and Djibouti as proposed even if they last longer than two years which is not even a quarter of the years we had endured without oil and since the oil is not the only natural resource we have got. Besides oil there is gold, wildlife, agriculture, forestry and fishery etc all which we can do without oil as we don’t rely on one source of God-given resources yet.

In fact, the absent-minded clique in Khartoum have never realised the arrival of their long spelt curse as prophesied by the Prophet Ngundeng that the downtrodden natives of the black land literally meaning (Sudanese) namely Fur, Nuba, Funj and Jinubiin in the South all of whom having been found inhabiting the land by the Arabs merchants before they were politely resettling over the northern part and spread over the land through the mercantilism fashion as sheer traders,

“that  the  landlords aka (Fur, Nuba, Funj and Jinubiin or Southern Sudanese)  would one day emancipate themselves from the yokes of Arabism and Islamism imposed on them at the highest order and be free and mighty to rout the Arabs using the same route and direction which once they had used when infiltrating through business imperialism using donkey as a ferry and be it the same donkey they will be still re-riding  in their retreat no more where all resources they came and exacted in Sudan shall remain only be retrieved by the right owners of the land without single grain go missing lest Arab will pay dearly for it.”

Now the curse has come to surface only the mad and the deaf who might not know any climatic changes sensibly to be ignorant or insensitive although the mad will see the changes of various images in motion likewise the deaf will see a variety of signs marking tantamount coming of the end of ages in their own deformed conscience and the rest is history.

Such a historical decision is just the least all of evils which must inevitably unfold or a moderate wound in the heart of Khartoum and its sycophants that must be terminally worsened by tetanus to death and therefore must be supplemented with an ultimate coup de grãce such that Khartoum clique has to really corroborate their economical decay at the long last between the blue dawn and yellow dusk in the true history of mankind.

Without Bentiu oil explored, Khartoum would be still wretched as it was in the early 1989 when it was as sheer slum as old Meroe in Stone Age shape in the early Sudan history.

But with the exploration of qualitative petroleum in Bentiu Land this had made Arabs in Khartoum to be the shining stars in the eyes of international opportunists such as China and Russia which have been unwaveringly supplying NIF regimes with all types of high calibre of weapons with modernity speed and long range precision including helicopters gunship which rain with chemical devices of nails and other bladed instruments with brutal intention to wipe out the marginalised people in Sudan but to their unhistorical know – how who are the great sources of wealth in the Sudan. 

Moreover; to pour enough fuel in to the hottest and the most flammable fire, and indeed for Nif Regime to recognize our economic sovereignty or diversity and territorial integrity of our blessed country, owing to the fact that they thought our choice for our political emancipation was just a joke or nightmare, The oil- rich State situated at the Western Upper Nile bank bordering the sisterly embattled State of Southern Kordofan (Nuba Mountains) under captivity in the northern political map  as well as bordering the Contested but constitutionally southern territory of Dinka Ngok chiefdom of Abyei; once dubbed ironically by the parasites in the north as a “Unity State”, meaning it is neither South nor north should the country be divided as it has been the present day reality and thus should no longer be the same again after separation as A UNITY STATE intended by the NIF machinery suiting to their political calculus in terms of economic expansionism a wrong promise of building bridge even at where there is no river at all.

However, for those in Khartoum to be proved wrong for the third time in the history, so that the effect of such proof be beyond reasonable doubt, the economically politicised name known as Unity State should be dropped away and be replaced by the followings of which only one to be chosen based on its historical commonality in line with the presently adopted political culture reflecting the collective will of and approval by the entire stakeholders of that state as follows:-

1. To be a Western Upper Nile State.

2. To be a Liech State

3. To be a Bentiu State

4. To be a Bahr El Naam state

And so on and so forth but it should be one of the above mentioned suggestions which is all-encompassing and where every one or individual feels recognised or defined by it in spirit or letter.

The motive of renaming that strategic location of western Nuer to be “Unity State” by Khartoum ‘s successive Regimes by then, was based not on geographical proximity owing to any kind of its centrality or commonality to Sudanese history but because God Almighty has ever since blessed it with a great lake of expensive oil which outshines the rest of oil sales in the international market thus it did pain and does pain the NIF to relent it without lame excuses for a pure economic reasons which should not hold any water forever.

Finally, the Unity State should be either homogeneously renamed as Western Upper Nile State as it is geographically located or Liech State as it is historically remembered in order to alienate Khartoum dreams far more useless and out of reach for future risk - evading probability or precaution as far as for the sake of reversing our orthodox history in to its most flawless form from Aden to date is concerned.

I am humbly and deliberately calling upon the people of presently robbed Unity State, the state government as well as national statesmen at the RSS level, to stand up and address the issue of giving A Unity State a new and physically fit name which shall have got no political implications in the years to come.

In Christ ‘s name, Arabs are as friendless as snakes and therefore should not be spared anything they have been camouflaging in the southern territory to the maximum of their ingrained political trickery and double dealing.

Let us go back eating using our traditional wooden spoon and renaming ourselves after our ancestral names not the ones have Arabism and Islamism impact and blackmailing.

The Author: is a Devoted South Sudanese residing in South Sudan Capital Juba and can be reached through This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

By: John Bith Aliap, Adelaide, South Australia

January 27, 2012 (SSNA) -- The immoral activities which we have witnessed in Jongulei state ever since the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) have distinctively breed a sense of doubts whether the government of South Sudan has an ability to control its citizens when it comes to a real meaning of national sovereignty. The map of Jongueli state has categorically been made full of dead, wounded and displaced persons because of frequent fighting between the Dinka, Nuer and Murle ethnic communities. I am anxious to say that the present cycle of violence in Jongulei, if not urgently stopped, will serve as an icon of the new Republic of South Sudan since it has yet to market its newly-founded identity at the regional and international realms after its independence on the 9^th of July in 2011.

When we speak candidly about this issue, the dreadful  events which are currently taking place in Jongueli state have possibly provided an opportunity in which the ability of Jongulei’s state government and the national government of South Sudan in Juba can be viewed and judged by the people of South Sudan and the international community at large. The Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) was primarily anticipated as an agreement jam-packed with hopes, joys, jubilations and opportunities in the entire country, but in the state of Jongulei where killing rules the daily interactions, this concept is exceptionally far from reality.

The news of massive displacements, deaths and the state hospitals filled-up with wounded persons have almost become the norms of the day in Jongulei state as we speak! However, all these kind of awful proceedings can possibly encourage any concerned South Sudanese inside or outside the country to argue that the state governor Kuol Manyang Juuk has conclusively become a typical governor, governing the wounded, dead and displaced persons as the above mentioned events take place on the daily basis in Jongulei state.

In a state inhibited by the Dinka, Nuer and Murle, whose hostilities are widely documented in the history of South Sudan, the present situation in Jongulei state can be a matter of veracity. The existing government of Kuol Manyang has turned out to be a liability that can not effectively manage these aggressive and hostile tribes, and if urgent action is not taken, the state of Jongulei will convincingly become ungovernable with far reaching consequences than its present state. whilst the state government has already made a series of requests from local, national, regional and international bodies in its quest to restore law and order in the state, these bodies in my view can not genuinely bring a culturally - appropriate resolution to this chronic problem as it is what is needed now to bring this ethnic-based conflict to an end.

The United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNIMISS) which the state and national governments sarcastically hoped to bring a   decisive solution to this ongoing problem between the Nuer, Murle and Dinka ethnic communities in Jongulei state can not be of any help at this hour. The national government of South Sudan in collaboration with the traditional local chiefs, youth leaders, women representatives, spiritual leaders, state government and perhaps, other peace-loving organizations should roll their sleeves and full their socks mutually in an attempt to bring the ultimate and long lasting peace in Jongulei state.

Although the international intervention has something to offer in terms of peace realization amongst these feuding ethnic communities, this intervention can not be regarded by state and the national governments as a primary source of conflict - resolution; rather it can be understood and hopped as a secondary source of resolution to Jongulei state‘s historically – rooted conflict which claimed many lives. 

Despite this gigantic failure of state and the national  governments to bring peace to Jongulei state, the alternative solution can still be found if these two governments and other concerned groups are serious enough to bring realistic changes in Joungulei state. First and for most, both state and the national governments should take a primary responsibility in this case to establish a buffer zone between these communities. The establishment of buffer zone can potentially prevent mobility of population between these warring communities. In most cases, problems between ethnic communities in Jongulei state always stem out from mobility of population, and if the mobility of population is ideally contained through buffer zone, this will in turn reduce the risks of potential attacks by a grieving community or communities given the current rate of death toll, abduction and displacement. The government of Jongulei and the national government in Juba should consider the establishment of buffer zone as a necessity to reduce the intensity of conflict.

Second, when the buffer zone is successfully established and the dusts of war have utterly settled, than the state and the national governments should without delay conduct a timely, targeted and coordinated disbarment operation in all the communities across Jongulei state. This concept of universal disbarment approach can potentially reduce the likelihood of retribution amongst the warring communities. The government should be warned that it has to evade its previous method when it disarmed some communities and leave other communities with arms to attack the disarmed, vulnerable and defenseless communities. Duk county and other Lou-Nuer localities are our contemporary examples. The previous disbarment campaign in Jongulei state would be considered as a failed policy since it fall-short to accomplish its intended purpose which is peace and tranquility. The previous disbarment failed because it was poorly planned and it has incontrovertibly provided incentive to the current situation in Jongulei state.

Third, since the number of abducted children and stolen cattle is very high, given the frequency of the attacks amongst the ethnic communities in Jongulei state, the return of these stolen cattle and abducted children would provide a sense of respite and complacency to members of these communities; and it can likely reduce the level of anger and provide a platform for a meaningful and realistic reconciliation process. The disbarment campaign  should not only focus on collecting fire arms from the civilians, but it should also involve  the return of stolen cattle and abducted children as these factors are central to the present conflict between these ethnic communities.             

Forth, the government of Kuol Manyang has lost its legitimacy. If it holds any legitimacy, it should have already initiated the process of state reconciliation before things could turn ugly, if it really means business with these feuding ethnic communities, especially after the onset of current episodes of vengeance attacks. In my perspective, the process of state-based reconciliation in Jongulei will close the wounds and also serve as a step toward to recognizing the injustices that these ethnic communities had historically inflicted against each other. The people of South Sudan and the rest are enervated of Jongulei state’s conflict; and are encouraging the state and national governments to conduct not just a reconciliation, but a symbolic reconciliation that recognizes the historical injustices that the Dinka, Murle and Nuer communities masqueraded against each other, in terms of cattle wrestling, abduction of children, destruction of properties and retribution. 

Just to conclude, the state and national governments must pursue all kind of peace-based initiatives to re-establish law and order and serve more lives from being lost in Jongulei state. The governments, both state and the national should establish a buffer zone, conduct a simultaneous disbarment, return abducted children, looted cattle and finally, pursue a symbolic reconciliation in the entire state of Jongulei. There should also be a contingent plane in case of any failure. For instance, if the state and national governments employ the steps suggested in this article and no change is realized, the national government should in this respect take a unilateral action to remove Kuol Manyang and his team, and replace them with a team that is duty-bound to rule the Jongulei state in a fair fashion dissimilar to the present state of affairs.  The state and national governments must take a moral and ethical responsibility to immediately implement the steps suggested in this article; and Jongulei state would surely see the lights of hopes and peace can prevail yet again.

The author of this work is a concerned South Sudanese citizen and can be corresponded at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

By Julius Nyambur Marko-Wani, New York, USA

January 27, 2012 (SSNA) -- I am not Ngundeng, the Nuer Greatest Prophet, who prophesized the unfolding events bedeviling South Sudan—and perhaps Sudan—but I can assert, and with precise certainty, that the federal authority of South Sudan in Juba is unknowingly sitting on a deadly political volcano. It is just a matter of tolling the bell and the youth will soon launch a mass movement that will either dictate the formulation and implementation of policies in juba, or take over the leadership altogether. This, I baptize it the inevitable Tsunami.

Does Juba know that its unprecedented failures to: prosecute corrupt criminals, abate ethnic decimation, and above all, reversing Dr. Garang's concept of “taking towns to the people” is deepening public cynicism and eroding the legitimacy of the state of South Sudan? The above reasons are sufficient grounds to invoke fury, which by all accounts warrant a call for a regime change. Let me reiterate here that I smell formidable uprisings knocking. This, the “Captain” in charge of affairs in Juba's White/State House, as well as the MPs in the SSLA, can take to the bank. It's a fact that I am aware of, a fact that I know. It's not fiction. And it's going to be a civilian revolution.

Revolutions—whether velvet or turbulent—are almost always never advertised. They just take off. In other words, they are what we used to call “Gum Barau!” during our hay days in the bush. In the case of what is evolving in Juba, and in other southern towns, the “volcanoes” are being tickled by the federal government in Juba, surprisingly. They are swelling with such excited rapidity like never before. My crystal ball tells me that the patient hoi polloi is “pregnant” with at least quintuplets. The anger, frustration, and the outrage are just inches away. The worst juba can do, and I am sure it can afford is, to hasten the situation further by just another omission or commission. I pray it's going to be an omission, because there are already too many faulty commissions. Below are the five reasons why I strongly think “Junubeen Spring” is imminent.

The first and foremost revolution instigator is the Political Patronage: Recycling the old guards in the expense of fresh, mentally-dynamic young intellectuals who are so capable of propelling the newest republic into a viable, democratic state. That the current government in Juba was as a result of compromises between the SPLM mainstream on one hand, and the numerous minor autonomy-seeking parties on the other, is not deniable. But what is equally unobjectionable is the fact that all the liberation fronts were fought by young men who are now being sidelined.

The second problem is Political Instigation and Ethnic Militarization. Whereas the youth of South Sudan are positively involved in embracing and fostering a national cohesion among themselves, tribal kingpins, just in egoistic quest for political dealership (not leadership), are adversely engaging in recruitment of folks from their ethnic backyards to take up guns, not to protect the national territory from external aggression, but in preparation for eventualities in event one lose an electoral position. Pathetically, where do these arms end up being used for?

The third, and the most fundamental, agitation is Kleptocracy or corruption. Defined as the system of government in Juba whereby those in power seek to maintain status and advance personal gain at the expense of the poor citizens. Juba is dually known as the most prospective place to exact business venture, as well as a more likely to be the most morally perverse city in East Africa. Sadly, the very same cliques who control power in Juba determine the direction and the context in which the juiciest contracts are awarded. Again, Junubeen youth are never trusted, thus can hardly get any of those contracts—let alone their management.

My second last piece of advice to the government is prompted by its Sluggish Decision making in Juba and at States Headquarters. It’s indisputable that what is doable in say, one hour, in any other country is what takes a week to be accomplished in South Sudan. The number of bills passed within a given year remained piecemeal; the provision of services to the voters is, of course, the debt people owed and not the opposite as expected; timely response to tribal conflicts is no longer within the purview of the national security responsibility, but a game contest presumably left to the mercy of ethnic military patrons (now that war is unofficially privatized in South Sudan), I should say; and not the least, Dr. Garang’s philosophy of “taking towns to the people” is being severely trampled upon and reversed to “bringing people to town,” which in turn depletes agricultural efforts, speeds up the growth of urban ills and so the prices of goods.

And currently there is the abhorrent Exclusion of Youth in the Leadership Affairs as well as in the Constitution Review Process. Politicians in juba are either simply ignorant or are just lucratively oblivious to the South Sudanese youth anger caused by the authority continued lack of appreciation of the youth unmatched contributions during the war, during the CPA campaigns and demonstrations in diaspora, as well as the educational initiatives undertaken by the youth in various capacities. At this juncture, one thing has become common knowledge: either we are being ruled by a Machiavellian or, it’s the case that our God-chosen Joshua is surrounded by bunch of little Machiavellians who are either powerful enough to coerce our beloved Joshua, or cunningly witty to distort what Joshua has appended signature on into what they will. This begs the question—which book among all the texts by Machiavelli, advises rewarding inaptitude to lead and sidelining the real heroes and heroines (youth) of the final, independence liberation?  

Having been left out in literally every aspect of national building, the last mistake was to snub the role of the youth in the constitution review process. This was a serious slap in the face. Now the daggers are drawn; all youth groups are now mobilizing, irrespective of ethnic backgrounds, to form a strong coalition that must stop the new republic from being brought to her knees at their watch. As for them, the time is now, and the price is right. Peace and democracy must prevail. On the other hand, the government’s hands aren’t tied; it should value vibrant ideas to dormancy; competent inclusiveness to redundant accommodation; and should allow for dialogue, debates, expression of competing and opposing perspectives, without undue repression.

Here runs my independent advice.

Julius Nyambur Wani is reachable at: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it . He can also be visited at julius-nyambur.blogspot.com - The Independent Advisor

By Elhag Paul

January 23, 2012 (SSNA) -- We are at it again – this thing called the constitution. The heart of what makes a state alive. In July 2011, the present transitional constitution was bulldozed without any regard to the people. President Kiir and the SPLM (Oyee party) decided on what they wanted (“One man, one tribe and one party government” editors’ opinion SSN 2012) and they forced it on us. Though president Kiir went around the world dancing and singing democracy while waving this shoddy transitional constitution, he only left despair behind as its contents are stuff of dictators and tyrannies. In fact whenever president Kiir utters the word democracy his insincerity and lack of commitment immediately engulfs the environment. The constitution says one thing and he and his officials back home practice different things not commensurate with it. In all fairness, it is arguable that RSS is not governed by any document. The constitution is just a document a state must have, but not to be followed to the letter as in other countries. So in our first hurdle on drafting a decent constitution we failed spectacularly. Everybody accepted that the exercise was futile and it was thought that the drafting of the permanent constitution would be done differently. Is it now? Let us examine it.

Abruptly with a bang the president on 9^th January 2012 issued “decree number 03/2012 for the appointment of full-time and part time members of the National Review Commission (NCRC) 2012 A.D” with a tight deadline. Why the urgency to draft the permanent constitution? After all as stated above, the transitional constitution came to life under very divisive circumstance. The wounds that this document opened up in the society are still fresh. Some of us had hoped that the government of president Kiir would be sensitive to allow enough time for the wounds to heal before embarking on the final process.  

The timing of this permanent constitution project is highly suspect. It appears that the government wants to deflect the attention of the people from the festering issues of corruption, insecurity, and mismanagement of the country.   It knows that it has miserably failed the people of South Sudan in these areas.   With the dramatic failures of governance in Jonglei and the negotiations with the Arabs of Khartoum exposing their sheer incompetence they want something that can divert the attention of the people away. So what is better than the constitution project?  This project also affords them the opportunity to fiddle with the process to insert clauses in the permanent constitution that will allow the ‘Oyee party’ looters to get away Scot free with the loot and the mismanagement of the country.   Or, possibly, they want to convert and cement the current constitution into a permanent one.   Whatever plans they have, president Kiir and the SPLM need to be careful and not push our country into turmoil. There is no need in antagonising the population day in, day out while they are failing in all areas of governance. President Kiir and his ‘Oyee party’ have stretched the patience of South Sudanese to a breaking point on many issues.   Wisdom demands that they better listen on this issue of permanent constitution. It is up to them whether they want to or not.

President Kiir’s decree raises some serious issues.  It is as if history is repeating itself so soon. All the signs point to the same way the draft transitional constitution (DTC) was foisted on us few months ago.   President Kiir the political midget and expert of tribal politics is missing the point if he believes that cobbling together a permanent constitution by his ‘Oyee party’ reflecting interest of a limited section of the society is going to hold. It will not and this will continue to be a live problem for years to come.   Effectively what this bamboozling of the constitution is doing is to sow the seeds of instability in RSS.   With that the next democratic government will have no option but to organise the process again until all the shades of opinions in our country are reflected in it. In absence of that, there will always be troubles in our country. Take for example, the instability in the Sudan since 1956 has partly been due to lack of acceptable constitution to the Sudanese people. It is also one of the things that have inspired South Sudanese to secede from the Sudan.   

President Kiir foundered in his decree. The representation of the various parties in the country is skewed to give the ‘Oyee party’ the majority in the constitution commission both in the full membership and the part time membership. What does this tell us? It tells us that the ‘Oyee party’ wants full control of the process in order to make sure that the constitution fully reflects their view which as stated above is domination by ‘one man, one tribe and one party’. Will South Sudanese accept this crude tribalism? It remains to be seen.

One intriguing episode is the appointment of NCP, PCP and the Communist party members into constitution commission of RSS.   The question to ask here is: Why appoint members of political parties’ alien to RSS?   NCP is the ruling party in the Sudan and PCP and the Communist parties are the opposition parties in that country – all are foreign and parties of a country hostile to RSS. How could it be that their members can be represented in the constitution commission of an independent neighbouring country which they are hostile to? What planet does president Kiir live on?   Does he really know what he is doing?   Or, is this the infatuation with the project of New Sudan (which died on 9 ^th July 2011 with the independence of South Sudan)?   Any reasonable person would agree that president Kiir needs his head checked on this? The appointment of members of foreign parties is not only illegal but flies in the face of rationality. However, if this appointment is intended to rig the process by appointing SPLM disguised members as members of those parties to further boost the representation of his ‘Oyee party’ in dominating the entire process, it amounts to serious political corruption which is a crime in itself against the people of South Sudan.   Whatever way one looks at it, it bodes ill for RSS.

While president Kiir is appointing members of foreign parties into our constitution commission, he is doggedly excluding true South Sudanese parties from the process deliberately. Take for example, he has failed to acknowledge parties such as USSP and others whose members have not been included in the commission. What credible answer has president Kiir got for this?   Excluding citizens and including foreigners from a hostile neighbouring country into our national affairs. Even people from Abyei get priority privilege over the indigenous rightful citizens of RSS.   Let us not complicate issues; Abyeians like Deng Alor are technically not citizens of RSS.   Why should they be enjoying the privileges of RSS while true citizens are being marginalised?   The whole of this process that president Kiir has initiated is tantamount to political corruption.   No wonder corruption is deeply ingrained in the very fabric and the DNA of the ‘Oyee party’.

Some of us rightly believe that the permanent constitution must reflect all shades of views and opinions in South Sudan.   The reason is that this document is the social contract that binds South Sudanese together. It is also the document that reassures all the citizens of their rights and responsibilities regardless of their religion, creed, gender, sex and tribe.  As the document that gives basis to governance of the country it must be something that South Sudanese agree on. There is no room for foreigners such as members of NCP, PCP, and the Communist parties to be part of it. Therefore, it is rational to demand that all the members of these groups including Abyei should be removed from the constitutional process.   RSS is not a banana republic for president and the ‘Oyee party’ to play with.   RSS is not president Kiir and his ‘Oyee party’s’ property.   They are the rulers today, but surely there will be somebody else tomorrow and hence the constitution must be a foresighted document.

At this juncture, it is important for me to bring in the UN. Ms Hilde Johnson in her press conference in Juba on 30^th September 2011 on Radio Miraya had this to say about the UN’s role in South Sudan on the subject of democracy.   “There are many ways of ensuring political pluralism and for me and for us the greatest test would be the practical implementation of the democratic transformation process.   This implies that key legislation needs to be in place, political space needs to be secured and those that are active politically whether or not in opposition, are protected both in terms of human rights standards, in terms of their ability to have freedom of speech, as well as their political activity. So the test of political pluralism isn’t always that everyone should be in the government but that the opposition that holds government to account can do so without interference.   It is also about being able to abide with core democratic principles. As I (Hilde Johnson) mentioned in my intervention, it is going to be important what the Political Party Act looks like, what the Electoral Act looks like and that there have been adequate consultation with the different parties on the acts.   In addition, we have a very important constitution review process coming forward.   So both from the perspective of the community and the people of South Sudan but also of the parties, having an inclusive and broad consultative constitution review process is going to be one of the most important tests as well. These key political milestones down the road, for me, are where we would see the test of political pluralism rather than necessarily in the formation of the government. That can be done in different way, and I don’t think there is one recipe for how it should be done. “

Now it is clear that president Kiir and the SPLM have failed the test.   The constitution process was started abruptly on 6^th January 2012 with a deadline of 9^th January 2012. Three days is not a reasonable time for consultation.   Further, true South Sudanese stake holders have not only been excluded but not consulted.   What are the UN and Ms Hilde Johnson going to do about this?   The credibility of UN is on line here.  If the UN and the International Community is not going to do anything, they should rest assured that their word will ring hollow in the ears of South Sudanese in particular and Africans in general.   Also marauding gangs like those 6000 kids who attacked Pibor will continue to take the law into their own hands and the situation could get out of control.   UN needs to maintain its credibility by ensuring that they do what they say they would do. I do not have to mention this, but it is worth reminding Ms Johnson that UN’s reputation with rogue regimes is not encouraging.   For example, in mid 1990s genocide in Rwanda (committed by the ruling party) took place under their nose.   Again in former Yugoslavia in Srebrenica, the Serbs committed genocide under the gaze of UN.   Again, in Haiti, UN soldiers were embroiled in child abuse and male rape cases.   Again in Abyei in June of last year, Khartoum’s army aided by Janjaweed attacked, ravaged and took over the town with UN troops barricading themselves with their guns in containers.   Again, in DRC UN staff members were accused of involvement in criminal activities such as rape.   Recently in Jonglei, the marauding kids from north Jonglei gave them (UN) and RSS one week notice of intent to commit genocide in Pibor and they did nothing.   The result is loss of innocent lives.   When will the UN rise to the challenge of what it claims to be doing wherever their presence is? Or wherever they are deployed?   The RSS is slowly and surely drifting into disaster while the UN is watching.   UN is forgetting that it has a mandate of section 7 of the UN Security Council to protect the people of South Sudan.   In my view this protection must include protection from the government of the day.   What this then means is that president Kiir and the ‘Oyee party’ must be held accountable for generating all the problems in the country.   To date this ruling party has not accounted for human rights abuses it committed during the war and it seems there is no provision made to address this.   President Kiir and the ‘Oyee party’ broke the Geneva Convention and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights when they were in the bush by engaging in heinous crimes against humanity.   What is baffling some of us is that the UN seems to be rewarding them for their criminality.   I wonder what example this behaviour is setting for future none state actors.  

Since coming to power in 2005 under the CPA, the ‘Oyee party’ blatantly ignores the needs of South Sudanese people such as health, education, housing and security.   They concentrate on enriching themselves by robbing the state and taking away the rights of people in participating in their affairs (It is worth noting that until 2005 South Sudan did not have a Dollar millionaire, but now most of the people in the government are millionaires including the president). Now the right of the people to participate in drafting the permanent constitution is being violated openly.   This is evidence beyond doubt that the GoSS is not democratic.   The songs of democracy that they keep singing are only to fool the international community.   What we have in South Sudan is crude tribal government that should not exist in 21^st century.    

Therefore, Ms Hilde Johnson needs to follow up on what she said on 30^th September 2011.   She needs to tell president Kiir and the ‘Oyee party’ that tribalism and democracy are irreconcilable and incompatible and there is no point in refusing to democratise.   She needs to stress to president Kiir that the various shades of opinions and views in South Sudan should be represented in the commission regardless of whether they are friendly to SPLM and GoSS or not.   The constitution is something larger than anything in South Sudan but South Sudan itself.   It is the document that brings the people together in a social contract to co-exist.   It will be there after SPLM is gone and many generations to come.   So SPLM should not be short sighted and negligent in laying the building blocks of a good and stable government.  

Finally, I hope that president Kiir reviews his actions with regards to the permanent constitution and make the necessary amendments and adjustments to exclude foreigners and foreign parties while bringing in every shade of opinion in the country to play in drafting the permanent constitution.   If as usual he ignores reason, let him and his ‘Oyee party’ rest assured that our future government will scrap any tribal constitution put in place now with a people’s one.

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

By James Okuk, PhD

January 22, 2012 (SSNA) -- The hottest news about Sudan these days, especially at international arenas is the case of conflict of interests on oil business between the Republic of the Sudan and its separated former territory that has declared its independence on 9th July 2011. But although some South Sudanese government leaders feel irritated to see some of us who are civil servants stating our opinions publicly, still we remain unintimidated to revere the rule of the highest law in the country that allows the practice of the bill of rights by each and every citizen regardless of who employs him or her. Not only this, but also article 139 (l) of the current transitional constitution permits all the civil servants of the new Republic to publicize their opinions whether it is in support or critique of the government policies and actions.

The case at focus here is the decision of the council of ministers of the government of the Republic of South Sudan to shut down oil operations and productions in its territory because of dishonesty and unfair deduction carried on by the government of the Sudan under pretext of transit fees charges. This irritating practice has been going on for some times and the GoSS got provoked at last as the flow of South Sudan oil reaches the international markets in a less quantity than expected. But are the governments of the two neighboring countries justified to have acted the way they did?

As far the spirit and desire for good neighborhood policy is connected, the two governments are not justified to have acted so because of the damage they could incur on each other's peoples though with different degrees of gravity. Thirty six (36) US dollar is highest a charge that a good neighboring Sudan can levy on each barrel of crude oil transiting its territory. But also not wanting to reach a quick agreement on a consensual amount that could be paid as a transit fee for South Sudan crude oil is also a bad faith from a nascent  GoSS. As it is not good to charge a neighbor very highly, it is also not good to use the land of a neighbor free-of-charge for longer time without a consent. What should have been the good thing to do then?

The GoSS should have never abandoned negotiations for reaching a fair deal on transit fee. This should not necessarily have been conditioned to what is happening between other countries regarding oil transit fees. It could have been a little higher as the situation, the terrain and the distance of transit is different from the ones found in countries like Chad and Cameroon.

On the other hand the GoS should have calmed down and looked at South Sudan without envy of the plenty of dollars that its oil generates in the markets compared to the little that have remained for the Sudan. It could have charged reasonable fees that would have motivated South Sudan not to think of shopping for a better customer for transiting its oil to international markets.

Nonetheless, the bad decisions have been taken by both the GoS and the GoSS, and we are left with nothing but to analyze and deal with the man-made crisis in order to find exit window if possible. The analysis may be generated by the following questions of critical thinking:

1) Which is a lesser evil; a thief that steal crude oil or a thief that steal petrodollar of the people of South Sudan?

2) Can Kenya, Uganda and Ethiopia be guaranteed and trusted to be honest and secure in transiting South Sudan oil to international markets?

3) Is it wise to do a transit of oil through two countries rather than one country; and what could happen if the middle country on the transit to the sea or ocean gets into troubles with any of the two countries involved in the deal?

4) Are Total and Toyota companies who proposed to build oil pipelines for South Sudan via Uganda to Kenya doing this out of love for South Sudanese or out of lust for profits that could be exploited out of a weak and desperate country?

5) Why should the oil of South Sudan be sent back to rest undisturbed under the ground after it has already been discovered and the sweetness of its revenues enjoyed for some good years?

6) Is GoSS sure the oil value will remain intact in near future as it rests in peace untouched underground;  what if another source of energy appears and make oil a history like the case of coal?

7) Has the GoSS a good faith in offering an assistance of  2.6 million dollars to the Sudan or there are some other ulterior motives behind?

8) If The GoSS is genuine in its talks of wanting to assist the GoS so that it could avoid economic collapse and if the GoS is charging high transit fees so that it could fill the economic gaps that have been created by the situation of separation of South Sudan; why the quarrels from GoSS who want to help the GoS then? Does this not seems to suggest that both means used from the GoSS or GoSS side justify the end (economic rescue)?

It is said that the devil you know well is far more guaranteed than the ones you don't know best. South Sudanese have been in the Sudan and with the Sudanese in both thick and thin. They know the Jellaba and the Jellaba know them.

Shutting down the oil operations and production in South Sudan because of quarrels with the Sudan over transit fees is not prudent at the moment. After all the alternative is not yet in existence and talks on this is still at the level of fantasy and utopia. Also the nature of the countries that are involved in the talks about the alternative is questionable as far as security or fair deal is concerned. Uganda and Ethiopia are already landlocked countries like South Sudan. They will also be charging transit fees before either Kenya or Djbouti charges South Sudan for transit and access to their ocean and see ports respectively. Why pay unnecessary transit fees to these landlocked middle countries when we can negotiate and reach a fair deal with one country that we are accustomed with, the Sudan?

Also keeping oil under the  ground when it is the core fuel of government and even private sector business in South Sudan is not a good decision too. I am not sure whether the GoSS has control on how nature works. The very oil it thinks of keeping under the ground for safety may disappear or dry up or lose its value in future; who knows? 

I think it not bad and dull to live and enjoy the blessings of one's time and place. Let South Sudanese not be denied enjoyment of their current blessings even if little because of sharing it with a greedy neighbor.

Oil revenues should not get stopped now for the mere sake of future use. The future may come with its own blessings or curses that could be different from our present today realities.

South Sudan National Legislative Assembly are you there? The Sudan National Legislative Assembly was there when the decision was taken to deduct crude from South Sudan oil as a charge in kind for transit fees. Wake up in Juba before Juba wakes you up on this risky situation to South Sudan economy?

-------------------------------------------------------

Dr. James Okuk is a lecturer in the Department of Political Science of the University of Juba. He could be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it