South Sudan News Agency

By Martin Garang Aher

March 29, 2012 (SSNA) -- The two nations of South Sudan and Sudan seemed to have bypassed the habitual melanoma that had in history, plagued the countries that have once been united from independence - reverting to war soon after separation. Rather unusual! But strange as it was, the international community witnessed the Sudanese bizarre and peaceful separation that many analysts, in forecast, believed would be preceded by upsurge of violence. Though these forecasters of war were wrong in speed with which war was prophesied to come, they were right in ‘time’ that it would surely take to come. Up until July 9th 2011 when the Africa’s massive country came crashing down into two states: Sudan and South Sudan, there was little hope that all would go well and peacefully without a farewell fire flare – well before independence of South Sudan or just as the two countries regularize their national borders and set up independent institutions.

To the Arab North citizens, particularly those who possess the will-power to attribute Arabness to themselves, and who by virtue of well positioning in the country’s power, they thought that disciplining South Sudan before it seceded was conceivably a matter of psychological settlement and a retribution for the damage done to national integrity. It also serves, as a ploy to blindfold the Sudanese masses that separation of South Sudan was not the making of the leadership in power – indicative of their constant flexing of muscles to prevent it from happening. Although the trick never played out, it was certainly tried.

Indeed, occupation of Abyei by Sudanese forces prior to independence of South Sudan was meant to correct the presumed wrong signatures appended to CPA peace documents; action that was literally driving South Sudan away into independence - which eventually occurred. Sudan claimed that occupation of Abyei was a result of retaliatory action of an attack on their retreating column of soldiers by South Sudanese army. So, it seemed beating South Sudanese army in the retaliation was not enough but to occupy its territory! The rationale is unfathomable in this case. No question at that point, the stage for war was, in effect, set.

What prevented a full-scale war at that point might have been a careful self-education of the people of South Sudan on the visionary Islamism nature of the old republic of Sudan. And so the trick was neither heeded nor allowed to tamper with the freedom that would have, in a single day of indecisiveness, shattered what was fought for in many decades.  One wonders now, why the SPLM/A that had mastered the tricks of the Sudanese army is falling fast into the trap. It was perplexing to hear president Kir announced in Juba that the South Sudanese army had taken Heglig. Though his position was based on the authenticity that Sudan started the war at the borders, he should have been aware that his position would solidify Jihadists peace distractors in Khartoum who see no reason to have smooth relations with South Sudan. Khartoum's agression must be treated in a similar way to that of Abyei before the referendum; only that this time, the nation must be mindful of the border line.

When Abyei fell to the Sudanese army prior to independence, South Sudanese were consciously obsessed with independence, not war.  The current twist in the tails between Sudan and South Sudan in which negotiations, the borders, citizenship status and oil become intertwined, points to the direction of other countries that historically never beat the temperaments and a sense of loss of each other in a civilized split-up. In such countries, war accompanied what was once a peaceful divorce in bloody exchanges that led to restrained relations. And this is one of the problems with peaceful resolution of conflicts through negotiations – the vanquished (including the one on the verge of it) never acknowledge the defeat; and wavering over remaining contentious issues of the conflict farther sow seeds for future confrontations.

As we saw in the breakup of Pakistan and India in 1947; where there was lack of clean division of the country in apropos to religious lines upon which the whole idea of division rested; and the actual lines of the borders were actually skewed in the areas of Kashmir and Hyderabad; that there was no doubt the wounds of partition would remain maligned for some time. South Sudan and the Sudan almost have a similar situation akin to what happened to the Himalayan nations.

With one third of the Muslims remaining in India and Indian Hindu population in bitterness over the partition – something that drove them rowdy and killing Mahatma Gandhi, their erstwhile religiously venerated figure – the seeds of war had been sown.India and Pakistan had since clashed over their borders numerous times.

Those were India and Pakistan. Today, they still fight declared and undeclared wars, with caution knowing very well they have their nuclear warheads pointing at each other and madness from either side to use one nuke-headed missile would lead to a Mutually Assured Destruction of the two nations. No one can lecture them on the true value of peace today for they know more than be told.

With a reasonable fraction of South Sudanese population still languishing in North Sudan and North Sudanese businesses and government eyeing South Sudan for business and economic (and oil is the economic stimulant the Sudanese government needs to counter economic spiral) gains respectively, there is a cause for concern that what started in Abyei and now in Heglig, will transcend further into the future – long after the National Congress Party (NCP) and Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) left the political scenes in both countries.

Perhaps the Ethio-Eritrean circumstance provides a similar situation of uneasiness over the break-up between two countries. I consider this appropriate because the two countries fought over borders in the 1990s after Eritrea gained independence from Ethiopia. The world media that witnessed the fighting told of the horrific nature of the war. So nasty and meaningless was the war. It was in contrast  with the fact that the bit of land in the contention was not economically useful or geopolitically de rigueur to either of them. The principle for war was only to maintain national integrity in terms of firm borders. The International Commission in The Hague established that Eritrea was to blame for starting the war by invading Ethiopia. As of 2012, the town of Badme, which was at the epicenter of war, is still under Ethiopian occupation even though The Hague based court ruled it in favour of Eritrea.

If South Sudan and Sudan inch in a full-scale war over the borders, I believe it is national integrity, which plays a critical role. With oil and national integrity complicating the scenario between South Sudan and Sudan, it is apparent that intermittent border skirmishes would not go away sooner than they suppose. Negotiations will only be deployed as vanguards for national integrity.

Who really wants to safeguard its national integrity more, South Sudan or the Sudan?

It is in answering this question, that the issue of national integrity becomes a little more complex. I suppose South Sudanese see the recent four freedoms agreement as simply another invitation of Arabs into the country. This is historically evident in the Sudanese common knowledge that the Arabs came to Sudan, spread their religion and never left. South Sudanese hardliners too, view Addis Ababa agreement on the four freedoms as a strategy schemed by the Sudan to encroach on South Sudan. To prove this fear, here is a comment made by an anonymous North Sudanese national on Sudan Tribune online newspaper on hearing that the two nations would sign agreement on the four freedoms:

‘What a great victory! that’s exactly what we were looking for, now on, we can own land, houses, move freely in the south, now the separation is meaningless, it’s just on the paper! Now the road has become widely open to our great mission of arabizing the South, we need to follow the same technique and method that our Arab great grandfathers had done when they came to Sudan, yes, we need to marry southerners ladies, that’s the shortcut solution in arabizing the south, our new generations will become full southerners but arabized! I personally prefer to marry from Western Equatoria, yes, Azande, what beautiful ladies! WOW!

(Sudan Tribune, 14 March 2012)

Northern Sudanese too, must have grown weary of the African resistance in South Sudan to the point that they panic over such agreements as antecedents for the possible loss of what they have already achieved. As such, whatever may reconnect South Sudan with Sudan must be nipped in the bud even if it means via the barrel of a gun.

The recent border clashes in Panthou (Heglig) echo what Islamists in Khartoum had reiterated about keeping the north Arabised and purely Islamic. In the words of Al-Tayyib Mustafa, a close relative of President Bashir, and leader of Just Peace Forum (JPF) of Sudan, agreement with South Sudan that involved the four freedoms: freedom of residence, freedom of movement, freedom to undertake economic activity and freedom to acquire and dispose property, poses threat to national, social and political security. His further calling on the president Bashir to scrap the deal as he did with the Addis Ababa framework agreement signed in July 2011 between the government and rebels of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement - North (SPLM-N), referred to national embarrassment hence, national integrity.

To juxtapose Sudanese vox populi position on normalization of relations with South Sudan, it is clearly that of resentment and hate. The editor in chief, Al-Sadiq al-Rizigi of Al-Intibaha newspaper had denounced the negotiations on four freedoms and fumed that he sensed an American hand in it. His last words were that the deal would not succeed because it compromised their rights - Islamic rights. Khartoum newspapers report that other Islamic hardliners in Khartoum have threatened to ruthlessly deal with South Sudanese in the Sudan when April dateline passes. These religious theocrats and fanatics explained the reason for their anticipation of a genocide night to be that an Islamic country cannot have non-Islamic citizens.

Of course, keen followers of the Sudanese politics would note that recent attacks on the South Sudanese forces which led to clashes over Heglig, were obviously designed to scrap the ongoing negotiations between the two countries and to keep the border wars continuing in order to uphold national integrity. No doubts negotiations will still be used in the near future, again and again.

Martin Garang Aher is a South Sudanese living in Western Australia. He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

By Majok Nikodemo Arou

March 28, 2012 (SSNA) -- Despite undergoing efforts of the South Sudan Government to disarm the hostile communities in the Jonglei State, more down to earth measures are required to prevent a potential rearmament.

Given long borders with Ethiopia and a neighbouring staunch enemy that stoops to conquer and ready to invest over local tribal feuds, challenges remain as the arms may continue to flow again into South Sudan even after the disarmament.

In the light of good ties with Ethiopia, the government could engage Ethiopia, especially the regional government that shares borders with South Sudan. There have been plans in this respect. This author is unaware about the results though.

With the issue of the North Sudan government’s intervention, it would be very difficult to tackle unless the local communities get dissuaded about the rearmament through incentives such as provision of effective governmental protection of their properties and lives.

Apart from the development plans that could help ease the tensions, there is a need to revisit how the Condominium Rule had established the rule of law and order in South Sudan. Not exactly to copy what the colonialists did, but to study how they finally managed to forge the cordial relations with the local chiefs to rein in the frequent revolts and disobedience. The efforts of the Condominium Rule were not all rosy, albeit they had helped the government so much to enforce the Rule of Law.

Indeed the role of local chiefs has been so far eroded to the extent that they no longer play an active role in ruling their communities. Why? The answer is simple. Their powers have been reduced to the extent that their subjects no longer give them due respect. For instance, the minor cases they used to settle had been referred to the formal courts.

To tackle the issues of the cattle raiding, the local chiefs can play a pivotal role to curb it if they are empowered. A sub chief for instance knows the source of any gun or a cow in his payam. Those who hail from the pastoralist background are aware that a clan, for instance, knows the source of any cow in the village because it is a close knit group. It is a common knowledge there a cow comes either as a dowry or bought in an auction or other known sources. In this area a sub chief could help in identifying the raided cattle if protected fully by the government from subsequent intimidation by youth involved in the illegal activities!

If protected from the intimidation, he could also help the government effectively in the current disarmament efforts, and may be in prevention of rearmament.

So the local chiefs should be delegated more powers in their jurisdiction in cooperation with the law enforcement authorities. The local chiefs’ benefits should be increased to motivate them. Through constant protection the chiefs could cooperate fully in the disarmament efforts without fear from a reprisal.

Another unfortunate point is that there has been rumours circulated that some of the regular forces had joined their communities in the recent raids. The South Sudan law enforcement authorities can check and investigate to bring unruly soldiers to book.

The Ministry of Justice can set up a special tribunal to deal promptly with the raiding, child abduction and other related cases in cooperation with the local chiefs and community leaders.

Frankly, the hostilities have reached the peak that the communities involved would like to bring them to an end. Nonetheless the fear from each other fuels the tension. Hopefully, more checkpoints are required in the counties and payams in cooperation with the local chiefs.

Finally, some members of the Jonglei State communities in Diaspora are unfortunately rekindling the tensions. One wonders whether they read the history of their host countries to draw lessons on the nation building. The agitation they are indulged in tantamount to the dissemination of hatred that add insult to injury.

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

By James Okuk, PhD

March 26, 2012 (SSNA) -- Few weeks back in Juba after Mr. Pagan Amum, the Secretary-General of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) party, came back from Addis Ababa with a failed message of deadlock of negotiations on oil business with the Republic of the Sudan, he was shockingly received by Mr. Arthur Akuein Chol with a crown of rose full of irritating thorns.

The thorny crown was prepared inside the chamber of the South Sudan Legislative Assembly, especially with the provocation that emanated from the summoning of Mr. Uncle Commander Elijah Malok, former Governor of the Bank of Southern Sudan who has his signature on all the categories of South Sudanese Pound.

This former man of money declared himself in the factory of law as free from any suspicious closed-door deals, and instead accused Mr. Arthur Akuein to be the suspected thief of the missing public monies that were audited by the Auditor-General and his crew. He produced some documents for his self-acquittal and was unhappy when the MPs did not use them as references in the hot sitting where the opposition SPLM-DC appealed and urged for forgiveness of the SPLM suspected thiefs of public fund since they are above the their own laws.

However, Mr. Arthur Akuein didn’t raised an objection pause in the August House but rather called a press conference later in one of the expensive eating houses in Juba where he accused SPLM VIPs from “ABOVE” of ordering him to spent and distribute the public monies in the way he did. He was playing loyalist game by then as the financial minister of the government of Southern Sudan to the SPLM VIPs from ‘Above’.

It came out from his press release that he sent a huge amount of millions of dollars to a personal bank account of Mr. VIP Pagan Amum, though he shifted the paradigm later by saying that he wired the same huge amount to the SPLM party’s bank account.

This contradiction seems to have watered down Mr. Arthur Akuein’s case. The dusty dangerous documents in a dusty briefcase by which he bullied his rivals with all throughout the past four years couldn’t support his defense for defamation of Pagan’s political image. The Equatorian judge disvalued the those documents and the Man from Bahr El-Ghazal was left to a teethy crocodile like a Nile Perch who it used to fear before. Unless, Mr. Arthur Akuein is ready to come up with another dusty briefcase full of dangerous financial disbursement documents if disposed in front of a judge, his appeal looked possibly a lost gold in a goal.

Thus the drama of the Benydit and Guandit not Bandit could be seriated follows:

1) A SPLM member and a MP who is also 'a suspected public money thief' shouted 'thief' at the SPLM Secretary-General in Home and Away Hotel in Juba. Two newspapers published the news about this courageous top-voice shout.

2) But the SPLM VIP who was shouted at run to the police station in Malakia to sue the shouter and publishers of the 'thief shout news'.

3) The case was taken to court under torts rather than criminal suit.

4) The assigned judge was so enthusiastic and capable of pronouncing a final verdict within a very short period while many gravest cases remain pending in Juba courts since the arrival of SPLM bush government of the so-called liberators in 2005. It took Goldenberg corruption scandal in Kenya at least two years before the final verdict. What a lucky and efficient SPLM legal court system and operation in Juba!

5) Funny enough one of the sittings was done in a controversial visiting presence of the Chief Justice of the Republic of South Sudan who could have been looking with red eyes at the judge during the process, and perhaps telling him in silence or in secret: "be with us or you are against us with consequence of possible loss of your lucrative job of the rare job of ‘My Lord’, dare you take the opposite path with them".

6) Naturally, the case was in favor of the SPLM VIP who was so fortunate to get away with additional big amounts of South Sudanese Pounds, and too happy to the extent of unconsciously thanking the judge and other supporters of his, and even the defendants who he was looking at as media tools for jumping to a mismatched conclusion of "acquittal" when there was nothing of such kind in the first place. Juba University was fortunate to get the SPLM VIP's free donation from suspected money out of the court’s unveridical fine.

7) Not only this, but also the Oyee Party’s VIP was so obsessed with the crony’s victory to the extent of forgetting that he was the one who sued the 'thief shouter' and the 'publishers of the thief shout'. He might have been thinking at that moment as if he was the one who got sued in the so-called court of quick law from “Above” in Juba.

Nonetheless, when plaintiffs start to think unconsciously that they are victorious by acquittal then something should be declared upside down in the system of justice of SPLM ruling party in South Sudan. This is not common in the common law. Perhaps a new precedent likely incoherent with the established principles of jurisprudence!

What is the message from this dramatic drama then? It could be put like this in a direct speech: "You the Non-VIPs of South Sudan dare you again "shout thief" to the well-placed SPLM VIPs and you will face the same fate of Arthur Akuein, Al-Masir and the Citizen Newspapers; you will pay very heavy fines and even imprisonments for your tongue or pens if you don't shut them down like South Sudan oil fields and behave like good boys to the liberators’ regime."

But is Juba University so desperate and overwhelmed with poverty and vulnerability that makes it susceptible of grasping any money gotten by any means to the extent of waiting for judges of South Sudan "to acquit the plaintiffs" and "fine the defendants" so that this can become a source of revenue to the Capital City’s Varsity?

For me as a free citizen of South Sudan and part-time lecturer, the University of Juba should keep its dignity by declining the receipt of the donation of the SPLM VIP, especially when it is coming out from a contested court's ruling (pending for a suspected appeal as well).

Let's our Mother Public University of South Sudan not be defiled by money whose sources might be tainted with the dirt of evilness of the darkness that has befallen the public monies of South Sudan since 2005. It is better to be poor and with dignity than be made rich and luxurious by donations of suspected public monies’ thieves who pretend to be benevolently charitable but only for shaky political gains and cover-ups in hunt for undeserved students’ support.

Let's the SPLM VIP enjoy his own additional booty from the court without involving Juba University in his short-lived banquet of justice for the strongest in South Sudan. Let him donate his booty to his own political party so that it could build a permanent SPLM Secretariat Headquarters in Juba or Ramciel after the temporary one was subsumed by fire last time.

Sincere charity should start at home and not anywhere else for us to be politically realistic and far from politics of Machiavellianism in South Sudan. Real justice from just and free law will prevail one day in South Sudan when the calls for genuine reforms and change become a realistic dream seeable on the ground with realistic approaches rather than propaganda.

Long Live Juba University even with its current poverty! Away with SPLM Secretary-General's unfortunate donation of the suspected money to our dear Mother University!

Dr. James Okuk (PhD)  lives in Juba and could be reached at okukjimy@hotmail.