South Sudan News Agency

Saturday, Aug 29th, 2015

Last update03:36:20 AM GMT

You are here: South Sudan Articles

The Genesis of South Sudan Post Independence Crisis

By: Deng Mading Gatwech

A nation or civilization that continues to produce soft-minded men purchases its own spiritual death on an installment plan by Martin Luther King Jr.

April 11, 2014 (SSNA) -- The Republic of South Sudan became the most nascent state on the planet-earth on July 9, 2011 when South Sudanese vehemently voted for self-determination in free and fair conduct of the REFERENDUM achieved through Golden Plate, the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) signed on July 9, 2005 between the Sudan People’s Liberation Army/Movement (SPLA/M) and National Congress Party (NCP) led government based in Khartoum, under the auspices of Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD).

However, the CPA was founded on the following KEY ISSUES; Conscious that the conflict in the Sudan is the longest running conflict in Africa; that has caused tragic loss of life, destroyed the infrastructure of the country, eroded its economic resources and caused suffering to the people of Sudan; In Pursuance of the commitment of the parties to a negotiated settlement on the basis of a democratic system of the governance which, on the one hand, recognizes the right of the people of Southern Sudan to self-determination and seeks to make unity attractive during the Interim Period, while at the same time is founded on the values of justice, democracy, good governance, respect for fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual, mutual understanding and tolerance of diversity within the realities of the Sudan.

The prelude in this article is the main projectile motion on which many assumptions on how the government in question runs it’s informed policy decisions and affairs unwaveringly based. However, the government after the public put so much trusts and hopes in it was proven ineffective and inefficient. The culture of intimidation started long ago right after the inception of the Sudan People’s Liberation Army/Movement (SPLA/M) on May 16, 1983 and the first bullet was fired on Gajaak section of the Nuer instead of the Arab north. The aspirations of many South Sudanese dissipate when the incumbent president of the then Southern Sudan government (GOSS) took over after the tragic death of the visionary leader Dr. Garang De Mabior on the plane crash. Million of South Sudanese perished in the liberation struggle that ran for more than 50yrs where hundreds of thousands people internally displaced and more than half a million took refuge in the neighboring countries and the diaspora. The following episode characterizes the government of the Republic of South Sudan eventually run the risk of collapse.

Economic development: is the sustained, concerted actions of policy makers and communities that promote the standard of living and economic health of a specific area. Economic development can also be referred to as the quantitative and qualitative changes in the economy. Such actions can involve multiple areas including development of human capital, critical infrastructure, regional competitiveness, environmental sustainability, social inclusion, health, safety, literacy, and other initiatives. Economic development differs from economic growth. Whereas economic development is a policy intervention endeavor with aims of economic and social wellbeing of people, economic growth is a phenomenon of market productivity and rise in GDP.

It is paradoxical that in this time of great prosperity in the rich nation of the Republic of South Sudan in the contemporary world there should still be a substantial part of our population particularly the marginalized and disadvantaged ones with incomes far below what is thought of as the standard dollars a day. Whenever social institutions malfunction like the case of South Sudan, the incidence of damage will usually be distributed unevenly over the society. Dinka are simply not exposed to the abject poverty and have the skill and the wherewithal to escape it. More significantly, the rules that govern the society's operation may determine the extent to which some members are affected by the institutional failure. In South Sudan, we can squarely say that, the incidence of poverty is disproportionately high among the Nuer, where the petroleum extracts from their motherland, which contributes 98% to the national revenue and 70% of the national GDP.

Ostensibly, income inequality is high, and the country has yet to transform its natural endowments into improved on poor infrastructure and livelihoods equal to none. Against this backdrop, the primary drivers of poverty in South Sudan include exclusion of the other ethnic group from sharing the national cake, corruption, depletion of assets and limited access to social services by the Dinka led government of president Salvatore Kiir Mayardit. The perpetuation of poverty exacerbated among different ethnic group in South Sudan is through direct domination of markets by ill informed Dinka businesspersons purportedly in the name of foreign companies. More importantly, the banking sectors (formal and informal) where financial intermediaries plays role have gotten heavy hands of the Dinka top echelon.

Good governance: the quality of public administration is important for economic competitiveness and societal wellbeing. At a time when Member States are facing increasing pressures on public budgets where South Sudan is not an exceptional, the challenge of ensuring high-quality public services requires technological and organizational innovation to boost efficiency. This applies both in public administration and in delivering public services and quality public investment. At the same time, good governance and legal certainty are necessary for a stable business environment but South Sudan go opposite as judicial system appears inept that give room for unstable business environment.

It is essential that the institutions that govern economic and social interactions within a country fulfill a number of key criteria. These criteria include the absence of corruption, a workable approach to competition and procurement policy, an effective legal environment, and an independent and efficient judicial system. Moreover, strengthening institutional and administrative capacity, reducing the administrative burden and improving the quality of legislation underpins structural adjustments and fosters economic growth and employment.

However, the Republic of South Sudan experience quite number of challenges with respect to weak institutional capacity culminate corruption that led to the loss of $4 billion in the government coffer where the president Salva Kiir led the team of 13 SPLM top officials allegedly to have stolen the money but the list of the corrupt officials was extended to 75 in pretext as a cover up. In the same tone, the public was left in anguish when Chief Justice Chan Reec Madut brushed aside the petition filled by 75 legal practitioners on behalf of the SPLM Secretary General Pagam Amum who was banned from speaking with the media and travel to other countries on unfounded charges to have accused the president of violating country and party’s constitutions when he (Pagan Amum) was suspended. It further argues that “... weak administrative and judicial capacity as well as legal uncertainty constitute key impediments in addressing economic development challenges.”

Political freedom: is a central concept in Western history and political thought and one of the most important features of democratic societies. It has been described as a relationship free of oppression or coercion; the absence of disabling conditions for an individual and the fulfillment of enabling conditions; or the absence of lived conditions of compulsion, e.g. economic compulsion, in a society. The concept can also include freedom from "internal" constraints on political action or speech (e.g. social conformity) The concept of political freedom is closely connected with the concepts of civil liberties and human rights, which in democratic societies are usually afforded legal protection from the state.

Various groups along the political spectrum naturally differ on what they believe constitutes "true" political freedom. Indeed, the quest for political freedom in the Republic of South Sudan culminate the political wrangle within the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) degenerated into full scale rebellion pitting Dinka of president Salvatore Kiir Mayardit against the Nuer of ex-vice president Dr. Riek Machar Teny claiming lives of nearly 20, 000 people and nearly 1000, 000 internally displaced persons and refugees in the neighboring countries. The theoretical part of political freedom as the new model in the nascent state of the Republic of South Sudan blinded Dr. Riek Machar without scrutinizing the empirical implications of political freedom, which president Salvatore Kiir Mayardit in his limited school of thought coached by his Godfather the blue eye of Africa Yoweri K. Museveni of Uganda, took the new model to the test on December 15, 2013.

By and large, the grip on power couples with the privileges of resources use at will by the president made him so powerful listening to none other than old village boys in either Kuacjok or Aweil of Greater Bahr El Ghazal region. A simple question one would ask, what type of the government South Sudan as a nation state follows? For the sake of time, the author has chosen three types of government that the readers would be walked through.

Liberal democracy is a form of government in which representative democracy operates under the principles of liberalism, i.e. protecting the rights of minorities and, especially, the individual. To define the system in practice, liberal democracies often draw upon a constitution, either formally written or un-codified, to delineate the powers of government and enshrine the social contract. After a period of sustained expansion throughout the 20th century, liberal democracy became the predominant political system in the world. The liberty of different social group in the Republic of South Sudan has been infringed so much to the extent that the freedom of speech tempered with and if anything goes by he or she gets himself/herself behind bars or either cost his/her life; a living example is the assassination of Isaiah Ding Abraham on December 5, 2012 on his critics of the poor performance of the government.

Hegemony ("leadership" and "rule") is an indirect form of government, of imperial dominance in which the hegemon (leader state) rules geographically subordinate states by the implied means of power, the threat of force, rather than by direct military force. More to this, hegemony denoted the geopolitical and the cultural predominance of one country upon others; from which derived hegemonism, the great power politics by extension meant to establish Ugandan hegemony upon South Sudan. It is apparent in the 21st century, Yoweri K. Museveni (2005–present) developed the philosophy and the sociology of geopolitical hegemony into the theory of cultural hegemony, whereby Dinka can manipulate the system of values and mores of other society, in order to create and establish a ruling class, a worldview that justifies the status quo of bourgeois domination of the other social classes of the society in South Sudan. In the praxis of hegemony, imperial dominance is established by means of cultural imperialism, whereby the leader state (hegemon) dictates the internal politics and the societal character of the subordinate states that constitute the hegemonic sphere of influence, either by an internal, sponsored government or by an external, installed government. This is where Yoweri Museveni plays a predominant role masterminding the current conflict in the Republic of South Sudan supporting the Dinka led government of president Salvatore Kiir Mayardit who is nothing but just a stooge spectating the heinous crime committed against his own country men and women by the serial killer Yoweri K. Museveni of Uganda.

Moreover, in the field of international relations, the Italian Marxist philosopher Antonio Gramsci developed the theory of cultural domination to include social class; hence, the philosophic and sociologic theory of cultural hegemony analyzed the social norms that established the social structures with which the ruling class establish and exert cultural dominance to impose their world view— justifying the social, political, and economic status quo—as natural, inevitable, and beneficial to every social class, rather than as artificial social constructs beneficial solely to the ruling class.

Authoritarianism is a form of government characterized by absolute or blind obedience to authority, as against individual freedom and related to the expectation of unquestioning obedience. As the true reflection of dominant strategy, racial and ethnic "democracies" cropped up and are those in which "certain racial or ethnic groups enjoy full democratic rights while others are largely or entirely denied those rights," as the case in South Sudan Dinka dominance on other ethnic group. Some academic thinkers (Prof. David De Chand, uncle Edward Lino Abyei and lecturer Oyet Nathaniel of Juba University) among others have pointed in their academic contributions to South Sudan explicitly or implicitly as another example of "democratic" authoritarianism. The far-reaching implications of denying different group republican privileges can contribute to the typically highly polarized political discourse in the Republic of South Sudan, which is now a focus of the world but pay less attention to the untold suffering of the voiceless people of South Sudan.

South Sudanese are the best judge for the type of the government they vehemently voted for during the conduct of Referendum in 2011 for the succession of South Sudan as a sovereign state.

The post independence crisis in South Sudan is fabricated by the incumbent president Salvatore Kiir Mayardit by curtailing the economic development, good governance and political freedom of the public. As quoted by Martin Luther King Jr., a nation or civilization that continues to produce soft-minded men purchases its own spiritual death. To the author of this article, president Salvatore Kiir Mayardit is no exception to the assertion by Martin Luther King Jr., to have planted the seeds of his own destruction much as he has proven to be weak president of the Republic of South Sudan. The principle of democratic system of governance, which recognizes the right of the people of Southern Sudan to self-determination founded on the values of justice, democracy, good governance, respect for fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual, mutual understanding and tolerance of diversity. However, the Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan 2011 was driven out of Interim Constitution of Southern Sudan 2005 on which the principle of democratic system enshrined. But the Transitional Constitution appears to have vested powers on the president next to God; a situation that intoxicated the president above everything else to persecute everyone at will. Nonetheless, the lack of comprehension in the international politics South Sudan is just at the crossroad loggerhead trading accusations with the international community; the same body yesterday devoted much of its time for the benefits of the entire South Sudanese but hijacked by few senseless Dinka led government.

Deng Mading isa South Sudanese exiled in East Africa and researcher in the area of “Democracy & Good Governance, Local & International Politics and Strategic Security Studies”. He can be reached at < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >.

We must not be bullied to submission by one single tribe in South Sudan

By Col (Rtd) Wani Tombe Lako

April 10, 2014 (SSNA) -- Subjugation and oppression have no colour, race, or religion. If a government has turned into a fatal bully, the people must refuse to be governed by such a government. When a president; or a monarch; no more respects his people, and kills them in order to remain in power, then; the people have got all the right in the world, to refuse to be bullied to a degrading submission.

President Salva Kiir has quickly reached the culpable levels of gross abuse of power and wealth which was reached by the late Sadam Hussein and Muaamar Gadhafffi of Iraq and Libya respectively. The former offended the consciences of the international community and humanity in general; and the later the consciences and dignity of the Libyan peoples; and both of them ended up dying miserable and shameful undignified deaths.

There is this naïve believe in South Sudan; among the supporters of President Salva Kiir that, the peoples of South Sudan; have serves’ and salves’ obedience and subservient attitude towards President Salva Kiir and his hegemonic henchmen; and other political hangers on; in the States, and elsewhere, in the government of South Sudan. These people shall be the cause for total destruction of the SRSS.

We the people of South Sudan have allowed ourselves to be bullied by the government of President Salva Kiir from 2005 to date, via tribal hegemony for no good reasons whatsoever. The agonizing peoples of the SRSS are the majority. Just why on earth; should the majority allow themselves; to be bullied, humiliated, rendered homeless; and jobless; and hopeless; by a tiny minority, who cannot in fact withstand the political and other furies of all the other 63, or so tribes in South Sudan?

But for the Ugandan army, the government of Salva Kiir would have been history by now, and the peoples of the SRSS could have been planning different kinds of governance and such like. What does this mean? This means that, this government in Juba can easily be sent packing by all the peoples of South Sudan. We the 63 plus ethnicities of South Sudan must not allow ourselves to become serves and slaves by our own volition; in our own mother and fatherland.

The government of President Salva Kiir has turned into a de-facto and de jure bully, and there is no more reason why we the people of the SRSS must continue to pay allegiance to this government in Juba. The government of President Salva Kiir has equated itself with the abstract State of the SRSS and this is a very dangerous situation, and it has been mercilessly demonstrated through the Juba genocide against the Nure peoples of the SRSS.

The people in government of President Salva Kiir, who directly and indirectly, by intention, conduct, and constitutional misfeasance, supervised the December 2013 genocide in Juba must not carry on representing us as government. The people of South Sudan did not elect them to kill part of the same people. The people of South Sudan did not elect them so that they can privatise the SRSS, and then, turn on us the people, just because, we asked them questions concerning their gross abuse of the fiduciary duties we delegated to them.

Who said that, these peoples in Juba are the only capable human persons in South Sudan, who can visualize good govrncne of the SRSS? In fact the reverse is true. The evidence on the governance ground shows that, these people are the most corrupt, the most inefficient; the most heartless; and the most selfish group of rulers the peoples of South Sudan have ever seen since 1956.

When rulers begin to compete in building motels, brothels, and bars, and pubs, in residential areas and elsewhere; including in innocent villages, then, society must begin to reckon that, the country has gone to political hooligans as it were. How on earth can a ruler develop the citizens by building bars and institutionalising prostitution by importing in prostitutes and such like as partners in business?

Why should the majority of us in South Sudan, standby, with folded political arms, while, this minority of political hooligans are destroying our country? Why should we the majority allow a tiny minority to render our country unlivable and a pariah State? The majority of us must pick up the political mantel that has been thrown into the political dustbin by this minority lot.

The majority of us must not allow the country to be ruined by some quasi military officers whose perception of a military officer is that of a looter and heartless murderer. Military officers are supposed to be gentlemen others. They are selfless others who ought to be the beckon of positive morality, especially when they spice up their careers with the notion of liberation and such like.

The notion that; South Sudan has positively developed since 2005 is grossly misplaced. We must not measure development by the number of tall buildings financed by looted and laundered public money, and built on grabbed lands, or culpably privatized public lands; such in Central Equatoria; whereby, some constitutional post holders have become estate agents, selling public land to others, and allocating more public land to their sons, daughters, and such like. We the majority of South Sudanese must not standby and allow this tiny minority to destroy the futures of our posterities.

This tiny minority in South Sudan has laundered billions of our money in order to empower themselves and their children at our expense. This tiny minority is succeeding in building a permanent ruling class, whereby, in less than another twenty years, if they are allowed to continue at the rate they are going in, no other single tribe or ethnic group from the other 63 ethnicities shall be able to survive decently in South Sudan. 

Their children are getting the best education with the best qualifications at the expense of our children we the majority. Their children are getting the best medical treatment at the expense of our dead and buried children we the majority. They are closing all life chances doors in our faces, and in our children’s faces; and in our grandchildren’s and great grandchildren’s faces; we the majority of the other 63 tribes and ethnicities in South Sudan; and we are standing by unconcerned. We must not allow ourselves to be bullied to extinction by a tiny minority whom we can stop and prevent from ruining the rest of us in South Sudan.

We the majority must not buy this political bullshit about rocking the boat of unity of the peoples of South Sudan. How can the Madi tribe in Eastern Equatoria feel that they belong in South Sudan when they are systemically being rendered homeless and hopeless by this tiny minority of other South Sudanese using public wealth and violence? Just how can these people in Nimule and Mugali and elsewhere in the Madi ancestral land; feel that they are united harmoniously with these occupying and settlers others; in their own ancestral land?

How can the Fertit and other tribes and ethnicities of Western Bahr el Ghazal feel that they belong in South Sudan; if they are being systemically lynched and their lands turned into pasture lands for the livestock of this tiny minority, and which livestock is protected by mounted machine guns on fast Toyotas pickups, whereby, both guns and cars are bought by our public funds. Just how can these Fertit tribes feel that they belong to the wider community of South Sudan if they are being hunted down like wild game?  

How can one feel that he or she belongs to South Sudan, as a member of a harmoniously united peoples, when, if she or he goes to a police station in Juba for example, to report an assault on himself or herself, only to find himself or herself being the suspect in this episode even if it is his or her body that is bleeding?

How can this person feel that he or she is obliged to defend and die for the unity of the peoples of South Sudan when he or she is being treated like this in the police station of the supposedly free country of the SRSS? What unity can you lecture to such an aggrieved person in South Sudan? This is in fact the feeling of the majority of the peoples who emanate from the majority of the peoples of South Sudan.

On the other hand; is it not true that, the crescent shape territory of South Sudan; from Raga in Western Bahr el Ghazal; through Western Equatoria, through Central Equatoria up to Eastern Equatoria, is it not true that there is no single tribe and ethnic group; that has not been violated and hurt by the same minority in South Sudan, using public violence and money since 2005 to date?

We the majority of South Sudanese must save our country from total destruction. We the majority of South Sudanese must write the template for various socio-cultural definition of variables of behaviour in public arenas. We the majority of South Sudan must be in charge of the army of the SRSS. We the majority of South Sudanese must take charge of all intelligence, and national security and other security institutions in the SRSS; if we want peace, love, tranquility, and development to prevail and to be sustained in South Sudan.

We the majority in South Sudan must not allow ourselves to be bullied. The year 2013 must be earmarked as the last year of bullying of us by this tiny minority in South Sudan. This tiny minority in South Sudan must be allowed to share in the governance of South Sudan in our terms; we the majority. We the majority cannot be told how to participate in the administration of South Sudan by this tiny minority. We have to act together now for the survival of South Sudan as peoples and land.

The author is Chairman of Greater Equatoria Council of Rights (GRECOR).

Search for Indigenous Solution to South Sudan Problem

By Jacob K. Lupai

April 8, 2014 (SSNA) -- On the 9th July 2011 South Sudan declared itself independent from the old Sudan after decades of bitter and devastating armed struggle that caused so much loss of lives and destruction of property. South Sudan celebrated with fanfare the end of half century of utter subjugation by neocolonial system of governance in the old Sudan.

It is not within the scope of this article to go into the details of half century neocolonialism in South Sudan. Suffice to say that barely two years of independence the people South Sudan started to experience problems of governance. It seems yesterday’s mentality of liberation with undisciplined volunteers has not yet changed into the mentality of fostering socio-economic development through discipline.

In 2005 after a comprehensive peace agreement with the government of the old Sudan, South Sudan became a self-governing autonomous part. The ruling party was the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) with its military wing, the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) which had prosecuted a 21-year old war for the freedom of the people of South Sudan. The vision of the SPLM was clear. It was to establish conditions contrary to conditions in the old Sudan.

Some aspects of the vision include establishment of democracy and good governance. On democracy the SPLM vision is the establishment of democratic path of development which empowers and encourages active participation of all citizens at all levels.

On governance the vision is the establishment of good governance where the exercise of political, economic and administrative authority in the management of the country’s affairs at all levels shall be people-based so that individuals and groups have an effective say in management and in decision that affect their lives.

The vision of the SPLM couldn’t have been clearer.

South Sudan Problem

South Sudan problem is in fact the problem of the SPLM as a political party which should not have been the problem of South Sudan in the first place. However, as the SPLM is the dominant ruling party in government, the problem has become a South Sudan problem because of the split of the SPLM and defections from the SPLA that has become of national concern.

The problem started when voices began to be heard of poor service delivery by the SPLM led government. Cases of rampant corruption were also heard loudly. According to an opinion poll in Sudanic Magazine of March/April 2008 Vol. 1 Issue 2, the Government of Southern Sudan was perceived as 90 per cent corrupt. Arguably the disappointment with the SPLM led government started to grow.

The problem came to a head when there was a crack in the SPLM leadership. This was partly due to contradictions in what the vision of SPLM was and what was actually happening in practice on the ground. The contradictions seem to have been too much that the SPLM leadership was categorically split right in the middle with one part as SPLM in Government and the other SPLM in opposition. The SPLA was also divided in loyalty. Some SPLA commanders and their men defected to the SPLM in Opposition with their equipment.

The split was no longer an SPLM problem but a South Sudan problem that had dragged in the United Nations (UN), African Union (UA) and the Intergovernmental Authority for Development (IGAD) in the interest of peace and stability in the region and also to avoid a humanitarian catastrophe in South Sudan.

Attempts for a solution

As highlighted above collective efforts to reconcile the differences between SPLM leaders that were supported by the countries of the region, international partners and the African Union did not succeed. By the end of November 2013 tensions between the SPLM in government and the SPLM in Opposition increased. The SPLM in Opposition accused the SPLM in Government of dictatorial tendencies and unilateral decision-making.

The split in the SPLM leadership produced a violent confrontation. In Juba on 15th December 2013 various elements of the presidential guard started fighting in their barracks. However, the SPLM in Government was quick to describe the fighting as an attempted coup d’état perpetrated by forces allied with the SPLM in Opposition. The SPLM in Opposition on its part denied any involvement in the alleged coup d’état.

A delegation of the IGAD Council of Ministers supported by the UN and AU travelled to Juba in an effort to persuade the parties to settle their differences peacefully. A second IGAD delegation led by the President of Kenya and Prime Minister of Ethiopia visited Juba for the same purpose as that of the first delegation. 

The efforts made by the President of Kenya and Prime Minister of Ethiopia culminated in the convening in Nairobi of an extraordinary summit of IGAD member states where three special envoys to support the Government of South Sudan and the SPLM in Opposition were named. The aim was to enable the parties to reach in an inclusive manner, a resolution to the problem and to initiate a dialogue by 31 December 2013.

Problem persisting

Events took a violent turn of intense fighting on 15 December 2013. However, people are now in April 2014 and it is now about 5 months since fighting started. The problem between the SPLM in Government and the SPLM in Opposition seems to be persisting. Now what do people think of the problem and its implication on the governance of the country?

The membership of SPLM is not the entire population of South Sudan and the SPLM is just one single party among many in South Sudan. Instead of relying on IGAD, the UN and the AU to resolve the split in the SPLM, it is also important for the people of South Sudan to look at themselves as a key factor in resolving the violent conflict that is tearing their country apart. South Sudanese need to be confident and self-reliant.

No solution should be imposed without an inclusive participation of all political parties for a consensus on the way forward in the best interest of South Sudan as a nation but not necessarily in the interest of an individual party. The international community should take note of this.

The split in the SPLM has caused much pain to people of South Sudan. However, it seems when South Sudanese are taking sides it aggravates the problem. There has to be a common ground to resolve the problem. The common ground should be a progressive provisional government. Blaming either side vehemently is not the way forward but seeking a common ground is in the interest of national unity.

South Sudanese indigenous solution

The SPLM in Government and the SPLM in Opposition seem to be too dogmatic and only appear to care much about their leadership’s survival and power in the country. They are like two boxers in a ring each one wants to win by all means. The two boxers do not see a win-win situation as an option but an all knock out of the opponent for a glory in the ring.

South Sudan is bleeding with the people enduring untold hardships instead of enjoying the fruit of their bitter struggle for independence from Arab Islamic bigotry and tyranny in the old Sudan. As it were, the people of South Sudan seem to have been thrown from the frying pan into the fire. Can the people of South Sudan truly put on a cap of extraordinary nationalism?

The SPLM in Government and the SPLM in Opposition should be made acutely aware that their belligerence is an absolute liability for all in South Sudan. People need a leadership full of confidence, to give and take, and decisive enough to bring the peace for which people are yearning.

A win-win situation for the SPLM in Government and the SPLM in Opposition is possible where a progressive provisional government is headed by technocrats of proven integrity but excluding either of the belligerents.

When the November 1958 military regime of Ibrahim Aboud was overthrown through a popular civil disobedience, Sir el Khatim el Khalifa, an Educationist, headed the provisional government. Also, when the May 1969 military regime of Jaafer el Numeiri was toppled Djouzili Daffalla, a Medical Doctor, headed the provisional government.

Why is it so scary to allow South Sudanese technocrats, who may include politicians of integrity, to head a provisional government as a compromise in the face of unnecessary devastation of the country?

The belligerence in Addis Ababa peace talks could be the fear in individuals who think they may face charges for crimes committed against humanity because of their perceived contribution to the carnage caused by the unfortunate split in the SPLM and the defections from the SPLA.

I am confident that the people of South Sudan will accept the offer of immunity for the anxious SPLM leaderships in return for them handing over power to technocrats to head a provisional government for the benefit of all. This can be through a negotiation with open minds and hearts.

This will be a typical South Sudanese own indigenous and genius solution to the violent conflict and the bitterness the conflict has generated. This is in order for security and stability to return to our beloved country with minimum delay for people to go about their daily business with peace of mind.

Conclusion

People of South Sudan are of one destiny. It is only unfortunate that they seem to be lacking a clear direction provided by a visionary leadership that is very caring for each and every ethnic group in the land. This is because people are frequently inclined to be instinctively tribalistic.

We in South Sudan need decisive leadership that is seen to protect each and every South Sudanese regardless of ethnicity or region. Upholding the rule of law to the letter is paramount so that none feels injustice in the Republic of South Sudan.

In conclusion, we all need to strive vigorously to make South Sudan progressively free of those who are inclined to be instinctively tribalistic for the national unity of South Sudan to flourish like flowers with some of the most beautiful colours on planet earth.

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

More Articles...

Page 54 of 288

Our Mission Statement

To bring the latest, most relevant news and opinions on issues relating to the South Sudan and surrounding regions.

To provide key information to those interested in the South Sudan and its people.