Dilemma of fighting tribalism in Southern Sudan

By James Okuk

February 26, 2008 — Tribe is good and we must be proud of our different tribes in South Sudan and should try hard to preserve them from disappearance in future. Tribalism is bad and wrong and we must fight hard – nails and teeth – to combat it in Southern Sudan On February 25, 2008, Gongich C Ngueny wrote: “This is not Congo, not Rwanda or, Kenya. It is Southern Sudan, a country not yet born, still there is already an emergence of struggle for political power based on ethnic lines brought by some enemies of togetherness’ far as I know it has never worked any where instead it brings animosity and anarchy. They struggle for power not knowing the hour. Please brethren, let us unanimously kill that attitude before it grows; most especially a state like southern Sudan, a state that is not yet born”. He added that “We people of southern Sudan should know and be proud of our history. A history which has consumed 2.5 millions lives, a history, that has turned Southern Sudanese tribes against one another: Nuer vs Uduk, Shilluk vs Anyauk, Monyjiang (Dinka) vs Beer (Murle), and Equatorian vs great Upper Nile. In after-math, a final peace was achieved… Let me just beg the rest of Southern Sudan communities to adhere unity wherever they are. We did not just inherit this great land from our parents, but we borrowed it from our children and their children’s children. So let’s make it a better place for posterity.”

Gongich opinion is wonderful at a glance and it deserve to be respected because he took the courage to voice out something he is seeing as dangerous for the well-being of Southern Sudan, particularly when it becomes and independent South Sudan after 2011. This is what he calls “the virus of tribalism” used by those who are working for the abortion of the State of South Sudan, which is still growing in the womb of the CPA politics. However, the fight for combating tribalism in a continent characterized by tribal affiliations is not so simple without dilemma. It is not either without sacrifices. I tend to believe that if you are a non-tribalist in the midst of tribalists, you will be a loser in the jungle of tribalism. Right or prove me wrong?

There is an irony in discussing the problem of tribalism: Tribalism cannot exist without a tribe. Right and unfalsifiable! In this regard the root basis to eliminate tribalism is to eliminate tribes. But this elimination will be contradictory to the desire to preserve tribes in South Sudan, which is part of Africa. Africa is ranked in the world as the continent where tribalism is high. The reason is clear – because it is also ranked as the continent which is still maintaining so many tribes so far. This reason could be enhanced by the facts that you find no tribalism in other continents of the world whose tribes have disappeared into the memoir of history (but this should not be understood as lack of other forms of injustice). That is, no tribe, no tribalism. This could be a justification that if we mean to fight tribalism to the roots we have to make tribal affiliation disappear so that we live as Southerners rather than as tribes – no Dinka, no Bari, no Nuer, no Collo, etc any more. Are Southerners willing to let their tribal identity and affiliation go?

When you struggle not to favour your tribe in your action, and others struggle to favour their tribes in their decisions, then you would have done no good to your tribes though you did well to other tribes when they have not done it to you. What is the way out from this dilemma? Two options: either accept the loss by sacrificing your tribal people while pleasing others, or join the practice by favouring them and disappointing other tribes. Each of these options is not free from damage (personal or community). Nonetheless, this dilemma could possibly be resolved by using the wisdom behind the song of famous Collo (Shilluk) musician, John Adhok: “let us destroy it if we are not willing to adjust it, or let us adjust it together if we think continuing this bad thing is not good” – ‘rënya en amaa e ca rëny, wala tienya en o dung o caa dok keje.’ That is to say, either all of us work to eliminate tribalism in Southern Sudan or we continue to practice it in whatever position we hold if others continue to practice it in the decision-making positions they hold too. Of course this will put those who have dual tribal identity in an awkward situation of choice; either to favour the side of their mothers or the one of their fathers, or favour both.

It is important to understand that injustice and oppression by a brother is the same practice when done by an enemy; it makes a brother an enemy as well. Kokora by Equatorians in 1980s was not for a non-reason; it was because of jange (Dinka, Collo, and perhaps Nuer) domination in institutions of Government of Autonomous Southern Sudan. Also defections from the SPLM/A in 1990 (mostly by some Nuer, Collo, Dinka and also some tribes from Equatoria and Bahr El Ghazal) was not for the joy of cooperating with Arabs in Khartoum; it was a result of Dr. Garang’s dictatorial and individualistic style of managing the movement, which was so fatal to some comrades who were presented with no choice but joining the enemy for safety from death from a brother – because death is death wherever it comes from. That is to say, Southerners went to bush under the SPLM/A to fight against brutal Northerners (including the Darfurians who were in the SAF and also as Mujaheen – holy warriors) but in the process they also turned brutal to themselves in some instances as described above. Nonetheless no one can deny that Dr. Garang is a hero today because of the CPA; he is lucky to have died early, otherwise, his heroism would have been demonized by the problems surrounding the implementation of the CPA and enormous quest for development in Southern Sudan.

In my conclusion, we should not be simplistic when we try to address the problem of tribalism in Southern Sudan; otherwise we will cause injustice to those who are qualified to do good work to the South but have happened to come from one tribe. In this case, I will prefer encouragement for equal access to competition for jobs and other privileges in Southern Sudan and accepting whoever wins the competition test even if from one tribe. As far as we need participation, involvement and representation of all tribes of Southern Sudan in the GoSS, we should not also sacrifice efficiency and merits in the process. After all tribes are going to disappear in future (given the ongoing civilization conditions) but efficiency, productivity, quality and merits will persist to be desired in the forthcoming independent South Sudan state. I hope logical and truth-seeking Southerners will agree with me here.

*James Okuk is a Southern Sudanese and a PhD student in the University of Nairobi in the area of political philosophy. He can be reached at: [email protected]