A hoax of a new party

By Yong Deng

June 8, 200 — In the past two months, northern media sources have been curiously reporting about the forthcoming defection by some senior SPLM figures. The names of the so-called prominent figures were withheld for long time and people who reported about the defection demanded absolute anonymity. This left the South Sudanese public in great suspense. The game became even more dramatic when the names of the spokespersons for the dissident group emerged to be the likes of Jamal al-Sarraj, Anwar Musa etc, which had never been heard in SPLM political history. The hell finally broke loose on Saturday June, 6th, 2009 when Dr. Lam Akol released a press statement confirming the formation of the splinter ‘Sudan People Liberation Movement for Democratic Change (SPLM-DC), a party for this splinter group.

Dr Lam as usual did not hesitated to fabricate some sham reasons for betraying the South Sudanese cause; the most ridiculous being “to save South Sudanese from eminent danger”. Despite the hypocritical tirade against SPLM in Mr Akol’s Saturday press release, any South Sudanese can easily figure out that the splinter political group does not have anything to do with the struggle for freedom and equality of all marginalised people and South Sudanese in particular; rather, it was formed to fulfil its own sinister objectives which will be outlined later in this paper. Of all the political parties in South Sudan, this treacherous party must be rejected by all Southerners because of the following reasons among others.

First, this splinter movement was born in coordination with the South Sudanese ancestral enemy, the racist, Arab dominated NCP, to distract South Sudanese from focusing on their referendum in 2011. Bashir and his cronies have learnt that South Sudanese are currently united and waiting eagerly to discard the Islamist North like a rotten tooth when the time comes in 2011.Worried by this unity, they decided to send their emissaries loaded with money to the South to bribe people into betrayal. This trick will fail because, not only are people scornful of it but also they are fed up with everything Arab-tainted. The outburst of Bashir on May 31th, when he declared that he would ban SPLM in the North because NCP does not get conducive environment among Southern populace is a proof of NCP’s frustration. The NCP out of its political calculations therefore deems it necessary to enter the South in the skin of its Southern stooges like Dr. Lam Akol.

In using Dr Lam as their emissary among Southerners, the NCP saw some glimpse of initial success on March 8th, 2009 when Southerners in Khartoum, mobilised by Dr Lam, came out in great number for the first time in history to rally in support of Al Bashir. From March, 4th -8th, no single South Sudanese joined the NCP stooges in the street demonstration against ICC either in the South or in the North. To add salt into the wound, Dr. Lam used the same ceremony to crown Bashir with a Chollo King headgear and a spiritual spear, the pinnacles of the Chollo kingdom. The scene of these beautiful symbols of African pride, on a wicked Arab (Bashir), was shamelessly splashed on television screen all over the world. One was left to wonder whether Dr Lam was rewarding Al Bashir for the atrocities he committed in Chollo kingdom in 2000-2003.Viewing that as an imaginable success, the NCP continued with their malicious strategy by pushing Mr Akol further to organise the Kenana summit where ill-informed Southern politicians each with individual egoistic motive met to attack SPLM and the GOSS for poor implementation of CPA, as if SPLM was the sole signatory to CPA. The formation of the new sisterly party to NCP in the name of SPLM-DC is therefore a continuation of NCP strategy and to some extent northern mentality of destroying Southerners by using their own son anytime they see a unified south Sudan.

The following evidence among others shows that the NCP is behind the so-called SPLM-DC, and even formulates its objectives.

1. As articulated in Dr. Lam’s press release, the main grievance of this party against SPLM is public criticism of NCP by SPLM cadres. The NCP wants puppet party that will shy away from criticising it in the public. Coalition parties everywhere disagree to agree unless Mr Akol wants to surrender the aspiration of South Sudanese to the NCP.

2. Despite SPLM’s public rejection of Bashir’s arrest warrant, NCP is unhappy that SPLM failed to force South Sudanese to the street to demonstrate against ICC like Mr Akol did. It is ridiculous that Akol cited it as one of the reasons for his shameless collaboration with NCP. Dr. Akol’s unyielding support for Al Bashir in the ICC saga shows NCP’s heinous hand behind the SPLM-DC.

3. Dr Lam, in his press conference, chided SPLM for not taking a firm position on Israeli-Palestine war in Gaza. It is the first time in history for a Southern politician to invoke Israeli-Arab conflict in Southern politics. That party policy is alien to Dr. Akol and I am sure it was forced into his throat by his NCP godfathers.

4. Leaders of this splinter party have suspicious relation with the NCP and Sudan security agents. They always hold malicious consultation, and it is even in the public domain that NCP has promised to fund the activities of the new party. One of this splinter group’s leaders revealed to Asharq Alawsat (a media source based in London) on May, 31st that their movement will be allied with NCP against the SPLM during February 2010. He said that this alliance will be declared in a later stage. Recognising this tricks all the marginalised people in general and South Sudanese in particular, must reject this destructive hand of the racist NCP.

Second, Dr Lam Akol as the head of the dissident group cannot be trusted with the heavy task of shouldering the South Sudanese struggle. As history has proved it, the struggle of South Sudanese for freedom against the racist Arab North is a hard and protracted one, and it need people who have both the will and determination to lead it. Lam Akol’s capitulation to the Islamist NIF at the testing time in our struggle in 1990s showed his inability as a leader not only to South Sudanese but also to our enemies in the North. He is too naive to face the Arab oppressors. All the peace agreements that he negotiated with NIF representative showed that he either handed over the aspiration of South Sudanese to the Arab North on a silver platter or he failed to express any objection when the agreement is being dishonoured. For instance, the so-called Frankfurt Agreement that he signed with Dr. Ali Al Hajj did not have any concession to the South by the NIF; be it secession, federal status or applicability of Sharia law. He was enticed on cheap surrender terms that never made any different to the lives of South Sudanese. Moreover, when NIF dishonoured his second peace agreement, the Fashoda Agreement, in 2000, Dr. Lam neither complained nor objected to this provocative act. He was contented with his ministerial position while the NIF army was on a killing spree in the Chollo land. He only escaped for his own life when the NIF started to restrict his movement in 2003.In short, Dr. Lam is a weak and an egoistic man who put self-interest above that of his followers. The illusive idea which suggests that he now has the courage to carry the touch of our struggle to the finish line is unfounded.

Third, Dr. Lam failed to provide honest reasons that necessitated his treacherous defection from the SPLM. Instead, he desperately tried to mislead Sudanese by camouflaging his true opportunistic motives in the lack of development in the South, corruption, insecurity, tribalism and democracy. He knows as well as all of us do that he didn’t do any different when he was in the government for 3 years before his dismissal. Record show that he even did worse, for instance he outrageously opposed the establishment of GOSS missions in friendly countries. He insisted that any bilateral relation between South Sudan and outside world would be coordinated through NCP dominated federal government. It is ridicule to human understanding that Dr Lam cited lack of democracy in the SPLM as a reason for his defection to the NCP, because it is well known that he has never been democratic. In the same manner, south Sudanese should reject any party with Lam Akol’s name tag on its chair because it is proven he never believe in democracy. In his 8 years of leading the SPLM-United, Dr Lam never held any national convention or a democratic consultation of any kind fearing that he might be challenged. It is apparent from his recent press release he is against the freedom of expression. Any leader, who calls for democracy cannot cite being criticised in the media as a reason for deserting the party. Akol is also both corrupt and a tribalist. Therefore, contrary to his claim, he is proven to be more unfit to rectify these flaws that he cited.

Of all the grievances stated by this splinter political group, none have anything to do with the true motive of forming this hoax party. The soul-searching question that should be asked is what then compelled Mr Akol and his cronies to form this new party? The following among others are some of the possible reasons that pushed Mr Akol to be a lackey to the NCP and form SPLM-DC for its (NCP) service. .

1. As mentioned earlier, NCP is the steer wheel behind this new party. Realising that they are losing ground in the South, with the ordinary southerners getting more and more suspicious of everything Arab, NCP want to use the new splinter group as a tool to coerce Southerners back into its line like it did on March 8th rally in Khartoum.

2. Dr. Lam want to use the new party as a bargain instrument to manoeuvre his way back to the SPLM ranks. Realising that he will never get any appointment or win any position within the SPLM, Dr. Lam chose confrontation and desertion to see whether he can be co-opted back into the party.

3. As mentioned earlier, Mr Akol remained passive in Khartoum after the abrogation of the Khartoum Agreement by the Islamist NIF. He either did not have a desire and determination to join his brothers in the SPLM and continue the struggle like Dr Riek Machar did or he had conceded defeat to the Jellaba. Either way, Dr Lam will remain a traitor to the Southern Sudanese cause. Moreover, his very late defection into the SPLM in October 2003 when about 50% of CPA was already signed left a lot of questions unanswered. Why did Mr Akol decided to leave the NCP only after peace was almost achieved? His collaboration with the NCP immediately after CPA added more to this confusion. Having in mind that Dr Lam Akol was also one of the last senior officers to join SPLM/A (in 1985 after the initial success of SPLA in the battles and the fall of Nimeiri) and the architect of the first defection (1991 coup), the question that lastly come to the minds is whether, Dr Lam Akol had all along been sent by the enemy to sabotage the SPLM from within. If that is true, it is one possible reason why Mr Akol has decided to desert after his objective proved a failure.

In conclusion, history has taught us throughout our struggle against the Arab North that the war of liberation is made harder to win not by the enemy but by our own blood brothers who betray our cause by either serving as destructive agents of the enemy, or by selling out the aspiration of the South Sudanese for their sinister egoistic motives. The political events surrounding Dr Lam’s desertion and the birth of the new party (SPLM-DC) are a continuation and integral part of the past betrayals. This party must therefore be rejected by all the Marginalised people in general and Southern Sudanese in particular.

The author is based in Halifax Canada. He can be reached at [email protected]