How GoSS can easily rally Southerners for self-determination

By Zechariah Manyok Biar

October 30, 2009 — I wrote an article few days ago, entitled, “Hard choices by SPLM.” I then received some e-mails from some people who say that I am politically naïve. Others say that I should keep in church and leave politics alone. This comment is interesting because nobody asked me to keep in church during the war even when I decided to take a machine gun at the age of 18 for the liberation of the country that we are now discussing its future. Am I really against SPLM? It depends on the beholder, and that cannot bother me.

I think that the issues that we are now discussing are critical issues that need careful approaches. It is always wise in a political situation like ours for a flag bearer like SPLM not to be on the wrong side of political debate, lest it loses its support from the international community. The world of today is a global village in which political success depends on the international community.

Luk Kuth Dak in his recent article mentioned that “some of the South’s loyal friends in some Western countries are beginning to question whether or not the Southern Sudanese would, in fact, live up to the task of governing an independent state on their soil” (Sudan Tribune, October 29, 2009). Some people may think that Luk did not know what he was talking about, but he is hearing what he is saying.

We must remember that what does not make sense in a political debate is what the international community stands against if it leads to a problem like the resumption of war between former warring parties such as NCP and SPLM who partner in a fragile peace. It did not make any sense when NCP demanded a quorum of 75% and 90% respectively for South Sudan to get its independent from the North. I wrote against NCP’s position. All the readers of my articles know that.

Now NCP has put SPLM on the wrong side of the argument by calling the 66% a “two thirds quorum.” Note that language is important in political negotiations. Would anybody argue that a two thirds demand is unrealistic without bumping on many political situations in which two thirds majority is used as a norm for quorums? Do we even have a constitutional support against a language of two thirds quorum?

Under the quorum of Assembly in “The Interim Constitution of Southern Sudan, 2005,” for example, Article 74. (1) puts it this way: “The quorum for ordinary sittings of the Assembly shall be more than half of the members; the internal regulations may provide for a reduced quorum that may not apply for the final presentation of bills.” More than half may not mean 66%, but any mathematician will not call more than half a “50+1” simple majority in a political debate. The only way that SPLM would fight to death is if anybody fixes the percentage of vote results beyond 50+1, which would be the reason why NCP did not stand its ground on that side of argument.

The language of two thirds quorum leaves the South with the only claims of difficult conditions that Southerners are in now that will in the future prevent them from turning up to vote? But would we hold that position until we resume civil war without being on the wrong side in the eyes of the international community? Would we also say that we cannot rally a population of less than 20 million people even if the conditions they are in are difficult? Does that not imply that we are unable to do simple things? Don’t you see Luk’s point?

Let me turn to what I think is the solution for securing the turn-up of 66% during the three days period of voting for referendum in 2011.

Let me say that the world of today is a world of technology. It was this technology that helped Barack Obama and his supporters to rally Americans behind him to become the first ever African American president in the history of the United States. I know some people would say that South Sudan is not the United States. I know that. But if we were able to rally South Sudanese and the Nuba Mountains people behind the SPLM/A to fight the government of Sudan during the North-South war without any salary, then why is it so difficult today to let Southerners turn up to vote for their self-determination?

What Obama and his supporters used during the campaign were e-mails and websites, which many South Sudanese in the Diaspora have access to. During the registration, the Government of South Sudan can ask South Sudanese wherever they are to select their group leaders that will not even need any money for keeping voters informed. The slogan would be that we need 90 percent turn-up of all the registered Southerners on the referendum day, and anybody who would let that not happen will be known as the person who let South Sudanese down.

These group leaders can be the contact points of the people under their responsibility. For example, a leader of a small group can have thirty registered voters under his or her responsibility. He or she will have all the e-mail addresses and phone numbers of all his or her thirty group members. Any interruption of communication must be detected within a day.

Group leaders would be under the leadership of the leader of larger group and on to the office of the president where one person will monitor all the groups. On the month before the voting day, all the members of all groups will communicate daily through e-mails and telephones so that they can detect any threat. On the voting day, all group leaders must ensure that their group members have turned up to vote. Anything that prevents them from turning up would be reported to the main office in South Sudan with accurate evidence that would convince the international community when GoSS decides to boycott the second turn-up and declares unilateral independence or simply rejects the results. Don’t you see how you can make yourself stay on the right side of political argument?

One may say that the strategies that I have given above would only work for those who know how to read and write, but would not work for the 90% of Southerners who do not know how to read and write.

That is a good argument. But I do speak to my mother on the phone every time, and she does not know how to read and write even in Dinka language. That means those who do not read and write, but they have telephones would use the technology the same way they use it now.

As for those who live deep inside villages in South Sudan where there is no network, I have a solution for their turn-up, too. All of us who fought during the North-South war know that we did not have internet, but we still used technology. That technology is radio that does not need internet or network. All chiefs to the level of clans should be given Motorola short ranged radios that they can use to communicate with the paramount chiefs, who will be near long range radios to communicate with GoSS offices in their areas. These clan chiefs would tell their people that they would be fined by GoSS if they do not turn up to vote for self-determination. Chiefs know more about politics, too. They can tell their people what choice would be good for South Sudan.

Can’t you see that we can easily rally 90 percent of registered voters to turn up on the day of referendum, instead of fearing the unknown? The remaining ten percent might be those who got seriously sick a day before the voting day, or those who got involved in accident in town. Within the 10%, some people may decide to sabotage the rights of Southerners, but they cannot reduce the percent needed to make the referendum results valid.

Those who think that they have great ideas are welcomed to give us the strategies on how to bring NCP officials down on their knees to ignore pressure from their people, who say that 90% should be their position, and accept simple majority in both quorum and referendum results. Or don’t you think that NCP officials also fear the opinions of their supporters?

Zechariah Manyok Biar is a graduate student at Abilene Christian University, Texas, USA. He is pursuing a Master of Arts in Christian Ministry and a Master of Science in Social Work, specializing in Administration and Planning. For comments, contact him at email: [email protected]