The case for South Sudan independence
By Steve Paterno
August 8, 2010 — The differences between South and North Sudan are as clear as the sun in the summer skies. These differences are the source of bitter relationship and often the cause of endless conflicts. The Comprehensive Peace Agreements (CPA), signed in 2005, between Khartoum and southern based, SPLM, attempts to resolve some of these major differences, particularly the issue of religion, power, and wealth—the issues, which are being utilized to the disadvantages of South Sudanese people for decades.
Traditionally, the South Sudanese are predominantly a mixture of those who adhere to African belief system as well as professing Christian faith, whereas the Northern Sudanese are of Arab orientation, with strong following of Islam. For years, the state apparatus from Khartoum employ both Arabism and Islamism as a means of discrimination against the South Sudanese. This devastating policy is one of the root causes of the conflicts. During the negotiation of the CPA, the issue of religion, became stumbling block, almost torpedoing the entire process of the peace talks. The agreement was only saved when a compromise was reached to allow South Sudan to operate as Sharia free zone, while the North to strictly stick into Islamic rules, a clear testimony to the fact that the South and North are completely different entities, separated by religious zealotry. Even Khartoum, a capital city which is supposed to be shared by all Sudanese of diverse religious beliefs, remains to be a place where Sharia rules are imposed on everyone.
Historically, Sudan has gone through many brutal powers, from Ottoman imperial greed, to British colonial rule, and to Arab-Islamic dictatorship. Throughout all these, the South Sudanese are the ones who are suffering the most, since they have no connections with any of the competing powers. However, the CPA tries to realign the power equation, in order for South Sudanese to at least have a say into their own affairs. In that, the South Sudanese are granted autonomy to run South Sudan region under the watch of Khartoum government in the North. The arrangement, though symbolic in a real sense, it leaves powers completely intact under Khartoum’s control. So, the only power left for South Sudanese now is to vote in the upcoming referendum, which is scheduled in January of 2011, where they can decide to vote for a complete independence so that they have a full control of their affairs.
Economically, Sudan is considered a potentially wealthy place. Most of the potential wealth of Sudan are located in South Sudan. Unfortunately, only the few are enjoying these riches, while the majority, especially, South Sudanese are languishing in abject poverty. The best the Northern government in Khartoum can agree on equitable distributions of wealth is that the wealth originated in the South must be divided into half, between South and North, meanwhile the wealth produced in North stays in Khartoum. With the looming referendum vote, South Sudanese are better positioned, with a great opportunity to opt for independence so that they have full share of their wealth.
The case for South Sudan independence is indeed very compelling. That is the reason why every indication is pointing to the fact that South Sudan is going to overwhelmingly vote for independence. The last desperate efforts by Khartoum in trying to woo South Sudan to remain under a united Sudan is hardly finding real audience in South Sudan. The South Sudan self-determination is actually predetermined. The only fear is that Khartoum is going to resort into violence to disrupt the South Sudan march into independence. Perpetuation of violence, however, will not deter the South Sudanese strong desire for independence. After all, South Sudanese people have lived all their livelihood through violence imposed on them, and no new violence will change them. Instead, any attempt of violence, will harden the resolve of South Sudanese.
Steve Paterno is the author of The Rev. Fr. Saturnino Lohure, A Romain Catholic Priest Turned Rebel. He can be reached at [email protected]
David Glenn
The case for South Sudan independence
Dear Mr.Paterno
I remember at one time in Naivasha,Kenya,the late Dr.John Garang,known for his sense of humor,was addressing and meeting and about wealthsharing,he jokingly said,( we argue about wealth sharing,while our people are asking where is this wealth that that they want to share-weino tharwa bigasmou damas he said in Arabic).
This to remind you that the issue of wealth you are talking about is a very recent phenomenon,that of oil,but when did the oil industry in the sudan start?Amd what is the share of the Sudan as a whole in this oil,after the foreign investments that helped explore,drill.produce and market,take their share,the Sudan alone did not have the capacity for major extraction industry,however,before that,who was financing the budgets of the South,the civil service,the police,the schools,hospitals,etc..who was financing all the services in the South,little as they might have been?From the elemntary school to the university,education was free for all Sudanese.Following the 1972 Addis Ababa agreement,all the services in the South were and remain to this ady the responsibilty of the Regional Government of South Sudan,the whole budget of the Regional Government came from the Central Government in Khartoum,and it is wrong to call it the Government of the North Sudan,for and until the day we are an independent state,we are part of the Sudan,and the Government of South Sudan,remains a regional government,and it is also not true that the GOSS is doing so under the watch of Khartoum,the GOSS has vast powers,including foreign representation,foreign trade deals and others.
You are also wrong to say that the North did not suffer under the Ottoman Turkish Rule,we were all colonized,by the Turks,the British and the Egyptians,and the South was not the only marginalized region in Sudan,in fact the South might have been better off than the East,and this why,the SPLM/A found favour with all the marginalized of the Sudan,though now,it is turning it’s back to them all.
In the North too,there Christians,and Moslems and traditional African Faiths,as in the Nuba Mountains,and incidentally you do mention the Moslems in the South,who are southerners,nor do you mention those Christians,who are working for the secession of the South,in furtherance of their own religious agenda against Islam,and i dont want the South to be used by any one,Moslem or Christian,for any agenda,other than the good of the people of the South.
While we are going towards the referandum,the referandum is not a declaration of enemity with the North,nor does it mean that we should forget what we share with the North,even the Arabic Language,you say is used to discriminate against the Southerner,which is not true,is the only language that unites the people of the South as can be seen in Juba,Malakal and other places.
It is elitists like you,who can speak English,but what about the majority of our poeple who do not know English?
The idea that any one may instigate violence to undermine the referandum,is a fig of your imagination,nay it is part of a propaganda campaign,a misguided campaign to further divide the North and the South,and you as a mature seasoned intellectual,should not be the one to trumpet it,you know very well that the referandum is a right enshrined in the constitution of the country.
But and as much as some are campaigning for secession,others have the right to campaign for unity,this is democracy and the people will decide,come January,so save yourself the hatred and bigotry,our pirpose is not to vote to simply denounce the past,our purpose is to vote for a better future.
Best regards.
Dinka Boy
The case for South Sudan independence
David Glenn ,
First of all, we need to congratulate the outstanding article written by Steve paterno. He explained the issues that had caused the war in the Sudan. He was right because the Khartoum government has been rulling the country for decades while they have been turning their eyes away from the South and the other marginalized African tribes in the Sudan?.
My friend, this referendum that guarrenteed seperation or unity is far from compromised, you have to know it very well because the North and the South lives for decades bitterly.Where are Universities , Hospitals, clinics, roads, railroads, democracy, revenues( oil share),and many others before the war broke out in the country?
In fact, i do not want to repeat myself over and over again while everything has been said by Peterno in his article, it’s upto you to digest or not.
How come you compared the suffering of South and North during the Bristish rules?.Where is development in the South?
Iam very mad with you my friend because you are talking and wishing for the impossibilities because we South Sudansese will never and wish to go back to square one because we are fad up,and we are ready to response very seriously to your aggression. If you are Arab who want unity with the South,then you have to shut up and follow your own way because we have no similarities with you Arab. You are extremist who are full of selfisness and blindfolded by Islamic laws that we can not tolerated. We fought the war for 21 years, the do you think the war of vote or bullet will not make you awake this time?
Please wake up and stay away from the South issues because you are intruder and we are waiting you in the battle field after you play around with referendum.Thanks
Al Noor
The case for South Sudan independence
David Glenn, the point behind Dr. John Garang’s joking remark about the notion of wealth-sharing is transparency. For to divide or share something equitably, any two parties must know the value of the wealth to be shared between them. Ever since Sudan’s independence, successive regimes in Khartoum have irregularly doled out financial resources to South Sudan administrations as though these were gifts of charity, for which the people of Southern Sudan should be grateful. In all instances throughout the post-independence history of the various administrations of Southern Sudan, the governments in Khartoum have used the national financial resources to mold, make or break South Sudan’s public institutions in order to serve the interests of the ruling Arab-oriented minority in Khartoum. The use of the national wealth to divide and rule the people of South Sudan was common policy pursued by all governments in Khartoum.
If the people of Southern Sudan are equal citizens of Sudan, then they have a right to the same level of economic and social development that the folks in the riverine regions have from the national coffers. Even if the notion of wealth-sharing is new, as you have incorrectly suggested (and it is not) the National Congress Party government in Khartoum has not been forthright about how much the nation gets from the oil, and how much the government of Southern Sudan is entitled to have. Yes, the folks in Khartoum say the government of Southern Sudan gets 50% of the oil revenues (only oil from southern Sudan is shared), but 50% of what?
David Glenn cheers the governments in Khartoum for financing and setting up educational institutions in South Sudan. Did you know that the University of Juba was actually set up and financed by the European Economic Commission (EEC), to some extent as part of developing the region after the 17 year-old civil war? Did you know that when Southern Sudanese went to Khartoum during the recent war, nearly all the basic education and secondary schools for these displaced southern Sudanese students were financed and run by international aid agencies and not by the central government in Khartoum? Have you visited the universities of Juba, Upper Nile and Bahr al-Ghazal in Khartoum and compared these with the quality of infrastructure of universities in the north? If the governments in Khartoum truly financed all aspects of education in Southern Sudan, as you romantically suggest, they would have helped move the three “national” universities back to their premises in South Sudan:premises which at some point were military bases for the jihad-fighting Popular Defense militia forces.
If you, David Glenn, want to campaign for the existence in the old Sudan, where the discriminatory Sharia is the law of the land, to remain a “special-status-holding” second-class citizen, you are free to do so. But please the people of Southern Sudan don’t need crocodile tears or sheep in wolf skin. The reason why the CPA, DPA and other agreements with the Arab-dominated regimes in Khartoum contain clauses and articles on wealth-sharing provisions is precisely because there is acknowledgement (albeit a token acknowledgement by the center) that these areas of Sudan have stayed on the periphery of national economic and social development since independence.
Arabic that is wildly used in Southern Sudan, Darfur and Southern Kordofan is markedly different from the Arabic language used by the Arab-oriented folks from the riverine regions of Sudan. You, David Glenn, might have forgotten the bit of Sudan’s history which laid out how Southern Sudan’s education system was run by English-speaking missionaries long before Sudan’s independence. Arabic and Islam were forcibly introduced to Southern Sudan by the post-independence regimes in Khartoum as an attempt to “pacify” the people of Southern Sudan, whose disenfranchisement with the system in Khartoum began as early as 1955. If you care to know, the policies of arabicization and islamization were aggressively carried out in South Sudan by the regimes of Ibrahim Abboud, Sadig al-Mahdi, Jaafar Nimeiry, Abd al-Rahman Siwar al-Dahab and later the National Congress Party and its offshoots in different periods.
Forcing the people of South Sudan to integrate to the Arab-oriented Islamic-based culture is one factor that will tear Sudan to pieces. Judging from the way various members of the elite in Khartoum have responded to calls by Southern Sudanese and others for a Sudan where there is no “special status” for minority religions, races or cultures, it is clear that Sudan is fast going to break up, and the northern elite do not seem to care that much, as long as they hold the reigns of power. May be they will wake up when they finally realize that the people of South Sudan will soon (and very soon) decide to break away from the vampire that continues to suck the blood out of the people of Darfur with such intensity.