SPLM is no longer a rebel

By Roba Gibia

June 8, 2008 – There are some few writers who tend to be apt illiterate and ignorant from some friendly countries, that have got no ethics and mores of just writings and copious knowledge about the true causes of Sudan’s conflicts in general and in particular south-north conflict, but rather are driven by sappy zeal of detestation, racial and religious discrimination, always claim to be the guardian of Sudan with hypocrite pretend that they do profoundly care about the unity and stability of the Sudan, and are constantly hanging Sudan’s predicament on the Western countries and especially their monstrous fiends, America and Israel. But if you have a close and comprehensive look at their stance, they have got upper hand in fueling Sudan’s crisis and are the very people planting seeds of sedition among the Sudanese sons and daughters by supporting one group against another on racial and religious basis. Not only that, but they do sadism when they see Sudan eternally in war with itself which saves their strategic interests.

At the wake of last May heavy fighting over the Abyei run between the old foes, Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) and Sudan Armed Forces (SAF), the SPLM Secretary General described the situation to AFP that Sudan is on the brink of civil war, and went on saying that they (Sudan Armed Forces) have committed serious ethnic cleansing, they have displaced more than 100,000 people, burning down their villages, looting all their property, not because of anything but because they were Dinka Ngok. Pagan concluded his statement by saying that the two parties are on the verge of a civil war, and the only option to avoid a civil war is to demilitarize the area and implementation of Abyei protocol.

Pagan Amum’s statement infuriated some cronies of Khartoum and people who doesn’t wish peace and stability to Sudan like one of the Egyptian writers, Hesham Abdo El-Rauf, who wrote a column under the false name, Arabi Asiel (Pure Arab) in Al Messa Arabic newspaper titled “New civil war” dated May 28, 2008 commenting on Pagan Amum statement but with absolute bigot and myopic sight.

Quote

We do absolutely agree with the statement of Pagan Amum, Secretary General for the southern Sudan rebels known by the name Sudan People’s Liberation Movement that the sisterly neighbor is on the brink of new civil war, and we do also agree with him that the reasons for this crisis between the central government in Khartoum and the rebels is on the rich Abyei area with petroleum, which resulted in the fierce fighting between the government forces and the rebels. But we do differ with him utterly about the reasons, which retains the reasons that the northern government forces is reinforcing its positions around the area which lies in the center of Sudan that belongs to Kordofan, this implies that it gives the legitimacy rights to the southern rebels to take similar measures. This is kind of distortion, because the real reason is the greediness of southern rebels in the area, this covetousness made the Westerners to put pressure on Sudan in order to categorize the area from one of the areas that has to conduct 2011 referendum about its status within the Sudanese state … despite the fact that it doesn’t belong to south, and the southern rebels of Sudan People’s Liberation Movement couldn’t wait, but tried to create reality to impose itself on ground pending when the referendum date approaches. Thus, it was naturally for Khartoum government to refuse such kind of policy and has to deal with, which resulted in severe defeat of its forces and causality that made the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement till this moment not to disclose about its actual causalities, but instead calling for the faithful implementation of the Naivasha agreement!! Unquote

The first instance that captured my attention from this Arabi Asiel’s (Pure Arab) column, is the use of plural pronoun “we”, that we do agree but we do differ. Thus, here one wonders as whether the writer is talking by the tongue of all Egyptians or government or writers or intellectuals or on behalf of Al Messa Arabic newspaper, as if it were to be his own notion, he should have used single pronoun “I” instead of plural “we”! Simply because I do not think that the Egyptian government will consent this daunting notion of meddling into Sudanese affairs, since it will weaken the Egyptian efforts and role in Sudanese affairs, and beside that it will jeopardize and damage the feeble South Sudan-Egyptian relations. Therefore, I do not think or believe that some Egyptian writers or intellectuals will agree with such an ingest and one sided writer’s view from one hand, but on the other it might be representing Al Messa Arabic newspaper writers’ view that published such iniquitous and prejudiced article under specious name.

The second situation was the persistence of the author in referring to South and the SPLM as rebels, even after more than three years of signing Naivasha peace agreement in January 2005 and formation of government of national unity and government of southern Sudan, but would have preferred if our honorable and smart writer to refer to SPLM as an ex-rebel(s). Hence, this is a clear inclination and author’s intention to mortify the SPLM led-Government of Southern Sudan by consistently referring to SPLM as rebels and to distort the just course of marginalized Sudanese struggle for liberty. But I would like to remind the author, Arabi Asiel that there are also Africa Asiel writers (Pure African), but are liberal writers and not narrow-minded like Arabi Asiel writers.

The third frequency was the verdict of the author on the controversial Abyei area without giving historical evidence to justify his judgment that Abyei belongs to Kordofan. Because both the government of Khartoum and SPLM delegation included in the Abyei committee has got no academic and research experience in gathering and analyzing historical events or legal expertise in the land rights and disputes, and that was why the ABC was formed to define the areas of nine Dinka Ngok chiefdoms. Thus, I wonder as whether the Egyptian writer, Hesham Abdo El-Rauf or Arabi Asiel has got the experience of the expertise in land rights and disputes! I would appreciate if he could come up with tangible, precise and historical evidence to justify his verdict that Abyei belongs to Kordofan. As I am afraid that Arabi Asiel is supporting Khartoum blindly on Arabism and Islam grounds, because if at all we have to talk about the cupidity, it is Khartoum which is avarice in South Sudan’s wealth, as ninety percent of the Sudan’s oil producing and exporting wells lie in SOUTH but being controlled by ravenous and Islamic government in Khartoum. Beside that I would like to inform writer, Arabi Asiel that Abyei never lies at the center of Sudan, and hypothetically if it lies at the center of Sudan, it doesn’t constitute that Abyei belongs to Kordofan or north. Thus, this is clear evidence that the author, Hesham Abdo El-Rauf or Arabi Asiel like the most of his countrymen has got petite knowledge about Sudan, and most of them believe that Darfur lies in south. And that was evidence as when one of the Egyptian AU ex-peace keeping forces who spent two years in Darfur, walked to my office, and after exchange of few words, he showed his AU-peace keeping ID to me and said that he spent two years in south Sudan. When I told him that he was in Darfur, he looked at me in discontent and said but Darfur lies in South Sudan! Hence, it isn’t surprise when Arabi Asiel wrote that Abyei lies at the center of Sudan and that it belongs to Kordofan or north, because he is an ignorant writer but being driven by sentiment of Arabism and imperialistic ideology.

The forth instance was the Arabi Asiel’s claim that because of the Southern rebels greediness, it made the western countries to mount pressure on Sudan in order to categorize Abyei from one of the areas that has to conduct 2011 referendum about its status. This is ludicrous and it is yet another absolute proof that our arrogant writer has got no idea about the root causes of south-north conflict. Here, I would like to inform Arabi Asiel that it was stipulated in Addis Ababa agreement that “areas that were culturally and geographically a part of the Southern complex” could decide by referendum as whether they wanted to join Southern Region (Organic Law to Organize Regional Self-Government in the Southern Provinces of the Democratic Republic of the Sudan, 1972). In addition, Arabi Asiel has to know why there is separate Abyei protocol, and what are the circumstances which made the two parties, SPLM and NCP to adopt and agree on Abyei protocol? Abyei is one of the reasons which led to the outbreak of civil war between south and north in 1983, and as we talk today if Abyei issue is not resolved amicably as agreed by the two sides, Abyei will remain a key civil war recommencement cause between south and north. Thus, we have to ask ourselves, is it the SPLM who couldn’t wait, but tried to create reality to impose itself on ground pending when the referendum date approaches or it is Khartoum? Therefore, writer, Hesham Abdo El-Rauf (Arabi Asiel) has to understand that the two parties agreed during the negotiations of 2002 (Machakos protocols), not only to address the grievances of Abyei people but Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile peoples’ too. Thus, we have to understand that implementation of Abyei protocol is for the best interest of Sudanese people and to ensure and protect the rights of the Sudanese peoples on both sides of the border to unite and maintain peaceful coexistence of the Sudanese peoples.

Roba Gibia, is a Sudan Tribune journalist. He is also the author of John Garang and the Vision of NEW SUDAN . He can be reached at [email protected]