Why South Sudanese are yearning for secession in 2011
By Zechariah Manyok Biar
June 15, 2009 — As both the National Congress Party (NCP) and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) are in the final stages of tabling the Referendum Bill to the national parliament, it is becoming clear that South Sudanese are more than ready to vote for separation in 2011 if NCP policies never change within the coming two years.
South Sudanese are yearning for secession not because they are insensitive to the suffering of people in Darfur and other areas that will remain as part of Northern Sudan, incase South Sudan secedes, but because they feel that it would be better for marginalized people of Sudan to have at least one free part of Sudan where they can run to for freedom if the worse comes to worse in the North.
The SPLM controlled government is not yet perfect, but the recent political steer by Dr. Akol shows who is who between the NCP and the SPLM. As a move to silence SPLM’s complaint against the registration of Dr. Akol’s SPLM-DC party, President Bashir threatened to ban SPLM in the North if SPLM would not allow other parties to have freedom in the South. SPLM later on threatened a lawsuit against Dr. Akol’s party for using SPLM’s name.
The choice of words in both President Bashir’s and the SPLM’s threats show that President Bashir still stands for tyranny and SPLM stands for democracy. President Bashir took it upon himself to ban SPLM party with no regard to the democratic respect for the rule of law, while SPLM chose the law to determine the ownership of SPLM’s name between SPLM mainstream and Dr. Akol’s new SPLM-DC party.
NCP’s dictatorship under the disguise of democracy is still clear to Southerners who are now determined to vote for secession in 2011.
The problem with NCP and the whole government in Khartoum is that they rule the nation under thick rather than thin theories of justice.
According to political philosopher Michael Walzer in his book Thick and Thin, the thin general theory of justice is minimal and universal. Human beings anywhere in the world don’t need anybody to teach them that murder, deception, betrayal, gross cruelty, radical coercion, brutal repression, torture, oppression, and tyranny are bad. These are basic injustices that all of us agree upon. On the positive side, thin theory of justice contains human rights to life and liberty, coupled with duties of non-violation. These are values that are shared by people of diverse moral codes.
On the other hand, Walzer argues that thick theory of justice or morality is not shared with all humanity because it is completely relative to one’s cultural surroundings. For example, Sudan has 597 tribes. It is illogical for the government to think that other tribes will submit to the values of one tribe out of 597. When it comes to religion, Sudan has two major religions: Christianity and Islam. But it also has traditional religions. It does not make sense for the government to force all these different religions to comply with the values one religion, be it Christianity or Islam. Tribal cultures and religious values fall under thick values.
Now you can see where injustice lies in Sudan. NCP is not willing to give up Sharia law in the government despite the fact that Sudan is one of the most diverse countries in the world. The government in Khartoum is insensitive to the autonomous thinking of its citizens. The war in Darfur would have been solved long time ago because Darfuris are not asking for separation. They just want to be treated fairly.
If the government of Khartoum was built on thin theory of justice, it would have understood what the Darfuris are feeling. Understanding of what people want leads to the solution of a problem. But because the government in Khartoum is based on thick values that 90% of the nation will never understand, President Bashir’s government is ruling the nation through murder, deception, betrayal, gross cruelty, radical coercion, brutal repression, torture, oppression, and tyranny.
During the war between the South and the North, the government in Khartoum could not keep Prisoners of War (POWs) alive, unlike the SPLM that kept thousands of Northern POWs alive until they released them after the signing of CPA. We thought that Khartoum government had learned a lesson through the humiliation that SPLM did to it through the release of Northern POWs before the international community after the signing of CPA. But we were wrong. Khartoum is not going to release any single Darfuri rebel POWs in the future if they sign peace with the people of Darfur. Khartoum is still playing its brutal game of killing POWs. How would you share a country with people like the NCP who never change?
A government based on thin values is the best government because it respects individual community’s or individual religious’ values, but still leaves a room for debate in the government for people of different values and convictions to arrived at a shared values through interpretation that makes sense to all. That is a government that we want in Sudan.
Lack of change for Khartoum government from its current thick value-based government to a thin value-based government is a sure ticket for secession of South Sudan in 2011, and possibly for many other marginalized areas in the future.
Zechariah Manyok Biar is a graduate student at Abilene Christian University, Texas, USA and a regular contributor to NSV. He can be reached at [email protected]
Akol Liai Mager
Why South Sudanese are yearning for secession in 2011
Dear Manyok Biar,
There is different between northern Sudanese people and the minority clique that gripped onto power for 50 years. It is up to northern majority voters to vote out this minority clique along with separation agenda in 2010 National Elections, or vote them in and southerners will just endorse that by 2011.
Yes, you are 100% right southern Sudanese are yearning for secession in 2011. But the real decision makers for unity or separation are Northern Sudanese who are luckly given a first go by the CPA for separation vote.
Dear Manyok, believe me or not, southerners are far better in terms of knowing rights, awareness, courage to stand up than northerners. They [northerners] need someone to advocate for them, awake them and SPLM did a terrific advocacy work in the bush, but did not back it up in the last 4 years and therefore, northerners are now feeling that their advocate has left them.
Imagine that you are a northern citizen in Southern Blue Nile, Nuba Mts, Darfur, Eastern Sudan and the far North, what would be your feelings toward SPLM at this moment? If I were, I would feel that SPLM have a chance to accomplish the mission it has worked so hard and took it up to 70%.
These people the northerners, who are also victim of religious and familes sectarianism oppressions deserve standing by them. SPLM Chairman must well be advised to visit them; especially South Blue Nile, Nuba Mts and Darfur. There is no exuses or genuine reasons that would convince this people to be off General Salva Kiir Mayardit’s agenda.
SPLM, other parties, journalists and intellectuals must work hard to ensure that our next door neighbour is not going to be like Russia, China or Iran. However, there is no other ways of ensuring that we have a friendly neighbour other than keeping advocating for a total change in northern Sudan political hierachy before 2011.
Again, it will not be wise for New independent State in the South to be in a position like that of Georgia, Taiwan or United Arab Emirate whose their territories are occupied due to imbalance economic and military power betwwen them and their lands’ occupiers.
Our current generation is entirely responsible for any suffering that our next generation will suffer. With our hands, pens or ideas, we must minimise future disasters by utilising tools and resources that we have wisely.