Dr. Lam Akol was a hero, but …

“The only better alternative (I am not saying the best) to Kiir in governing the South and taking it safely out of the turbulences that stand on its tough journey to independence, is Dr. Lam Akol Ajawin because of the best capacities of good governance he has. It is said that when the going gets tough, it is the tough who gets going,” James Okuk. Really?

By Gatkuoth Deng, USA

June 15, 2009 – Yes, Dr. Lam Akol Ajawin was a hero! His decision to leave his lucrative job of being a university lecturer in Khartoum and joining the SPLM/A in 1986 was welcomed by the people of South Sudan. And before he joined the movement in person, Dr. Akol used to operate in secret SPLM/A cells in the federal capital – a risky dangerous task.

While in the SPLM/A, Dr. Akol in the late 1980s commanded a number military assaults on government garrisons and towns as SPLA Zonal Commander in Northern Upper Nile. He also did a very good job in his contribution to establish some of SPLM diplomatic and humanitarian institutions abroad, such as the Sudan Relief and Rehabilitation Association (SRRA).

Dr. Akol contributed to the positive change in the movement, particularly in the historic 1991 split which championed self-determination, democratic transformation and respect for human rights, among others. Was he not a hero? Yes, he was. But is he now?

My brother, James Okuk, misunderstood my points in the article I wrote entitled: “SPLM vs SPLM-DC: A pig blaming the fox for quitting,” in which I challenged some strange ideas introduced in Dr. Akol’s press release during the launch of formation of his SPLM-DC party in Khartoum.

If it were not because of emotions in defense of Dr. Lam Akol, Okuk would not have missed my points. In my article, I agreed with Dr. Akol’s press release that South Sudan under SPLM leadership in the person of Salva Kiir Mayardit, is a mess.

However, I did not agree with Dr. Akol on his strange introduction of Israeli-Palestinian attacks in Gaza strip, the ICC indictment of President el-Bashir, and Akol’s deliberate silence to reveal the evils of Basher’s NCP, his alleged financier, in relation to the mess we witness in implementing the CPA.

My argument is that if Dr. Akol revealed the evils of SPLM that resulted to failures in the South or Sudan generally, he should also have revealed the evils of NCP – the co-partner in the mess – in failing the South and Sudan.

To me, SPLM’s failures in the South also negatively impact on national issues. For example, how could the so-called New Sudan project succeed in the whole country if it fails in the South?

If the SPLM does not provide a tangible example of development, democracy and stable South, etc then how would it convince citizens in the whole country that it can change the rest of the country for better?

Citizens would not allow the ugly South Sudan experience of tribalism, weak and corrupt leadership under the SPLM of Salva Kiir to be applied in the North.

Likewise, if the NCP doesn’t implement its part in the CPA, how would the South achieve development and stability or even successfully introduce the so-called New Sudan vision which concerns the whole country?

Brother James Okuk yet surprised me in his latest article entitled, “Genius of success to lead South Sudan to prosperity,” (see Sudantribune.com, 15th June.) In this article, which I believe he did not put much of his thoughts in as a man I admired for his good thoughts, Okuk put a defense position which instead sounded naïve. Forgive my language, Mr. Okuk, incase.

Defending Lam Akol for not criticizing the NCP James Okuk wrote “Since Dr. Lam Akol focus is on how to rescue Southern South [Sudan] from corruption, lack of development and leadership crisis, it will be misplaced and useless for him to criticize the NCP who only control North and have no real power in the South (as provided by the CPA).”

Well, I almost got confused and couldn’t believe what I read from a man I expected to have gone through lessons of ‘critical thinking’ in the universities. Mr. Okuk seemed to have forgotten the contents of his boss’ Press Release. Dr. Akol’s Press Release did not confine its tone to South Sudan politics. He went as far as blaming the SPLM for lack of a political position on Israeli-Palestinian war, ICC indictment of Bashir, etc. Are these issues which were brought up in Dr. Lam Akol’s Press Release not national concerns? Are they only for the South? Is he going to run his supposedly national party one-sided?

Brother Okuk seemed to forget that when people talk of lack of development, corruption and leadership crisis in the South, there is visible hand of NCP in all these. Where do we get our 50% of oil revenue from? Is the South not depending on oil revenue by 98% of its entire budget? Who is controlling the flow of almost the whole South Sudan budget? Is the NCP remitting all the 50% shares to the South honestly and timely? Is the NCP honest in the number of barrels of oil exported or sold per day and in the calculation and division of shares thereafter?

Is the NCP free from corruption in the Sudan? Is the NCP free from leadership crisis in its midst? Dr. Lam Akol stated in his Press Release that he believes in the secular united New Sudan and self-determination for the people of South Sudan. Tell me, are these not national issues? Well, may be Okuk brushed them a side as merely for propaganda purposes.

Since Dr. Akol did his press release in Khartoum while the initial members of his party are northerners, he must have found himself in the same trap of the Jalaba’s strategic new Sudan project meant to confuse the sole aspiration of the people of South Sudan for independent South Sudan nation. As late John Garang found himself in the trap to please his northern colleagues and political mentors like former Foreign minister, Dr. Mansour Khalid, Dr. Akol’s close and Khartoum-based northern colleagues are a cause for concern. However, Dr. Akol knows very well the invalidity and implications selling such kind of outdated politics in South Sudan.

If he blames the SPLM for not conducting political rallies in the South on its political direction, Akol will soon find out why. The SPLM is shy, or rather afraid, to recommend to the people of South Sudan the Jalaba’s underground project of the so-called united New Sudan as the destiny the party has committed itself to.

But how would Lam Akol achieve either secular united new Sudan or self-determination if he could not criticize the NCP’s negative role by suppressing democratic transformation of the Sudan? If his press release was about the South alone then why did he bring up those national issues? Do people think he could achieve change at least in South Sudan during this interim period without addressing those national issues which implicate the NCP in the mess?

How would Dr. Lam Akol make development, census, elections and referendum succeed in the South or in the whole country if he could not equally make the NCP’s North to commit itself to such exercises? And if the NCP doesn’t play its expected positive role, can’t it or its leadership be criticized? Does Mr. Okuk know the reason why people are crying for Salva Kiir to utilize his position in the Presidency?

I am sorry for so many questions, but the article of Mr. Okuk has really generated such questions. Of course, the SPLM/GOSS under the leadership of Salva Kiir has failed the South. May be it would have done more of development if the NCP released all the money and the oil revenues received in the last four years reached at least ten billion or more US dollars. However, since Salva Kiir, if competent, could have done more with almost seven billion dollars his government received for the last four years, but instead stole it in coffins, etc., yes his leadership has failed us.

But Lam Akol knows very well that NCP/GONU has not released some of GOSS’ share of oil revenues. He knows very well that NCP is to blame to some extent for the population census failure. He knows that the NCP is partially responsible for insecurity which prevails in the South. Lam Akol also knows that NCP is dragging its feet on demarcation of North-South borders. NCP is delaying elections which Lam Akol hopes to compete in.

NCP is also dragging its feet on important national laws including referendum law for supposedly Lam Akol’s region that he wants to free from leadership failure, etc. If these are facts, then how did Lam Akol get the courage to spare NCP which contributes to failures of vital issues that would directly affect the future of South Sudan and unfortunately blamed them squarely on SPLM alone?

In his response to my article in which he seemed desperate after rendering Salva Kiir useless and putting him out of equation, Mr. Okuk in a euphoric and teasing analysis wrote these three paragraphs below that under-estimated the GOSS Vice President and SPLM Deputy Chairman, Dr. Riek Machar while over-exaggerating Dr. Lam Akol as the only alternative choice for leadership:

“With the announcement and launching of the SPLM-DC as a political party that will aim at better change in the South, I would have expected Mr. Gatkuoth to urgently shake Dr. Riek Machar and tell him to resign from the GoSS and SPLM leadership mess so that people can believe that he could be the savior of South Sudan if prophesy of Ngundeng becomes true and realistic,” wrote Okuk.

Well, Mr. Okuk expected the Vice President of South Sudan and Deputy Chairman of SPLM to have already resigned from the party and government mess, and to join Dr. Lam Akol in his new party in order for people to believe that he could be the savior of South Sudan if prophesy of Ngundeng, as he put it, becomes true and realistic.

The people of South Sudan would not wish Dr. Machar to resign from the party (SPLM) and government (GOSS). Dr. Machar would not also want to let down the people of South Sudan during this critical time. It would be like an experienced pilot who suddenly decides to leave the plane to a learning or reckless pilot in a stormy weather while the plane is still in the air. In this situation, the plane would definitely crash!

When you are an experienced driver and teaching someone how to drive a car, it is not you who sits in the driving seat. It is the learner who sits in the driver’s seat and you sit beside him or her to guide.

What happens if the learning driver doesn’t follow your rules? What if the learner decides to hit the brake without your instructions? The car will definitely stop. What if he continued to drive to cross a junction where roads meet despite red traffic light on your side of the road? He would cause an accident with other cars? What if he suddenly stops the car while he is supposed to move? You will definitely delay in reaching your target point?

In this kind of situation, what would the experienced driver who teaches the learner do while he is not the one in the driving seat? Would he be directly blamed for the learning driver’s reckless behavior? Would he tell the driver to stop learning or would he continue to try to convince him so that he drives the right way using the driving regulations? Or would the experienced driver just quit (resign) from teaching any one else including the bad learner who is already in the driving seat?

Had it not for the perseverance of Dr. Riek Machar in that second seat to the learning driver plus James Wani Igga in the parliament, South Sudan would have crashed years ago. The present failures of the learning driver would have been a 100% disaster instead of 60% disaster by now.

May be the car might not have already crashed because the experienced driver has been working hard to turn the steer to the straight road if he sees the car branching and heading to a tree. But in some cases the learning driver might quarrel and say leave the steer to me I know how to handle it myself! This sometimes results in the car to move in zigzagging route. This is the situation Dr. Machar, the experienced driver, is facing with General Salva Kiir, the learning driver.

Brother Okuk’s intention was to also equally blame Dr. Machar as Salva Kiir because he is the Vice President. I hope the example above will shade some light to prove that Okuk is wrong. It doesn’t mean that when the head of organization is weak or failing the people, his or her second in command is equally weak and failing the people. The boss may accept and rule over issues that will turn negative without the consent of his deputy. As for Okuk’s assertion of Ngundeng’s prophesy on future leadership, I don’t have the competence to answer it.

So, again, what Mr. Okuk should understand is not to judge the chairman and his deputy like identical twins. An example is the South African experience when President Thabo Mbeki and former Chairman of African National Congress (ANC) failed the ruling party, his deputy became immediate choice. Mbeki resigned and his deputy, Jacob Zuma, took over the party’s leadership and became the President of the Republic of South Africa.

So, it doesn’t necessarily mean that colleagues are always the same in their actions. If Mr. Okuk’s perception of corruption and blame on Dr. Riek was because of the accommodation of “idle” people in hotels in Juba by Dr. Riek as he alleged, then he has to research more on this.

It was known since 2005 as the GOSS policy to accommodate staff and guesses in hotels. If it was passed as an official policy by the government chaired by Salva Kiir Mayardit, then how would Dr. Machar be an exception? Even if he opposed the policy, but passed by the cabinet, he would just go by it. Only calling the accommodated people “idle” is a lie!

My brother, James Okuk, of Nairobi university continued by under-estimating Dr. Machar and making him look like a helpless victim when he wrote, “In my evaluation and judgment, Dr. Riek will never be a better alternative to ‘Dr’. Kiir even if he waits until the last minutes when he finds himself in-between-and-nowhere in the SPLM politics of power sharing during the coming elections even if he campaigns hard to scare Salva Kiir and make him resign and go home.”

“If he [Machar] thinks that he could be nominated to stand as the SPLM candidate for GoSS Presidency in the next year elections, then he is dreaming a fantastic dream whose end is futile because Dr. Garang’s Orphans (who were recently adopted by Kiir as his Boys) are also eying that top public job too, and they have majority power in Political Bureau that can easily oust the unwanted dreamer who they level as traitor,” the student continued.

In his argument, brother Okuk based his reasons for future unsuccessful ascending to Presidency by Dr. Riek Machar, despite being the second powerful man, on implications of tribal politics in the SPLM or South generally. He said Machar would be squeezed in between by either Garang’s orphans or Kiir’s boys, some of whom he (Kiir) recently adopted from Garang’s family.

Mr. Okuk, has hit the nail on the head! His statement would mean that even if Dr. Machar is capable of leading our nation to prosperity, tribal politics in the SPLM would not allow him to, rendering him “never be a better alternative to ‘Dr.’ Kiir” as he put it. He talked of the SPLM Political Bureau being dominated by tribal loyalists or adopted boys of certain leaders.

What Okuk has forgotten is that even if the SPLM uses tribal politics of conspiracies targeting individual leaders, Dr. Machar would be one of winners, not helpless victims. He seems not to have followed up the experience of the 2nd SPLM National Convention in Juba in 2008, and how Salva Kiir himself plus his boys and adopted ones almost lost.

I went to Juba and stayed there from May to June 2008 and witnessed the drama that unfolded! Both ways, whether it is democratic political play free from tribalism or the game of the fittest duped in tribal-based conspiracies, Machar would surface with his head high.

Ask the insiders what transpired during the Convention when it came clear that Salva Kiir and group reverted to tribal conspiracies and tactics. After he recommended Speaker James Wani Igga to replace Dr. Machar and Taban Deng Gai to replace Pagan Amum, respectively, Machar in his response told James Wani Igga that he was not in position to contest against him. He told him that he also accepted Salva Kiir’s unilateral way of re-ordering the 1983 SPLM leadership hierarchy which Garang left intact in 2005.

It is to be recalled that it was because of respect for the SPLM hierarchy since 1983, for those who still have the list, that Salva Kiir was allowed to be appointed as Dr. John Garang’s Vice President in the South after 2005 CPA’s agreement. It was also the same respect and abiding by the leadership hierarchy that after Garang died Salva Kiir was unopposed in taking over the top leadership.

When Salva Kiir decided to break the hierarchy during the Convention by inserting James Wani Igga in his rightful place, Machar instead decided to contest the chairmanship of the SPLM against Salva Kiir. After Salva Kiir’s tricks to divide the Nuer, Equatorians, Shilluk, etc failed, he decided to back down. This was after Nhial Deng Nhial also split the Dinka themselves against Salva Kiir. Equatorians got the deputy position and most of them secretly joined Machar to get rid of the incompetent Salva Kiir. The Nuer all stood behind Dr. Machar and defeated the unpopular Nuer personalities that Kiir thought would bring him the Nuer. Pagan Amum split the so-called North Sudan delegates with Yasser Arman. Kiir was advised that he would fail if he insisted to contest the leadership against Dr. Machar.

So Kiir’s tactical advisors backed down in the last minute in the name of avoiding tensions between groups that would lead to war between the tribes, particularly the Nuer and Dinka. If that was so, did they not sense the outcome of such tribal conspiracies in the first place?

Unless the citizens or supporters are convinced that tribal conspiracies are eradicated from the SPLM party’s leadership process, such moves will always face stiff resistance! But can they dare to repeat it in the upcoming elections whether by the so-called Political Bureau? If they will, then they are fools whose clique’s leadership is doomed to violent failure. They will only give chance to Machar to rise over their heads.

Oh, brother Okuk, in such a situation of tribal conspiracies that exist in the SPLM, let the readers judge for themselves how could Dr. Lam Akol replace Salva Kiir as President according to your statement which says, “The only better alternative (I am not saying the best) to Kiir in governing the South and taking it safely out of the turbulences that stand on its tough journey to independence, is Dr. Lam Akol Ajawin because of the best capacities of good governance he has. It is said that when the going gets tough, it is the tough who gets going.”

Well brother, I can quote you again, “It is said that when the going gets tough, it is the tough who gets going.” Really? I don’t even want to talk about his good governance you alleged. I read some complaints from South Sudanese on how he favorably employed people in his former Foreign Ministry in Khartoum. They will speak for themselves.

Dr. Lam Akol has been a helpless victim in the South and that is a reality. I believe that Dr. Lam Akol himself would not agree to your statements which, to contrary, tried to positively over-exaggerate his well known situation. To say it is the tough that gets going in reference to him, is just a joke! When Dr. Akol was victimized and removed from the position of Foreign Minister, did he get another job up to now? Did any one protest against his removal in the South?

Does Mr. Okuk know where Dr. Akol stayed during the SPLM Convention of 2008? It was in the house of Dr. Riek Machar. Does he know what happened when Pagan Amum was deceived and replaced with Taban Deng Gai by Salva Kiir? He joined Lam Akol in the house of Riek Machar to console him and made their little reconciliation as minority tribe when things turned ugly on tribal and clans conspiracies.

Does Mr. Okuk know why after Dr. Machar signed the Khartoum Peace Agreement in 1997, Dr. Lam also followed him and signed the Fashoda Agreement with his faction? Does Mr. Okuk know why when Dr. Machar returned to bush and merged with Dr. Garang in 2002; Dr. Lam Akol also followed Dr. Machar and returned back to bush to rejoin the SPLM/A?

But let me assure you that, unless tribal conspiracies are eradicated in the Salva Kiir’s leadership in the SPLM and GOSS, Dr. Riek Machar would never stay removed even for a minute without a heavy price to be paid by the perpetrators. The only healthy way to remove Dr. Riek Machar is through a free and fair election. If the citizens of South Sudan vote him out in a free and fair elections, then his supporters, who are currently the majority in the South without your notice, would be convinced to stay calm and accept the outcome. But if it is through tribal politics of elbowing him for tribal interests, it will never succeed! Forget it!

But in the situation of Dr. Lam Akol what did he do? What did James Okuk do in Nairobi when he was helplessly removed? He could not even protest! Even if Lam was hang by Salva Kiir, may be what Okuk would do is to sob in his class room in Nairobi helplessly. So please refrain from underestimating powerful leaders and over-estimating weak ones if it comes to tribal conspiracies.

Okuk is correct that Dr. Lam Akol was dismissed by his former boss, Dr. Machar, in Nairobi after 1991 split. But does Mr. Okuk know why Dr. Akol was dismissed? He was in opposition to Dr. Machar’s peaceful strategies. Lam Akol wanted Garang removed through military might, not negotiations, among others. That was a fact, Mr. Okuk! Ask Dr. Lam Akol himself.

Nevertheless, Dr. Lam Akol was a hero! But his present direction of alliance with NCP at this critical moment will erase from memory of people his heroic past. Dr. Machar would not do this now because he knows that his self-determination through referendum, which he worked so hard to achieve and has championed, has now overtaken the so-called united New Sudan.

Machar, like James Wani Igga and some other South Sudanese nationalists know that the SPLM is changing from dictatorship towards achieving democratic transformation, etc at least in the South. Why would Machar quit and leave his people alone in this path he championed? He is the one now negotiating the referendum law in Khartoum which will make the people of South Sudan free at last. In his Mission Statement he wrote, “With ballot or bullet, South Sudan shall be free.” So he is on the right track!

May be Dr. Lam Akol formed his party because he was simply getting bored as he was marginalized and doing nothing. But this doesn’t mean that a fox, seeing the pig failing to do the lion’s job, can then suddenly think of trying it better only to find himself in big unfitting shoes of the lion and while on the wrong side too.

As somebody wrote in his plea to Salva Kiir to step down in order to save his good history during the war and not erase it from people’s minds by his present failures, Dr. Lam Akol should be advised by his die-hard supporters like James Okuk to refrain from introducing, in the South, the dirty and unconcerned politics of Israeli-Palestinian war, etc.

He should also be told to criticize the culprit, Bashir’s NCP like he did to Salva Kiir’s SPLM, if he wants to be seen serious in implementing the CPA and saving the South from these two ruling, but failing parties in the country. And not forgetting the tribal conspiracies…

Gatkuoth Deng lives in USA. He can be reached at: [email protected]