Southern Sudan insecurity
By Amos C. Ngueny
September 23, 2009 — The Southern Sudanese, particularly the innocent village civilians, are in a state of ambiguity over the increased insecurity situation in the region, so far worse than over the war period. This has left them contemplating on how possible, and under whose leadership, a tangible peace could be realized on ground in the South and presumably the whole Sudan. The worry by many Southerners is that, they will be the ones to derail their own self-determination referendum militarily.
The intentions behind most of these insecurity situations, so much prevalent in Jonglei state, have been disputed, with some articulating that the latest incident at Duk Padiet is already a rebellion in the making, while the government maintains that they are unknown gunmen. For ease and sincerity, Kuol Manayang Juuk, the state governor demanded the three counties of Uror, Nyirol and Akobo West to disclose those behind the plot, and on the other hand, civil society groups and peace observers have noted with grieve that, these are more organized and advanced invasions against the victim communities than at the level of tribes.
This on going situation, especially when the country tows towards general elections, will also entrench itself in making some permanent stains on Riek Machar, the current Vice President of the Government of Southern Sudan and a lobbying aspirant within the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement for presidency of the government in which he is currently the vice president. This is so, especially when Riek as known was a partner to Lam AKol, now the top-most leader for the splinter Sudan People’s Liberation Movement- Democratic Change (SPLM-DC), in brewing the 1991 split that pitted many Southerners. Some state natives perceive it as a new dawn of the gone split, and their faith in Machar is lost once again as detailed herein.
Of course, Riek can not be singled out among others with whom he could be graded, but, having condemned at the bottom of his heart the retaliatory attacks of Murle on Akobo recently in which about 160 people died, Machar’s silence on what is seen as an organized uprising rebel group sends out bad implications. If he could say all that people need on retaliatory attacks, he equally deserves all that triggered him to say the better, not only condemnation, about what is against his incumbent government. People are despaired on what Lou-Nuer,who one time were used by Machar to fight for power, want in their attacks and they then look back at the silent Machar.
In most of these rounds of armed fights against civilians, the Government of Southern Sudan hints that, these are connivations by the National Congress party to undermine peace and governance in Southern Sudan and translate it in to a region that can not rule itself. Now that Machar himself declared in close door meetings his need for candidacy even when Kiir, his party chairman has reservations in contesting for national presidency, this theory treats him badly. The public in this matter is ostensibly believing that, Machar is grapping these chances to bring in failures in the name of his senior, not knowing that, if anything, both are makers of these failures since they are the presidents and chairpersons of the same ruling SPLM.
It is wise enough to transparently and impartially give reliable positions in shaping the future of Southern Sudan. Therefore, Machar deserves support for his promise to investigate facts behind the retaliatory attacks of Pibor on Akobo. But, it seems, he wants to condone these acts when done by his people against others, otherwise, the Murle, though a turbulent minority and most often part of the northern-sponsored militia in the South, does not deserve such sanctions from the vice president if he could not condemn what they retaliated for; they could think they were targetted while known by Machar despite their guilt of first attacking.
In the other parts of Southern Sudan, Machar has ever been noted of condoning criminals. We all see that, the Greater Equatoria suffered – and continues to suffer – the insanity of the Ugandan Lord’s Resistance Army rebels. It has been prospected that, the rebels have been getting support from the Khartoum government in the times of war, and that when peace was signed, its atrocities could come to an end. Unfortunately, Equatoria region felt betrayed and not cared for when Machar, after LRA attacks in Nabanga and when Ugandan People’s Defense Forces deterred gun traffickers in Kapoeta last year, said the UPDF should be expelled from Southern Sudan and LRA should be given temporary refuge. Who does Machar think bears no nerves to transmit pain and agony as a person? Are the people of Equatoria his sacrifices to lift up Joseph Konyi in a bid to retrieve relations of their Lafon talks?
However, what took the public by surprise was when he met Tanginnye, a major general in the Sudan Armed Forces, and released him with contradictory statements. Gabriel Tanginye is wanted by the Government of Southern Sudan for inciting violent clashes in Upper Nile, in which over 150 people died in 2006. When he returned to the area amidst cautions that, he should not visit the area for being part and parcel of instability, Tang’s coming led to another outbreak of heavy clashes between the Joint Integrated Units allied to the SAF and those allied to the SPLA February this year. Machar went to purportedly calm the situation at a time when the president of Sudan, Omar Bashir was in Juba, and he succeeded.
Machar made some brief talks with Tang and convinced him to live Malakal so that peace prevails, but later, he said the arrest of Tang was a “complicated matter”, simply because he is a general in SAF and can only be handed over by the commander-in-Chief of SAF to the GoSS if need there be. The wonder here is whether he is not part of the GoSS that wanted Tang or does it make sense for the vice-President to slay his government designed policy after first giving an approval? These cracks from the top reflect the suffering of the innocent civilians in Southern Sudan!
The SPLM as a ruling party in the South is being criticized on many issues; some of which are true realities of our contemporaneous coordinate while others are slangs maneuvered to slander its competitive advantage. But a lot of people share with it the faith of liberation to The Promised Land; that we shall see either an independent South or a Democratic Secular Sudan of Justice and Equality for all, although the gravity of secession is high. The easiest Machar could do is to shy down from the on going power debate so as to adequately consolidate his position and clear off his brand of wrangle in power even with the late leader. It will so much be ugly to again see him gearing now with Garang’s deputy when he one time fall out with Garang, and he would wrongly be taken as moving to get power. By doing so, he will restore public trust at this critical moment and shall be the one to bring back the skewed image of his party after the referendum.
The victims of such organized invasions from LRA and the so-called militia, especially Equatoria and Jonglei in particular, must look back to enable them determine their present and the future. They have to look at the peace they quest for at their expenses and also imagine who among their children shall one day see that peace. Will they not be finished by the LRA and Nuer militia before that peace! I know they could be the bases of the SPLM and the GoSS that, if they look else where further, that will be the day of failure of Kiir’s government. But Kiir need to address this rebellion in the making if he wants them to retain faith.
The writter is a researcher of Biochemistry and Human Psychology at Kenyatta University, Nairobi. he can be reached at [email protected]
thieleling
Southern Sudan insecurity
Nyueny,
Your thinking shows why the Dinkas are the weakest, but not the least interesting, of all the tribes in south sudan.
Dr. Riek, your focus will give south sudanese the greatest freedom; which both Garang and Kiir failed to do.
It is obvious your rhetoric is to keep your place, the current leadership position in south sudan. But this is even beyond psychology or social conventions to keep South sudanese in mild form of torture en masse under Garang or Kiir dictatorshp. But don’t forget south sudanese are free; the Nuers are even freer.
Deng Wel Deng
CAN THE INDEPENDENT OF SOUTH SUDAN BE ACHEIVE?
CAN THE INDEPENDENT OF SOUTH SUDAN BE ACHEIVE?
BY DENG WEL DENG
I am very equivocal about this topic which I think is the “moral obligation and fundamental right” of every single southern Sudanese to pursue. This question can be answered in the following three ways; firstly, the juba incumbent optimists, who their minds are not invested with tribal ideologies, will answer “Yes” to the about question and will pursue it to the finishing line. Secondly, the incumbent pessimists, will answer “No” to the about topic ,and will continue to loot as much as possible, anything that may come to their disposal, not minding the innocent nationals who may be in need of national services, and who are also the future defend force for this country. Finally ,hesitant and the unsure will neither answer this question and will continue to loot so long as they are in those offices in juba and will flew the scene if the future of the about south Sudan later turnout to the doomed.
Ladies and gentlemen, as you know Sudan has been in warriors with itself and the external neighbours from the 1885-date. starting from the ANGLO/EYGTIAN war which was weigh against these rulers British and Egypt by both the Mahadis Kingdom and Nubian Kingdom and of course any other warriors that I fall short to mention before that. The mahadis then took control of Sudan and weigh slave trade against the Nubian kingdom. This slave trade after amahadis conquering northern part was extended to southern Sudan but was not effective and culminated into killings of local chiefs in 1968.
The above topic has been an issue of concern to the political syndicates, and has led to formation of too many political parties in Sudan, One being the Sudan people liberation movement (SPLM/A).the Late DR JOHN GARANG was the founder in 1983.this intelligent person was able to look beyond the boundaries of southern Sudan having the followings in mind:- new united Sudan that respects democratic and justice rights of it citizens; to be the voice of voiceless and defend defendless marginalised people throughout sudan;to isolates the policies of islamisation and arabanisation to the non Arabs who formed the ninety percent of the Sudan population and of course the dishonouring of the Addis Ababa agreement which Arabs later failed to implement by saying that “it is not naturally made or Quran” to be respected.
These political objectives by DR GARANG met a lot of criticism from people who cannot see the possible united Sudan .and had attracted enemies and friendenemies.Let me put this very clearly to those who always feel agitated, when an issue concerning new united Sudan is touch, by leaders like Silva kiir and few others that Dr garang was not against south independent. What he does mean is this in dinka saying “if you want ribs of an animal, you have to ask for thigh of an animal to be given ribs.”For those who may not understand this saying there is also a conversant saying in English that “you have to aim at stars to land on the moon.”Also in athletic game of high jump, you don’t have to put the robe below your knees and jump over it and claim to have won. You have to put the robe above your shoulders and jump over it to challenge your strength.
The first enemy that hijacked these political objectives was the government of late JAFAR NUMIERI. And I quote his then saying that “defection of Dr Garang is worse than death of one thousand soldiers”. As you know Arabs are imperialists who their policy is divide to rule Sudan forever. NUMEIRI had to take the following measures to avert the success of SPLA/M; issuing small arms to southern Sudanese who thing the objectives of SPLM/A are ambiguous; lured back people from SPLM/A with money and weighing massive war against the SPLM/A but all in vain. SPLM/A became popular and NUMEIRI was ousted by the interim government of SURADAF in 1985 which was later taken over by SADIQ AL MAHADI in 1986 through election. ALMAHADI invited Dr Garang for talk which he also put pre condition that he have to come by himself to the talk in Addis Ababa and I quote his then reaction saying that “you ALMAHADI, issues of nation are not suppose to be discussed under dark shadows of other countries, instead they should have to be discussed on the bright day ligh”.which was later reveals that Almahadi came with money from Khartoum to lured Garang back and leave his political objectives for the sack of economics benefits like the way they did to other southern Sudanese.Almahadi before he was ousted by coup in 1989 by the government of this beleaguered president of Sudan Omar basher called a meeting to consider the grievances of the SPLM/A before the Abuja talk in Nigeria as second attempt where William Nyoun as a head of delegation was lured back to Khartoum with few dollars. But, the outcome were as follows: current president instead asked almahadi to relinquish powers if he is tired of war ; he was also warn that Arabs will never be ruled by non Muslims and that Arabs will never negotiate with slaves unless they will be left defendless for them to give powers. The question that remain to be ask after these barbaric acted by Arabs are these, are Arabs ready to be rule by non Muslims in Sudan ?.Are the ready to leave southern Sudan to secede? Not at all and I quote the statement from the NCP deputy justice minister that “they will never allow southern Sudan to secede through constitutional rights”.
The other group that resisted these objectives was the Anyany two who failed to join the government of Mr Abel Alier after the Addis Ababa agreement. The points of disagreement were that they wanted to lead the movement and also wanted to fight for the independent south Sudan .after having disagreed with SPLM/A movement in BILPAM they relocated back to nuer land and setup their camps. They were led by SAMUEL GAI TUT, AKOUT ATEM AND PUALINO MATIP who later were used by the Khartoum government to massacred the people who were going to BILPAM to join the SPLM/A. The question that remain to be ask is this, did they achieved the about subject? No at all, instead some of them end up dying in the war fields wanting to kill their fellow southern Sudanese and pualino matip was influence by Khartoum to defend his own south Sudan oil from SPLM/A by forming bogus party call SOUTH SUDAN DEFEND FORCE (SSDF).
The big antagonism that existed today among the communities in southern southern, was created by some individuals who at point of victory to achieved the about subject, stabbed the movement at the back. This group was led by the current deputy chairman of SPLM/A Dr RIAK MACHAR and other defected fox DR LAM AKOL who massacred DINKA BOR in 1991.This group claimed to be dissatisfied with the SPLM/A objectives of NEW SUDAN. But that was not the motive behind the defection; instead they were entangling between Khartoum influences and incitation by west for them to over thrown DR GARANG. The proposition being that Garang was a communists and ally to Russian. After having seen SPLM/A as party of liberation struggle without economics benefits they had to concede to these influences and commit this awful attack to fulfil their slogan of “filling the stomach to the brim without minding the food taste”.This two orchestrated this evil act and left for Khartoum after the met a lot of criticism from the west. In Khartoum they had formed a party call SOUTH SUDAN INDEPENDENT MOVEMENT (SSIM) with DR RIAK as a leader. This political party took initiatives in 1997 to negotiate with the BASHER government .And in process the fox Lam Akol disagreed with Riak and defected again.Dr Riak did succeed in some few areas of negotiation but failed to implement the agreement because he was powerless in Khartoum and defected back again to the SPLM/A in 2001.Did DR RIAK achieved the about objective?. No, definitely not at all. Please Dr Riak; I had quote your words in the crisis meeting of 2004 that we must remain “united” for the enemy not to exploit the then misunderstanding between GARANG and SILVA. “One would wonder why you are so silent in this tribal fighting”. Done you know that every time you say something your community will listen or is it that your tribal cognitive domain is switch on to block the national one.
Few people who are tribal minded may thing I am prevaricating but this are real facts that needed to be told and for that matter these public figures should be left to criticism for them to deliver right services to our people regardless whether they come from your tribe or not.
If RIAK had received criticism because he had implemented wrong policies, than one will wonder why some Nuer elites would applause this barbaric attacked by the criminals on the innocent souls. Done you even know it is condemn in the bible. And every time you kill innocent souls than you are murderer. “Some people went as far as calling these bandits, “mighty nuer warriors” please Mr Gatkouth Deng, I quoted these words from you and can you justify why you give this criminals name “mighty.”?Let me put this scenario to you Mr Deng, what will nuer warriors achieved after having massacred all other southern tribes?No community in this contemporary globe will leave its vulnerable people to be massacred in front of their eyes .so take notice!!! Dinkas are not coward it is because they are mindful of the about subject. Please every time you put this irresponsible praises on the web, done you know that you are damaging the credibility of your community and of course great leaders like JAMES HOTH MAI,JOHN LUK JOK ,TABAN DENG GAI and so on.
The other party that hijacked the political objectives of Dr Garang was the EQUATORIAL DEFEND FORCE (EDF) led by Dr Theophilos Ochang Lotti. He wants southern Sudan to be turn into warlord field like Somalia. What a pathetic and ambiguous idea from the Dr who is highly educated to formed a party that will liberate a part of southern Sudan and claimed now to be advisor to the president of southern sudan.This reminded me that he was exactly following the foot step of Joseph lago, when he was lured back to Khartoum with few dollars and woman to a abandon his political objectives for economics benefits, to destroy the regional government of Mr Abel Allier Kuai.
The other political party that was recently formed is SPLM/DC that is now led by fox LAM AKOL. This party was formed to hijack the political legacy of Dr Garang, which is now being implemented by the president of south Sudan. I would advise my fellow colleagues from Shilluk not to lost even single soul in support of this delirious person. This person will go to his grave with a damaged reputation that will haunt his kinship forever. The problems of lam akol are clearly identified as followed: he has no respect for authority, that is why he had disagreed with DR GARANG and went and disagreed with DR RIAK in Khartoum; he is man who put his economics objectives in front of national political objectives and so long as his economics objectives overrides his political objectives than he has to shift and of course he is not true patriotic to die like DR GARANG for the sake of southern Sudanese.”What he does, is just a hot air and a white smoke” by Australia Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.
Please after hinted you on the above issues, I will summarised in short that we as southern Sudanese may have our differences and interests but our own objective is one. This is independent south Sudan we have to be very vigilant and gear up to achieved it whether through political, economic, social or through a barrel of gun then we have to do it all of us. Also let me put a challenge to all of you that we have to nurture and take care of DR JOHN GARANG legacy after the failed attempt by the other southern Sudan leaders. Therefore, our struggle must continue.
They writer Deng Wel Deng is student from Edith Cowan university Australia. He can be reach:[email protected].