A lesson South Sudan armed groups from Libyan crisis

By Zechariah Manyok Biar

March 21, 2011 — Citizens in Africa and in the Arab World who were eagerly waiting for their turn to change their dictators in the Tunisian and Egyptian style might now be reconsidering their planned actions. The choice made by the Libyan demonstrators to arm themselves against their dictator Muammar Gaddafi is a great mistake.

It is clear that the demonstrators were in danger of losing many people to Gaddafi’s forces during their peaceful demonstration, but the mistake is that they have now chosen a side that isolates them in the eyes of the Libyans who initially supported the protest against Gaddafi. Libyans all over Libya who wanted to force Gaddafi out of power were determined to die in the hands of what they believed to be foreign fighters, fighting for Gaddafi only. Such a belief was eventually going to convince the Libyan army to be on the side of the people.

Now, the army is fighting against what they believe to be rebels, not the peaceful demonstrators that they wanted to side with. A large number of women and children who were part of the demonstration will play a minimal role in the current armed rebellion against the Government. Tribes that are loyal to Gaddafi will now defend him because they may perceive the rebels as threats to their tribal interests and identities. Government officials who like a short term regime change will now side with the Government in order to have something on the table for their families.

The international community will also slow down on asking Gaddafi to step down since there are laws that apply to armed rebellion. Armed rebels are not regarded as innocent by the international community. So, those who were planning to support the demonstrators in Libya will now think twice on how they market their support to the members of the United Nations Security Council. One permanent member in the Security Council can veto any military action against Gaddafi’s Government if such action does not convince his or her country. The United States is already stretched to the point where intervention is something its leaders are reluctant to engage in before they free themselves from Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Libyan rebels are now on their own. They will have to accept both a defeat from Gaddafi’s forces and end the rebellion, or they will have to plan for a lengthy liberation war. Tough choices.

I once wrote that one should not kick the buttock of an elephant if he knows he is not strong enough. Anybody who sings the song of violent must first check his muscles.

We have now seen that those who took arms against some Governors in South Sudan in the year 2010 have not yet ousted the Governors that they wanted to topple. They have now discovered that the process of toppling a leader militarily is not easy. These renegade Generals must first defeat the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) and other organized forces before ousting those Governors. They will then have to convince the Government in Juba that they are no threat to its leaders before they are allowed to sit in state offices that they may occupy by force. Will they succeed? I doubt.

Am I saying here that the SPLM/A were wrong in taking arms against the Khartoum Government in May, 1983? The answer to this question is no for two reasons: First, there was not even an imperfect democracy existed in the Sudan of that time. To make matters worse, Shari’a Law was declared the Law of the Government by the time of the rebellion. Second, the SPLM/A knew it would stand against the Government in Khartoum militarily because it was able to rally the marginalized people all over Sudan against the regime in Khartoum.

This is not the case now for those who have armed themselves against the Governors of Jonglei and Unity States. Their focus is so narrow that they cannot convince more than ten tribes to join them against those Governors. So, the rebellion of people like George Athor against Governors like Kuol Manyang of Jonglei State will fail or it will be lengthy if it is to succeed magically.

To avoid the Libyans’ mistake, our politicians should follow a democratic means that convinces both the local citizens and the international community to side with them. Armed rebellion against any elected leader does not have a place in a democratic society, however imperfect such a democracy could be.

Any armed rebellion must have a clear justification in order to get enough support locally and internationally. Losing elections in democratic elections is not a good reason for taking arms against an elected Government; however messy one regards the process of elections. Demonstrations in democracy are the only way to change imperfection in democracy, even to the point of toppling dictators like we witnessed in Tunisia and Egypt this year.

Zechariah Manyok Biar, BA. Edu., MACM, MSSW. He can be reached at [email protected]