Loyalty to the SPLM chairman must be the criterion of return

By Amb. Gordon Buay

I think it is high time for us to discuss realpolitik, which is defined as “politics based on practical and material factors rather than on theoretical or ethical objectives” (political dictionary).

For those who understand realpolitik, there is no practical reason why known enemies of Chairman Kiir such as G-11 and SPLM-Ngundeng should be allowed back to the SPLM party as per the Arusha Agreement. I don’t see the practical benefits of allowing political viruses into the party to slowly infect the party and destroy the cells of the SPLM.

Late professor Jurgen Morgenthau defined practical politics as a political game based on the objective laws of human nature. Human nature includes many things not limited to jealousy, lust for power, competition, blackmailing, etc. In political world, not everybody saying that he believes in the SPLM Party can be said to be loyal to the Chairman. Only what the person does would tell whether they are loyal to the chairman of the party.

What Pagan Amum did in August, by going to Addis Ababa and turned against the chairman of the party, is a typical political blackmailing which shows that he has not yet given up his ambition to topple the chairman of the party. He proved what Jesus Christ said in the Bible that not everyone calling me Lord, Lord would go to the kingdom of God, but only those who practice what my father in heaven wants them to do.

Membership of the political party is always based on loyalty. It is NOT based on Jesus Christ’s forgiveness when he said that “when a man slaps the left cheek, then, turn him the other cheek”. Politics does not work that way that was why Omer Bashir kicked Hassan El Turabi out of the National Congress Party after the disagreement of 1999. The same thing happened in 2012 when Ghazi Saladin was kicked out of the NCP and led him to form his own party.

If John Garang de Mabior is resurrected today and starts agitating members of the SPLM against Chairman Salva Kiir, he would be a good candidate for dismissal the same way Hassan El Turabi was dismissed from the NCP.

My brain cannot get a correct practical formula how the three SPLM factions would really coexist in one room without the repeat of December, 15, 2013, as required by the Arusha Agreement. To make the matters worse, the SPLM-Ngundeng of Riek Machar will have an official army for 18 months as per Addis Ababa’s Compromised Peace Disagreement signed by SPLM-in-Government with 12-page reservations attached.

If members of the SPLM want stability, the best solution is for G-11 and SPLM-Ngundeng to form their own party. In that way, the members of the SPLM would be spared from political stress caused by daily infighting and competition between the three factions.

I would like to see if the leader of SPLM-Ngundeng will get members to his party from non-Nuer, apart from Ansars whom he mobilized on the basis of Ngundengism. As for G-11, they would either be forced to join the vicar of Ngundeng or retire from politics for good because during the 2010 election, the Shilluks told Gen. Oyai Deng Ajak in Malakal that “the only Shilluks who could vote for you are those in the graveyard”. Most of G-11 failed 2010 election. The only person who saved them from public humiliation was President Kiir who returned them to the Government by exercising his executive powers.

We need to conclude that G-11 and SPLM-Ngundeng must form their own party so that they don’t disturb the people of South Sudan and create instability within the SPLM as they did in 2013.

The author is an ambassador at the South Sudanese foreign ministry. He was the spokesperson for former rebel faction South Sudan Liberation Army (SSLA)