Home | Comment & Analysis    Sunday 23 December 2012

Why the armed forces of South Sudan shot down a UN helicopter


By Eric Reeves,

22 December 2012 — On December 21, 2012—in a deeply tragic accident—military forces of South Sudan shot down a UN Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) MI-8 helicopter with four Russian pilots aboard. The incident occurred in Jonglei state, in a region where there has seen heavy military activity by the Khartoum-supported rebel militia force of David Yau Yau, a brutal and merciless military commander. Inevitably, the event brought strong condemnation and various demands were made of the Government of South Sudan and the Sudan People’s Liberation Army, including by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.

Unfortunately, as the event is being reported, far too little context is provided for this incident, and the most significant events preceding it. But there is very considerable context, and there are many events—some very recent—that have a direct bearing on our answer to the question of why this helicopter was shot down. To be sure, as part of this question, we and the SPLA must ask about command-and-control measures, precautionary procedures for the use of all anti-aircraft weaponry, communications issues, and individual responsibility in this particular case. But these are not the essential questions: the essential question is what must have been in the minds of the soldiers who fired the shots that brought down the helicopter. And here there is much that demands consideration.

Most recently the UNMISS confirmed that in the very same area, a Russian Antonov was observed by its own personnel dropping supplies to David Yau Yau:

"The United Nations confirmed its troops spotted a white plane dropping packages in an area where South Sudan said a Sudanese aircraft supplied weapons to rebels, a day before the countries’ presidents were to meet. A Sudanese Antonov plane air-dropped weapons and ammunition to the militia led by David Yau Yau, which is fighting South Sudanese troops in Jonglei state, South Sudan said on September 22 [2012]."

"’There was a white fixed-wing aircraft that was observed by UMISS troops dropping packages,’ UN Mission in South Sudan spokesman Kouider Zerrouk said today by telephone from Juba, South Sudan’s capital. ’But UNMISS is not in a position to confirm what was in them and who dropped them.’" (Bloomberg, September 24, 2012)

But of course the UN knows full well that the account asserted at the time by South Sudan is correct: this was an SAF Antonov engaged in a re-supply delivery to David Yau Yau. What other possible explanation could there be? South Sudan has no Antonovs of any kind, and the UN would certainly know after the fact if one of its own aircraft had been in the area. This leaves only Khartoum’s Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) as responsible for this extraordinarily provocative flight. And as one seasoned regional expert put the matter to me, based on communications with SPLA intelligence, the SAF flight route is in fact easy to deduce:

"The aircraft that delivered supplies to Yau Yau [on September 22], was an Antonov-12 (4 turbo propellers), the same aircraft that the UN World Food Program used during Operation Lifeline Sudan. It came from El Obeid though Unity State (on the Abiemnom side) and as it entered South Sudanese airspace it would have been able to melt into the UN aircraft traffic and be confused for one of them. The aircraft would then have returned by following a route along the Ethiopian border, where there is no tracking system, up to the tip of Upper Nile State, and then fly back to El Obeid in Sudanese airspace. An Anonov-12 can fly 2000 km." (email received from Juba, September 24, 2012; lightly edited for clarity)

We may be sure that this is what happened, even as we know that fighting between Yau Yau’s forces and the SPLA has been intense since August—much more intense and with more frequent military encounters than have been reported publicly, especially around Gumuruk and Likuangole in Jonglei State (it was near Likuangole that the helicopter was shot down).

Khartoum has regularly violated Southern Sudanese airspace over the past two years—for bombing attacks on Southern territory, for military reconnaissance purposes, and for the re-supply of Southern renegade militia groups. There have many public reports, such as the following, and even more that have been kept confidential by UNMISS:

"South Sudan’s army on Thursday accused the army of neighbouring Sudan, of carrying out renewed aggression in its territory despite the ongoing negotiations on security arrangements between the two parties in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa. The spokesperson of the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA), Col. Philip Aguer, in a press statement issued on Thursday said that warplanes belonging to Khartoum have hovered over Unity and Upper Nile states over the last two days in violation of South Sudanese airspace." (Sudan Tribune, September 13, 2012)

"Warplanes allegedly belonging to Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) on Tuesday carried out aerial bombardments, killing at least five civilians in South Sudan’s Northern Bahr el Ghazal state, the spokesperson for South Sudan army (SPLA) said. Those killed, according to Philip Aguer, were mainly women and children. ’Kiir Adem in Northern Bahr el Ghazal State came under heavy and aggressive aerial bombardments by the Sudanese armed forces today.’" (Sudan Tribune, November 20, 2012)

The UN mission refuses to investigate these latter attacks because they lie in the ill-conceived "Mile 14" section of Northern Bahr el-Ghazal State (south of the River Kiir/Bahr el-Arab River). This is so despite a great many eyewitnesses to the bombings. Such failure to investigate seems, of course, incomprehensible to Juba.

There have also been repeated reports from many authoritative sources that Khartoum has attempted to disguise its aircraft as if belonging to the UN, an outrageous and highly dangerous violation of international law. This tactic has been well reported by the former UN Panel of Experts on Darfur, indeed confirmed by photographic evidence of disguised aircraft on tarmacs in el-Fasher and elsewhere. It is the height of hypocrisy for Ban Ki-moon, given Khartoum’s egregious violation of international law with such disguising, to "strongly condemn the attack" on the "clearly marked" helicopter, and on this basis to call for Juba to "immediately carry out an investigation and bring to account those responsible for this act." Why no similar demand for accountability on the part of the SAF for its deliberate disguising its aircraft as belonging to the UN? What possible meaning can "clearly marked" have in an environment in which the presence of disguised aircraft has been authoritatively established. This violation of international law, for military purposes, clearly endangers UN and other humanitarian aircraft.

All evidence suggests that the shooting down of the UN helicopter was an accident: the SPLA has no motive whatsoever for military hostility toward UNMISS, indeed needs all the help it can get in dealing with the unrest in Jonglei. And we have no reason to dispute the account of SPLA military spokesman Philip Aguer:

"’We regret the incident,’ army spokesman Philip Aguer said, adding an
artillery unit had spotted a plane landing in an area where Yau Yau
forces were operating. ’We saw a white plane landing and asked UNMISS whether they had any flight in the area but they denied it. The army opened fire because it thought it was an enemy plane supplying Yau Yau with weapons,’ he said. ’We later heard UNMISS had a flight there. They should have informed us.’" (Reuters [Juba], December 21, 2012)

Here we might also wonder why we heard so little from the UN about the well-reported, explicit SAF threat to shoot down a UN medevac helicopter that was attempting the rescue of eleven UN peacekeepers in Abyei, four of whom had been mortally wounded by a land mine their vehicle had run over:

"In the first deaths for the UN Interim Security Force for Abyei (UNISFA), a landmine killed four Ethiopian peacekeepers and wounded seven as they patrolled the village of Mabok in the disputed Abyei territory [August 2, 2011]. A UN Medivac helicopter sent to collect the wounded was delayed for three hours in Kadugli, South Kordofan’s main city, when Sudanese forces threatened to shoot at it. (Agence France-Presse [Khartoum], August 3, 2011)

Where was Ban Ki-moon’s moral outrage at the time? Evidence suggests that at least one of the soldiers might have been saved if Khartoum had not delayed the medevac by means of military threats.

To be sure, we also know that the SPLA is capable of making terrible mistakes: in September, South Sudanese soldiers killed at least 10 of their own troops when they shot and sank one of their own military riverboats in a remote region after mistaking it for an enemy craft. But this was obviously an accident, even as the SAF grounding of the UN medevac helicopter and medical team was grimly deliberate.

The UN Mission in South Sudan: Speaking out only when it wishes

The extensive intelligence network employed by UNMISS along the North/South border provides the Mission with a great many reports, some of which are investigated, some not (for reasons that are unclear and inherently suspicious). We have a particularly revealing example of this in an Associated Press report from earlier this year (July 24, 2012), in which a confidential UNMISS investigation of a highly significant bombing attack was revealed on the basis of a leaked report:

"Six bombs that Sudan maintains were aimed at rebels in its own territory instead landed across the border inside South Sudan, according to a United Nations report. UN observers who visited the site found six bomb craters 1.16 kilometers (.72 miles) inside South Sudan’s territory, according to the internal report obtained by The Associated Press. The UN team said the six bombs created small craters where they came down in Northern Bahr el Ghazal state early Friday. ’The craters are almost in one line, possibly indicating a bombing run by an aircraft. Bomb fragments and debris was visible in and around the craters. The smell of gunpowder was also evident,’ the report said." (Associated Press [Nairobi], July 24, 2012)

Why would Khartoum engage in such a provocative attack, and justify it after the fact with the ludicrous claim that the attack was directed at the Darfuri rebel Justice and Equality Movement (JEM)? The attack—according to the SPLA—occurred around 3am on the morning of July 20, when darkness would have been complete. Antonovs have no militarily purposeful precision, even in daylight: they are retrofitted Russian cargo planes from which shrapnel-laden barrel bombs are simply rolled out the back cargo bay. An attack in complete darkness by an Antonov is the very embodiment of "indiscriminate."

So, who ordered this attack? Ban Ki-moon certainly didn’t bother to ask, and UNMISS suggested no motive. But we may be sure that an attack so consequential was not ordered on the initiative of a regional military officer but on the basis of an order from Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) headquarters in Khartoum. And these senior officers would certainly have known at the time both that the UN Security Council deadline for an agreement on oil revenues was approaching—and that such an attack would be provocative in the extreme. Unsurprisingly, it led the GOSS delegation to break off direct talks with the Khartoum regime leadership, even as it was in the process of making a generous offer on the issue of oil revenues. There is good reason to believe that senior military officers, increasingly ascendant without Khartoum’s inner security cabal, wished to derail negotiations essential to peace.

There is a larger issue here that also bears on yesterday’s shooting down of a UN helicopter. Because the UN would not make public its findings about the July 20 bombing—or many other bombings confirmed or reported—the Government of South Sudan (GOSS) has been left to conclude that the international community simply doesn’t want to hear about such attacks, even when there are civilian casualties. This deep asymmetry in the attribution of responsibility, this refusal to be honest about what the UN knows of Khartoum’s military actions, only works to increase the level of mistrust on the part of the GOSS and the SPLA.

The UN seems to have worked hard to encourage this mistrust. One casually cynical UN diplomat in Juba declared—after Khartoum’s military seizure of Abyei in May 2011 and after the steady bombing campaign against Southern civilian and military targets that began in November 2010—"the SPLA is paid to be paranoid." In other words, commenting on Southern concern about Abyei, about Khartoum’s support for renegade militias, and about potential aspiration to seize the oil regions of Upper Nile or Unity State—and about ongoing aerial military action against South Sudan’s territory—this UN diplomat had the audacity to declare simply: "The SPLA is paid to be paranoid" (Bloomberg, July 7, 2011).

Such cynicism is rampant in the UN system and is a significant part of the context for yesterday’s shooting down of an UN helicopter. So, too, is the refusal of the UN to report incidents that may have significance for humanitarian and reconnaissance flights. For example, in mid-September 2011 a MI-26 helicopter belong to the UN Interim Security Force for Abyei (UNISFA) was shot at by SPLA forces near Pankuech (Unity State), according to a highly reliable regional source. The helicopter was apparently delivering food from Bentiu (capital of Unity State) to Yida refugee camp (also in Unity State, and the site of an extraordinarily barbarous SAF aerial attack in November 2011).

Why was this incident not made public? Would it not have been useful to the Russian helicopter crew to know that a UNISFA helicopter had been fired upon by the SPLA in another case of mistaken identity? Because SAF violations of South Sudan’s sovereign air space are so regular, if unreported publicly by UNMISS, it is finally not surprising that there will be cases of aircraft whose identity is confusing.

Let us be clear, even if UNMISS cannot bring itself to be so: it is Khartoum that is violating South Sudanese airspace. SAF aircraft have bombed locations all along the North/South border for the past two years; they have used high-flying Antonovs for military reconnaissance purposes; they have deployed Iranian drone aircraft over the South (one was shot down over Unity State in March of this year); and as UNMISS confirmed in September, the SAF is also responsible for supplying by air a brutal militia force that trades on ethnic tensions and is responsible for a great deal of civilian mayhem. The Sudan Human Security Baseline Assessment Project of the Geneva-based Small Arms Survey, in its brief report update on Yau Yau, notes in its concluding paragraph:

"Pibor county officials told the media that Yau Yau’s forces have killed and raped civilians, looted property, and slaughtered the livestock of those who will not join the rebellion. Yau Yau forces reportedly killed one Murle sub-chief in late September because he was encouraging his community to resist recruitment." (Yau Yau is himself a member of the Murle tribe) (December 17, 2012)

This is the force that Khartoum is supplying by means of aerial drops in Jonglei, far inside the sovereign territory of South Sudan. Knowledge of this is always with the SPLA and was certainly so yesterday. This is what UN officials seem unwilling to acknowledge, even as their own complicity in yesterday’s tragic events is directly tied to this unwillingness to be honest. Yau Yau’s is, of course, part of a much larger pattern of Khartoum’s extensive military support for renegade militia groups in South Sudan; this has also been established authoritatively in many reports from SAS.

The failure to confront Khartoum over illegal use of military aircraft

If Ban Ki-moon wishes to express outrage and to demand accountability, his efforts would be much better directed at Khartoum than Juba, as he well knows but refuses out of cowardice and expediency to acknowledge. Here it is imperative to note the incomprehensibly shameful and irresponsible refusal of the UN and the international community to bring pressure to bear on Khartoum to cease its aerial assaults on civilians in Southern territory, in the Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile, and in Darfur. I have chronicled more than 2,000 confirmed aerial attacks on civilian targets in greater Sudan since 1999 (www.sudanbombing.org), and what is most evident—beyond the staggering numbers—is the relentlessness of the attacks and the utter failure of the UN to put in place any measures that will deter the regime from continuing an aerial campaign that is inherently indiscriminate, and has claimed—in aggregate—many tens of thousands of lives. Indeed, for all the ferocity and brutality of the Assad regime in Syria, Khartoum’s aerial war on Sudanese civilians has claimed many times the number who have died in Syria over the past year and a half.

Human Rights Watch has recently released an authoritative report on aerial attacks in the Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile (December 2012), and it makes for horrific reading. The report ("Under Siege: Indiscriminate Bombing and Abuses in Sudan’s Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile States") is based on five fact-finding missions and more than 200 interviews (conducted in Arabic and local languages). It finds that:

"Since the conflict started, Sudanese forces have carried out indiscriminate aerial bombardment and shelling in populated areas, killing and injuring civilians and causing serious damage to civilian property including homes, schools, clinics, crops, and livestock. Government forces, including Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) and Popular Defense Forces (PDF), have also conducted ground attacks on villages during which they deliberately burned and looted civilian property, and arbitrarily detained people. Soldiers have also assaulted and raped women and girls."

"The evidence documented suggests that the Sudanese government has adopted a strategy to treat all populations in rebel held areas as enemies and legitimate targets, without distinguishing between civilian and combatant. This apparent approach lies at the heart of the serious violations of international humanitarian law documented in this report."

"Large areas of land in Blue Nile state in particular, are now abandoned. Sudan’s abusive tactics, reminiscent of those used in Darfur and during the long civil war, including the de facto blockading of humanitarian assistance, have worsened already poor conditions."

"In the 18 months between June 2011 and December 2012, Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) have carried out hundreds of bombings, shelling, and rocket attacks on civilian areas across the Nuba Mountains where the rebels have control. The strikes varied in frequency and intensity, from several times per month to several times per day."

"The bombings have killed, maimed, and injured civilians in their homes, while farming, fetching water, or attending village markets, and have destroyed homes, crops, livelihoods, clinics, and schools, and forced people to abandon their homes and livelihoods. The persistent bombing has terrorized the population; most families have dug foxholes near their homes or moved to sheltered areas…."

"The vast majority of bomb victims that Human Rights Watch documented are civilians. Most of these are women, children, and the elderly."

"In all incidents investigated, witnesses and victims told Human Rights Watch that there were no military targets, such as a rebel presence, in the vicinity at the time of the bombings."

This, Ban Ki-moon, is where your moral outrage and demand for "accountability" should be directed. It is to the people of Heiban, Un Sirdiba, and from countless other locations throughout greater Sudan that you should be explaining why you are silent or indulge only in perfunctory condemnations of ongoing and undeterred aerial assaults on civilians:

"Examples of civilian victims wounded by use of indiscriminate bombing include Huwaida Hassan, mother of seven, who was seriously injured by a bombing on the Heiban market around mid-day on October 2. The bomb fragments sliced into her belly. Two elderly women and a teenage girl were among the others injured. Fadila Tia Kofi, a woman in her 70s, was injured by bomb fragments at around 11am on September 11, 2012, while working at her garden near her home in Lima village, western Kadugli locality. ’I heard the sound of a plane and I fell to the ground. A big piece of metal cut my toes,’ she told Human Rights Watch at her home in October 2012. ’I don’t know why the bombs come. I work, I farm. Now I crawl.’ All the toes of her right foot were amputated and she can no longer walk."

"Five members of a single family—including three teenaged sisters—died when shells hit and set ablaze their home outside of Um Sirdiba in Um Durein locality, on the night of February 17, 2012. Four sisters sleeping in one room burned to death. Their father, Samuel Dellami, died soon afterward. His brother told Human Rights Watch in April, 2012: ’Before he died, he said ’where are my daughters?"’

In thinking about the tragedy of yesterday’s helicopter shooting and the death of four Russian pilots, we should bear in mind the dying agony of Samuel Dellami.

Eric Reeves, a professor at Smith College, has published extensively on Sudan, nationally and internationally, for more than a decade. He is author of A Long Day’s Dying: Critical Moments in the Darfur Genocide.

The views expressed in the 'Comment and Analysis' section are solely the opinions of the writers. The veracity of any claims made are the responsibility of the author not Sudan Tribune.

If you want to submit an opinion piece or an analysis please email it to comment@sudantribune.com

Sudan Tribune reserves the right to edit articles before publication. Please include your full name, relevant personal information and political affiliations.
Comments on the Sudan Tribune website must abide by the following rules. Contravention of these rules will lead to the user losing their Sudan Tribune account with immediate effect.

- No inciting violence
- No inappropriate or offensive language
- No racism, tribalism or sectarianism
- No inappropriate or derogatory remarks
- No deviation from the topic of the article
- No advertising, spamming or links
- No incomprehensible comments

Due to the unprecedented amount of racist and offensive language on the site, Sudan Tribune tries to vet all comments on the site.

There is now also a limit of 400 words per comment. If you want to express yourself in more detail than this allows, please e-mail your comment as an article to comment@sudantribune.com

Kind regards,

The Sudan Tribune editorial team.
  • 23 December 2012 10:03, by Ambago

    There you go SPLA
    "SHALA Akuk adi talaga - shala abukk adi talaga - shala UNIMISS adi talaga " and very soon shala USA adi talaga"!
    where are
    we going??

    repondre message

    • 23 December 2012 10:35, by sudani ana

      Mr Reeves
      It has not even been 24hours since the chopper was shot down, and you’re out with one of your usual 10,000 word articles defending South Sudan/SPLM/A and waging one of your usual bitter rants attacking SAF and Sudan. The only rational conclusion I could arrive at is that you are on the payrolls of SPLM, had a slice of the embezzled 4 billion dollars already and looking for more.

      repondre message

      • 23 December 2012 11:09, by Malim

        Dr. Reeves always has the best analysis that you never had. The only conclude you can arrive to is say he is in the plan roll SPLM. Dr, Reeves is an international figure that dealt with International politics which include the UN and your Criminals of Khartoum.

        repondre message

    • 24 December 2012 03:15, by Darkangel

      Ill repeat it again and again .. so keep deleting. You & Reeves are sick Zionists ! The SPLM shot down the plane intentionally because of Russias stance on Sudan & Abyie. You will keep killing Russians and Chinese, until they leave so the Americans can do their dirty work in S Sudan with no witnesses.
      Sick Sudantribune, Delusional Reeves are all paid by the same Satanic people that want control.

      repondre message

      • 24 December 2012 03:18, by Darkangel

        I dont know what illiterate you have working in Sudantribune who thinks i only write this stuff here. I write it in more important places like BBC, AlJazeera, RT and CNN. They dont delete it. But who cares if you illiterate readers dont get the message .. they people that matter do .. so keep deleting my messages you incompetent out the Bush Clown ! Whos laughing now !! Ha Ha Ha

        repondre message

        • 24 December 2012 05:54, by Observer

          Dark Angel,
          Funny thing, I have searched the BBC and AlJazeera newsites for your comments and either you use a different name, haven;t written anything or else those Zionists have deleted your comments there too.
          My comment was deleted as well but I don’t take offence like you do- it is the websites right to do so.
          Was waiting for the Zionist comment to appear and you have not let us down

          repondre message

        • 24 December 2012 11:28, by mohamed mahgoub

          Mr. Dark A. Wondering which language did u use to write in those leading media outlets ,man u can lie inside our rotten country - sudan- where anything is possible! according to NCP radical views ,but to take out there in the cyberspace,its laughable!

          repondre message

    • 25 December 2012 20:53, by Tutbol

      If the govt of S Sudan won’t sit down with these Europeans thieves who shrouded themselves with the UN clothes & claimed to be working for peace, then the citizens of Jonglei will have no choice but to resist their Congo-like thievery. We don’t want just want these criminals roaming our state as if they own it. The UN is openly supporting the rebel Yau Yau, but our govt is tight lipped to take...

      repondre message

      • 25 December 2012 21:07, by Tutbol

        ..These criminals head on. The govt was the one who made a deal with these European thieves to be deployed in our country & the govt must also make sure that they control these criminals. Our people are getting tired of these UN’s criminals activities. We can’t just handle the UN criminal behaviour in Congo replicated in our Jonglei state. UN troops are not wanted fulstop.

        repondre message

    • 26 December 2012 21:01, by Peacocktail

      If the Copper was for reconnaisance, without and secret movement,why not informing theirs colleague of departing plane routing to Pibor/Akobo, surely this plane was for SECRETION MISSION in JONGLEI, Reconnaisance always includes memebers of UN Police, SPLA, SSNPS or Jonglei Restore Peace Army of SPLA because of partnering with South Sudan security, they are not allow to flight wasting fuels.

      repondre message

  • 23 December 2012 16:42, by Rommel

    This is a comprehensive, extensively documented and extremely well written article and I really must tip my proverbial hat to Eric Reeves for departing from the tardy, sketchy and superficial non-analysis that often passes for journalism when it comes to matters pertaining to the two Sudans...

    repondre message

    • 23 December 2012 17:03, by Rommel

      .. but it does have the affect of evoking within me an all encompassing feeling of anger, contempt and disgust for the neanderthals in Juba for so utterly failing to provide a modicum of protection to our people from the continual air assaults from a technologically retrogressive and dilapidated air force.

      repondre message

      • 23 December 2012 17:10, by Rommel

        If we had a government worthy of the name, instead of a rapacious band of dim-witted, incompetent, thieving neanderthals... Khartoum’s entire air force could have been rendered inoperable, useless and obsolete by now with the acquisition of just one exceedingly important platform — the S-300PMU2...

        repondre message

        • 23 December 2012 17:27, by Rommel

          .. but instead of staying true to the task (s) that they were commissioned for... they’ve inexplicably decided to reduce themselves to being the enablers and accomplices to an Arab supremacist, Islamist and genocidal regime with known terrorism links, that has unleashed its subpar, imprecise air force on our civilians as though it were a significant world power.

          repondre message

          • 23 December 2012 17:39, by Rommel

            If these death-deserving saps had just scrounged together $800 million during the seven [7] year Interim period, Sudan’s air force wouldn’t be able to fly over South Darfur, South Kordofan, White Nile, Sennar and Blue Nile. They wouldn’t be able to fly over um hegelega — just south of Khartoum.

            repondre message

            • 26 December 2012 18:57, by sudani ana

              You have been campaigning hard for an air defence system for SS. Notwithstanding the fact that at present SS can ill afford to feed its population, but considering they are already shooting down UN planes without one, can you imagine what damage these illiterate soldiers would do if they had proper anti aircraft missiles. I gather nobody in the region would be safe then.

              repondre message

              • 27 December 2012 06:23, by Rommel

                sudani ana:
                I really do think that you people should feel eternally grateful to Salva Kirr’s pseudo ’government’; you are to feel grateful for the malfeasance and incompetence that has so allowed you to occupy large swathes of our territory, while simultaneously subjecting our border communities to indiscriminate aerial bombardment.

                repondre message

                • 27 December 2012 06:48, by Rommel

                  I don’t think you at all understand what the acquisition and operation of an advanced, comprehensive and lethal air defense system would mean in the grand scheme of things. Your air force is currently able to molest our air space as far south as Jonglei, while being wily in using U.N. colours — which thoroughly explains how this tragedy transpired...

                  repondre message

                  • 27 December 2012 06:59, by Rommel

                    These tragedies wouldn’t repeat themselves if we had within our arsenal something like the S-300PMU2. We would at that point be downing your aircraft deep within your territory and not in Jonglei or anywhere near the border. There’s no one else in the region that should or would feel threatened by our eventual acquisition of something like this... other than you...

                    repondre message

                    • 27 December 2012 07:14, by Rommel

                      .. because it would defang you like the snakes that you are. We don’t consider anyone else in the region an enemy. Kenya currently occupies an area of South Sudan of comparable size to Abyei — the Ilemi triangle... but we would NEVER go to war with Kenya, because regional blocks [not Nation-States] are the only viable units in the 21st Century.

                      repondre message

                      • 27 December 2012 08:26, by Rommel

                        South Sudan can afford to protect its airspace if it could only somehow manage to repatriate just $800 million of the $12 billion siphoned off by these cretins during the interim period.

                        repondre message

                        • 27 December 2012 08:57, by Rommel

                          I take refuge and consolation in the fact that *ALL* of them are unspeakably dumb as they are unbelievably corrupt... which will make it that much easier to remove these blind and dumb animals from the political arena. People like me will have their guts for garters.

                          repondre message

                          • 27 December 2012 11:13, by sudani ana

                            Do you realize that the S300 air defence system that you keep writing songs about is Russian? The same people the idiots of SPLA have just downed one of their helicopters !!! I can’t see them, or anyone else for that matter , rushing to provide this dangerously tribal, aggressive and illiterate army with advanced missile systems.

                            repondre message

                            • 27 December 2012 11:28, by Rommel

                              sudani ana:
                              Your hypocrisy and the cringingly self-unaware manner in which it is expressed is just precious. Aren’t you from that country in which a quarter of a million people have purportedly died at the hands of their armed force — both directly and indirectly!?

                              repondre message

                              • 27 December 2012 12:01, by Rommel

                                Please have the grace to afford me a little credit... I have earned it, haven’t I!? I am more than aware that the S-300PMU2 is Russian and I very well know that the Russians are seething and are likely to remain incensed for a while... which is why it’s absolutely essential that South Sudan engage in the highest quality of diplomacy by compensating the bereaved Russian families handsomely...

                                repondre message

                                • 27 December 2012 12:27, by Rommel

                                  .. while profusely expressing our condolences and deep regret for this unfortunate tragedy until the Russians have been thoroughly placated. I really don’t think the Russians would turn down an offer by us to purchase a platform for $800 million in addition to the hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Russian weaponry that we’re likely to purchase.

                                  repondre message

                                  • 27 December 2012 12:41, by Rommel

                                    The government of South Sudan is seemingly incapable of grasping the full extent of the dramatic changes that have taken place in the grand chessboard with the impressive, meteoric rise of non-’Western’ powers such as China, India and Brazil... that now make it more than possible to build a truly multi-polar world, in which the role of the U.S. will be redefined and significantly attenuated.

                                    repondre message

                                    • 27 December 2012 12:52, by Rommel

                                      South Sudan MUST work intimately with *any* and *every* significant world power — and it should start be recognizing Russia’s importance in the international political environment. It should also stop jeopardizing its chances of acquiring advanced platforms and systems by disciplining the armed forces and putting an end to the insecurity in the country.

                                      repondre message

                                      • 27 December 2012 13:00, by Rommel

                                        If South Sudan continues to stubbornly insist on being America’s young, emaciated black poodle in East Africa, it will just be another Congo, exploited by extremely powerful Western multi-nationals for its resources and left all the more impoverished in the ensuing chaos...

                                        repondre message

                                        • 27 December 2012 13:08, by Rommel

                                          .. with the United States likely to provide support to the various armed tribal forces that are likely to emerge and ascend in the country, just as we’ve seen in the Congo. The United States is not to be trusted, because once it’s done with South Sudan, it will discard it like a cheap, dirty, broken and over-used prostitute... without a soul, pride or cognition of itself.

                                          repondre message

                                  • 27 December 2012 17:26, by sudani ana

                                    "I really don’t think the Russians would turn down an offer by us to purchase a platform for $800 million in addition to the hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Russian weaponry that we’re likely to purchase."
                                    Don’t you think you should concentrate on development first? You know, building schools , hospitals and improve industry and agriculture before you consider spending billions ..

                                    repondre message

                                    • 27 December 2012 17:36, by sudani ana

                                      Cont..on weapons? Rommel if this is how the educated elite of South Sudan think, then you have no hope for a better future. Additionally, where are these billions going to come from. You need to export your oil first, whether through Sudan or another route. If through Sudan, we need security first, in which case you won’t need to spend billions on weapons. If through another route you’ll need ..

                                      repondre message

                                      • 27 December 2012 17:41, by sudani ana

                                        You’ll need to spend billion on pipelines, treatment facilities and fees to the other country, coz as you know there’s no such a thing as free lunch.

                                        repondre message

                                        • 27 December 2012 17:50, by sudani ana

                                          I do now believe what you said about being 22 years old, for despite your eloquence, there is a clear lack of wisdom that only comes with age.

                                          repondre message

                                          • 27 December 2012 18:16, by Rommel

                                            sudani ana:
                                            My word, I had no idea you hailed from an affluent, secure and tranquil Nation for you to so kindly nominate yourself as my teacher, ostensibly attempting to disabuse me of my immaturity, my fallacies and my apparent misplaced sense of priorities with such wise words of admonition.

                                            repondre message

                                            • 27 December 2012 18:28, by Rommel

                                              Your little speech on the needs of South Sudan’s beleaguered population is beyond amusing, especially when one considers that Khartoum is engaged in profligate military spending, precisely when millions of its owns citizens are displaced from Darfur, South Kordofan and Blue Nile State. Khartoum has NEVER tempered its military spending due to humanitarian concerns.

                                              repondre message

                                              • 27 December 2012 18:44, by Rommel

                                                The nepotism, corruption and the complete lack of development in my dear Nation has left me a little more than just galled and so I don’t appreciate the accusation that I am somehow advocating profligate military spending at the attendant expense of what should be my Nation’s primary concerns.

                                                repondre message

                                                • 27 December 2012 18:58, by Rommel

                                                  You’ve left me feeling terribly curious and so I was hoping that you would do the decent thing of at least attempting to satiate my curiosity by revealing to me just how the educated elite of your Nation *think*!? What it is their position on on occupying other peoples lands!? Do they find it agreeable or at odds with their moral codes? Do they accept the merits of a theocratic State!?

                                                  repondre message

                                                  • 27 December 2012 19:09, by Rommel

                                                    What is their position on genocide and State terrorism? Do they think it right that a murderous despot hold on to power for decades on end? Do they support the obscenity of a government nakedly catering to the interests of a particular ethnic group at the expense of all others? For the government to immediately and invariably support Arab tribes in their wars of aggression against others?

                                                    repondre message

                                                    • 27 December 2012 19:31, by Rommel

                                                      You seem to think that we should just allow you to continue to bomb us. In the vein of your self interest and aggrandizement you also seem to think that we should just ignore the fact that our civilians were violently dispossessed and deprived of their homelands for the sake of building schools. There is no greater ignorance, misery, poverty and dishnour than to accept dispossession.

                                                      repondre message

                                                      • 27 December 2012 19:40, by Rommel

                                                        The morally vacant are the only ones that would subserviently accede the homelands of their forefathers for the sake of a dishonourable peace; a peace that deprives their children of their inheritance. Where’s the wisdom in that!?

                                                        repondre message

                                                        • 27 December 2012 19:48, by Rommel

                                                          Your continual occupation of our lands makes it exceedingly difficult for us to work with you in a mutually beneficial manner and so I don’t think that South Sudan should be so desperate, so one dimensional and uninspired as to put its destiny and very existence at the feet of an eternal enemy.

                                                          repondre message

                                                          • 27 December 2012 19:54, by Rommel

                                                            We should start protesting -in the millions-, Nationwide and for as long as it takes for these neanderthals to repatriate the billions of dollars that they have STOLEN from us, so we can redirect these funds into other sectors of the economy — such as agriculture. We must learn to adapt and not beg an enemy that we shall eventually bludgeon.

                                                            repondre message

                                                            • 28 December 2012 00:49, by sudani ana

                                                              Unfortunately am using an IPhone to post my comments at present which makes it a rather arduous task. So, is this your master plan to fund your billions worth of arms shopping spree? Demonstrate to force the thieves to repatriate the stolen billions? Well, let’s just say you’ll be waiting for eternity, I’ve never known a thief to return his loot so willingly, besides even if it has not ...

                                                              repondre message

                                                              • 28 December 2012 00:57, by sudani ana

                                                                Already been spent, I doubt that any SS politician would risk incriminating him/herself by returning the stolen money. You are more naive than I thought. As for the rest of your rants, I will be more than happy to oblige you with an answer when I have access to a proper keyboard, this one finger typing is killing me.

                                                                repondre message

                                                                • 28 December 2012 01:21, by sudani ana

                                                                  And finally before I go, I must express my sense of shock at your flippant words in calling us your " Eternal enemy, an enemy (you) would eventually bludgeon" ???? Please don’t hold back!!! Haven’t you heard that that in politics there is no "eternal enemy"? And your enemy today can be your friend tomorrow!!! And you say you’re thinking of going into politics?!!! BLUDGEON huh?

                                                                  repondre message

                                                              • 28 December 2012 17:40, by Rommel

                                                                sudani ana:
                                                                I can assure you that I‘m not so conceited and so grand as to conceive of a master plan, yet. LOL. I was merely musing over the possibilities. I am not a daft child or a roseate fool that actually believes that protests are the panacea to my Nation’s many problems; and I certainly wouldn’t only resort to them when a dozen or so Palestinians die at the hands of the “Zionist entity",

                                                                repondre message

                                                                • 28 December 2012 17:42, by Rommel

                                                                  while inexplicably ignoring the deaths of at least at least a hundred thousand [100 000] of my own at the hands of the President that I am told is loved oh so very much. There’s a limited palette of options that can be taken, and I mentioned protests because they’ve featured so very heavily in the overthrow of despotic governments and dictatorships in the past two years.

                                                                  repondre message

                                                                  • 28 December 2012 17:44, by Rommel

                                                                    I was flippant, was I? Ah, I see. Are you sure you even know what the word means? I am being impish, of course. If I didn’t call someone who has killed millions of my people, occupies my lands and refuses to return these sovereign territories, an eternal enemy… I would actually be disrespecting and insulting this enemy of mine; because he has more than evinced his position towards me.

                                                                    repondre message

                                                                    • 28 December 2012 17:47, by Rommel

                                                                      Was I being louche in describing you as an eternal enemy? What about the boastful and uncouth manner in which you described the deaths of my Nation’s soldiers in occupied Aliiny [“Heglig”]!? I believe the word you used was cockroaches. Do you recall? I think a little bit of self-reflection is in order, don’t you *think*?

                                                                      repondre message

                                                                      • 28 December 2012 17:50, by Rommel

                                                                        I don’t reject or rule out the prospect of rapprochement and possibly even genuine friendship... but to achieve the peace that you so cynically evoke in the absence of returning occupied territories [a war of a kind]… would be the equivalent of a mesmerizing Houdini spectacle.

                                                                        repondre message

                                                                        • 28 December 2012 17:52, by Rommel

                                                                          You say that there can be no permanent enemies in politics and that your enemy today can be your friend tomorrow --- and dare I say it… I agree. But you either don’t know, forgot or dastardly omitted the integral component of that idiom. And so here’s the rest: “There are no permanent enemies, and no permanent friends, only permanent interests.”

                                                                          repondre message

                                                                          • 28 December 2012 17:54, by Rommel

                                                                            You see it’s not in our *interest* for us to permit you to occupy our lands and it’s certainly not in your interest for you to relinquish control of our fertile, resource rich lands… and so we’re in a bit of a quandary, aren’t we? When in the proverbial tomorrow do you see your country returning the Lebanon size, copper and Uranium rich Kafia Kingi enclave and Hofrat en Nahas to South Sudan!?

                                                                            repondre message

                                                                            • 28 December 2012 17:55, by Rommel

                                                                              As you may well know, the Kafia Kingi enclave and Hofat en Nahas were veritably within the borders of southern Sudan from the days of the Condominium up until they were annexed to Darfur in 1960 by Ibrahim Abboud. There are at least a dozen other Southern territories in which the narrative is the same and invariably so:

                                                                              repondre message

                                                                              • 28 December 2012 17:59, by Rommel

                                                                                Fertile, mineral rich lands of the South are identified by your jihadi elites and subsequently cleared of their indigenous populations with the help of the various nomadic Arab tribes that reside in contiguous states. This is precisely what happened to the people of Aliiny [renamed “Heglig”] in the 90s as documented by Human rights watch, the Harker Report,

                                                                                repondre message

                                                                                • 28 December 2012 18:01, by Rommel

                                                                                  the coalition of international justice, the former UN Special Rapporteur, Leonardo Franco and a plethora of other authoritative sources. Do you see your country ever returning Aliiny [“Heglig”] to its rightful, now dispossessed owners!? I don’t, because as you say, a thief (*you*) is not likely to ever return its loot.

                                                                                  repondre message

                                                                                  • 28 December 2012 18:02, by Rommel

                                                                                    Do you still *think* that rapprochement will be at all possible in the future, with us collectively singing kumbaya? Explain to me just how friendship is at all possible when you’ve pinched my things, so to speak. Explain to me how that little arrow leads from the former to the latter, if you could...

                                                                                    repondre message

                                                                                    • 28 December 2012 18:06, by Rommel

                                                                                      ..But wait, you can’t… because to any normal human being the logic of your argument is broken — very, very broken. Did you know that your country declared war on Israel in 1967 and has vowed to never recognize it? Do you agree with this position? And if so, why? You have a permanent enemy, why?

                                                                                      repondre message

                                                                                      • 29 December 2012 10:32, by sudani ana

                                                                                        Even Israel can one day become a friend if they end their occupation of Palastinian land and stop stealing Palastinian LAN through illegal settlements. I do remember my words, I also remember seeing SPLA soldiers allulating and dancing like demons whilst executing injured SAF soldiers when Heglig was overrun. Am sure you’ve seen it too and probably cheered them on.

                                                                                        repondre message

                                                                                        • 29 December 2012 16:11, by Rommel

                                                                                          sudani ana:
                                                                                          Is your position on Israel a derivative of a commendable moral stand, or is it merely -and far less impressively- a feature born out of perceived bonds of kinship with your co-religionists and fellow Arabs? Be honest. I am certain that I understood your post, but you seem to be saying that Israel will remain an implacable enemy until certain conditions are met. Is that correct?

                                                                                          repondre message

                                                                                          • 29 December 2012 16:12, by Rommel

                                                                                            In the spirit of fairness, don’t you think that we too may have certain conditions to redefining, resetting and normalizing relations? Or are such conditions only reasonable and cogent when “Arab lands” are under occupation!? Did you know that you occupy lands that are much larger than the occupied territories as well as the lands of Israel, combined?

                                                                                            repondre message

                                                                                            • 29 December 2012 16:18, by Rommel

                                                                                              Will you be returning our territories? No? [*Sulky face*]. I didn’t think so. Your hypocrisy is as despicable as it is inimitable. It really is in a class of its own. As for "Heglig" — you know the nature of my position in regards to that. Don’t be so needlessly churlish.

                                                                                              repondre message

                                                                                              • 29 December 2012 16:21, by Rommel

                                                                                                Your constant provocations and attacks on our positions necessitated a military response, which was ultimately betrayed by death-deserving ineptness and political narcolepsy. But I didn’t support our return to Aliiny in such a woefully underpowered fashion, especially in the absence of comprehensive air cover. Our response should have been limited and specific – repulse the attackers.

                                                                                                repondre message

                                                                                                • 29 December 2012 16:25, by Rommel

                                                                                                  I don’t support the killing of *any* wounded and defenseless soldier, but don’t make the mistake of having the gall to moralize to me. Your armed forces and your so called mujahideen engaged in wanton acts of extreme violence that claimed the lives of hundreds of innocent civilians in Aliiny ["Heglig"] and thousands more immediately beyond it in 1992-3.

                                                                                                  repondre message

                                                                                                  • 29 December 2012 16:31, by Rommel

                                                                                                    The paramount chief was also gruesomely beheaded by your mujahideen. Am I right to assume that you would have “cheered” on his beheading? Please don’t be so mean-spirited. Throughout the duration of that engagement, my posts had no hint of gloating, even when it seemed the South had triumphed.

                                                                                                    repondre message

                                                                                                    • 29 December 2012 16:33, by Rommel

                                                                                                      Clarify something for me: Is your definition of Palestinian land restricted to lands that are internationally recognized as occupied territories, or does your definition also include all the lands that constitute what is now Israel?

                                                                                                      repondre message

                                                                                                      • 30 December 2012 00:34, by sudani ana

                                                                                                        I support the rights of the palastinians to have their country in their land which was occupied in 1967 with Alquds (Jerusalem ) as their capital. I support the right of return for the Palastinian refugees to their land. It goes without saying that settlements on occupied land are illegal. I know what you are driving at. There in no parallels to the sudans issues. We have disputed land that...

                                                                                                        repondre message

                                                                                                        • 30 December 2012 00:42, by sudani ana

                                                                                                          Both sides are laying claims to. You seem to only believe in the veracity of your claim, and that’s your prorogative but land disputes are not as simple and straightforward as you think, where as in Israelis case the whole world knows they are stealing Palastinian land by using brute force claiming it was given to them by God???????? more than 3 thousand years ago. You tell me which Court in the .

                                                                                                          repondre message

                                                                                                          • 30 December 2012 00:46, by sudani ana

                                                                                                            World could ever accept such a thing as proof of ownership. Yet the USA are happy to support this great injustice at any cost, hence my, and all Muslims, beef with the USA.

                                                                                                            repondre message

                                                                                                        • 2 January 2013 19:25, by Rommel

                                                                                                          sudani ana:
                                                                                                          The assertion that Jewish claims to the “Holy Land” are drawn solely from the Hebrew Bible is an ahistorical anti-Semitic canard; there has been continuous Jewish presence in the “Holy Land” for over 3,300 years, even after the Romans exiled a significant portion of their population in 70 AD and even after the Arabs *invaded* in 638.

                                                                                                          repondre message

                                                                                                          • 2 January 2013 19:34, by Rommel

                                                                                                            You do realize that the Jews have lived in the "Holy Land" far longer than any other population, including the Palestinians? I don’t mean to imply that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian lands is anymore justifiable because of these historical facts, but I definitely felt the need to disabuse you of the anti-Semitic canard that you seem to be bedeviled by.

                                                                                                            repondre message

                                                                                                            • 2 January 2013 19:42, by Rommel

                                                                                                              You realize that your name for Jerusalem (“Alquds”) is preceded by the Jewish name for the city by 1,300 years? Does your definition of “Alquds” also refer to the Western half of the city? Like you, I too support the right of return for the Palestinians, but just how likely is Israel to ever permit something that would undoubtedly result in its revocation as a State by demographic means?

                                                                                                              repondre message

                                                                                                              • 2 January 2013 19:49, by Rommel

                                                                                                                The *Jewish State* will never permit the return of the dispossessed Palestinians. It’s interesting –but not at all surprising- that you would dismiss any notion of there being parallels between Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land and your occupation of our lands. The resemblance between the two is certain; the only difference is that your occupation has claimed infinitely more lives.

                                                                                                                repondre message

                                                                                                                • 2 January 2013 19:57, by Rommel

                                                                                                                  I think I’m going to have to hammer the message home... there are parallels between between the two tragedies. Whether or not you acknowledge this is ultimately irrelevant. I think your essential mistake is in assuming that because these territories are disputed that it then necessarily means that the documented evidence is either scant, conflicting, equivocal, tenuous and or imprecise...

                                                                                                                  repondre message

                                                                                                                  • 2 January 2013 20:03, by Rommel

                                                                                                                    .. that the evidence doesn’t clearly and conclusively settle the question of to whom do these lands belong. Is that the thematic hinge of your facile and terribly unconvincing rationalisation of land theft!? You seem to be saying that my position is informed by mere opinion. The material evidence renders such rhetoric nothing more than wishful thinking.

                                                                                                                    repondre message

                                                                                                                    • 2 January 2013 20:05, by Rommel

                                                                                                                      Contrary to what you may think, I don’t just jump to a congenial conclusion in the absence of evidence. I am very well aware that to surrender reason and objectivity is to surrender credibility and I’m not about to do that, now or ever. I distilled and subjected the claims of *both* parties to rigorous, acid scrutiny and scalpel-like precision.

                                                                                                                      repondre message

                                                                                                                      • 2 January 2013 20:07, by Rommel

                                                                                                                        The unfortunate fact that we were once an integral part of Sudan for over a century has I think shielded you from being recognized for who you truly are – an inveterate occupier; you’ve not been bespattered with this charge precisely because we were once in Union for such an excruciatingly drawn out period; and so it was rather like two television pictures, one melting into the other.

                                                                                                                        repondre message

                                                                                                                        • 2 January 2013 20:16, by Rommel

                                                                                                                          The fact that we only became a Nation in 2011 means that it will take that much longer for the world to recognize just what it is that we have been deprived of and to what extent. The process of educating actors of international significance will take time, but unfortunately this is being bridled and confounded by incompetent cretins.

                                                                                                                          repondre message

                                                                                                                          • 2 January 2013 20:20, by Rommel

                                                                                                                            I’m not surprised that you’ve dismissed a mound of grit-edged evidence by characterizing it as a merely a claim put forward by me; this bit of snideness suggests that you’ve been left with no recourse but to run away from the material evidence. The evidence I speak of comes in the form of reports that I have gone to the effort of collecting from a plethora of human rights organizations,

                                                                                                                            repondre message

                                                                                                                            • 2 January 2013 20:25, by Rommel

                                                                                                                              government gazettes on boundary changes, maps and colonial reports. British colonial reports detail our presence 70km north of “Heglig” in Kol Delek (“Keilak”) at the beginning of the Condominium period. I don’t just make claims, I gather evidence and do my utmost to objectively analyse the material evidence.

                                                                                                                              repondre message

                                                                                                                              • 2 January 2013 20:27, by Rommel

                                                                                                                                Do you know of a place called Mijak-yiith (“Karassana”)? It’s an area around 50-60km north of “Heglig”; and it was the home of the Ruweng Dinka, until they came under constant attacks by the Misseriya as well as by your armed forces. We tempered our anger in the face of these constant attacks that eventually resulted in the displacement of the entire population of Mijak-yiith in 2008,

                                                                                                                                repondre message

                                                                                                                                • 2 January 2013 20:30, by Rommel

                                                                                                                                  ostensibly for the sake of what was at that point the approach of the Referendum. Here’s the source on the raids on “Karassana” payam in 2008: http://www.occasionalwitness.com/Articles/20080210b.html

                                                                                                                                  repondre message

                                                                                                                                  • 2 January 2013 20:33, by Rommel

                                                                                                                                    In virtually every case in which there is a territorial dispute between our two Nations, the material evidence supports our claims. Hofrat en Nahas and the Kafia Kingi enclave were transferred from Bahr el Ghazal to Darfur in 1960 by Ibrahim Abboud and we have the government gazette to prove it. Your government’s claims to the area referred to as Mile 14 are just as hollow:

                                                                                                                                    repondre message

                                                                                                                                    • 2 January 2013 20:35, by Rommel

                                                                                                                                      Your claim to Mile 14 is based entirely on your misinterpretation of a Condominium era agreement, the Munroe-Wheatley agreement of 1924; an agreement that only granted grazing rights to the Rizegat 14 miles into Dinka Malual territory... and -I have read it- and nowhere in the text does it sanction a formal border adjustment or transfer to the Darfur province.

                                                                                                                                      repondre message

                                                                                                                                      • 2 January 2013 20:37, by Rommel

                                                                                                                                        The NCP acknowledged “Heglig” as part of South Sudan during the interim period up until July 2009; hence the frisson of celebratory triumphalism that came at the heels of its convoluted misinterpretation of the ruling on Abyei by the PCA, after which it immediately denied south Sudan a share of the proceeds from “Heglig” in contravention of the wealth-sharing provision of the CPA,

                                                                                                                                        repondre message

                                                                                                                                        • 2 January 2013 20:39, by Rommel

                                                                                                                                          mandating an equal sharing of revenue on oil fields found within the south. We have dozens of human rights organization reports on the displacement of the Ruweng Dinka from “Heglig” in the 90s. I can more than demonstrate the veracity of our claims on other occupied territories such as Kaka, the Megenis Mountains, Chali, Guli and many, many others.

                                                                                                                                          repondre message

                                                                                                                                          • 2 January 2013 20:43, by Rommel

                                                                                                                                            Question: Will you resign and reduce yourself to the pretence that Khartoum acknowledged our rights to “Heglig” for years on end out of some uncharacteristic grace and altruism!?
                                                                                                                                            The extensive and irrefutable documented evidence affirms again and again that “Heglig” is the land of the Ruweng and that they were violently dislodged from this area in the 1990s.

                                                                                                                                            repondre message

                                                                                                                                            • 2 January 2013 20:52, by Rommel

                                                                                                                                              I think I owe you an apology for being so obscenely late with my response — but I have to say in my defence that I have been terribly busy. I’m glad to have gotten all of that of my chest. I imagine that this is precisely the same kind of feeling that big-breasted women get after a breast reduction operation. LOL.

                                                                                                                                              repondre message

                                                                                            • 29 December 2012 16:22, by sudani ana

                                                                                              I take what you’re saying on board, I also noticed that you deliberately ignored the second part of my comment.

                                                                                              repondre message

  • 23 December 2012 20:08, by Mohamed

    Reeves....good morning......this article is about the SPLA shooting down a UN helicopter.....let’s stick to the point.
    I wonder what Reeves would have written if it was SAF that shot down the UN helicopter?
    This nincompoop is unbelievable!

    repondre message

  • 24 December 2012 02:07, by Grader

    Professor Eric correctly summed up UN double standard on South Sudan.
    It is the UNMISS to blame not SPLA for the shooting as they failed to clearly notify the military of their activities in frontline.

    repondre message

  • 24 December 2012 09:27, by 4Justice

    What did the UN deplomat mean by "the SPLA is paid to be paranoid."

    Let’s find out:

    Alice Bailey and the United Nations

    The United Nations worship an “Externalized Hierarchy” of “Ascended Masters,” who carry out the work of a Luciferian “master plan” (Adam Weishaupt’s 1775 Illuminati blueprint) for the establishment of a permanent “Age of Aquarius” (A Dark Evil Age Of Death and Destruction) ruled by one “SANAT Kumara,” (notice the name SATAN has been rearranged, just as SANTA) the “Lord of the World” (2nd Corinthians 4:4 the devil is the “god” of this evil world). Sanat Kumara is a fictitious character made up by Alice Bailey and her Satan-worshipping buddies. The truth of so-called “Ascended Masters” were in contact with familiar spirits, demons, that dictated what Satan wanted them to write. This is how Satan controls the “spiritual wickedness in high places” as Ephesians 6:12 teaches in the Bible.

    repondre message

  • 24 December 2012 18:55, by master

    if UN bias & unfair why you allow them in south sudan?let them go home . But you can not take such fatal decision
    SAR were played the role of reconciliation man between s . Sudan rival tribes which UN playing now but with less merit
    all south sudanese talking about unity & reconciliatoin . No one talked about devolepment
    if all international communty support ss no thing will change. You want

    repondre message

    • 24 December 2012 19:10, by master

      to back our rebels & when we do the same it’s taboo for us
      s s always talking about sudan dishonest any agreement
      in CPA the two sides must withdrow their forces N/S 56 border line . Who dishonest that agreement?
      If SPLM/A applyed this agreement there no rebels now in BN & SK
      we were/are supplying yau yau tell bring SPLM/A down
      ss has uncontrolable problems & looks for more

      repondre message

    • 26 December 2012 20:46, by Peacocktail

      Where was the Copper heading with Russian crews, Why no other personels including Civil affairs officers, SPLA Intelligents personel, Human right affairs Officers, Medical Officers? No clear reason on flight using coppers in Jonglei. UNMISS is like foodbasket being fed by any holder. they love money and even engage with SAF to deliver supplies to Yau Yau to maintian their presents in Jonglei,RSS

      repondre message

  • 25 December 2012 12:21, by S.SUD

    Well Done!

    repondre message

    • 26 December 2012 20:53, by Peacocktail

      UNMISS never know that South Sudan is the sovieriegn state capable of handling and sobotages factors like UNMISS, SAF. Why Condem SPLA of defending South Sudan yet UN PEace Keepers are by kills on daily basis in Darfur by NCP and they keep quiet as if they are being fuck by Bashir.I lost the trust on UN forces in any mission, they survive in creating disturbances. If they flight againt withut perm

      repondre message

  • 27 December 2012 09:33, by 4Justice

    21.12.12 The Begining of Luciferian Age

    There has been an explosion of New Age occultism around the world; including Harry Potter, which is nothing less than an introductory course into witchcraft for children worldwide. New Age and witchcraft both dabble in familiar spirits (demons). Seeking spiritual guidance, information, or power from any source other than God is witchcraft. Understanding that, it becomes evident that there are hundreds of practices of witchcraft; including yoga, séances, tarot cards, psychics, crystal balls, necromancers, palm reading, clairvoyants, speaking-in-tongues, astrology, and a bunch more. God forbids all these things in the Bible [Deut 18:9-14;Lev 19:31;Lev20:6,27; Rev 21:8;Rev 22:15; Acts 13:8-10; 2 Chron. 33:6; 2 Kings 9:22; Ex. 22:18; 1 Sam. 15:23; Mic. 5:12; Nahum 3:4; Jer. 27:9; Mal. 3:5; Isa. 2:6; 2 Kings. 21:6; 23:24; Isa. 19:3]

    Expect to see a lot more of these activities promoted to children, aired on TV, and pushed in public schools. Satan wants your child to become a Luciferian worshipper! Already the world is worshipping the beast, flashing Satanic hand signs everywhere.

    repondre message

  • 27 December 2012 09:59, by Akolde Nhiak Jinub

    Readers, Dr. Reeves isn’t out 2 be bias 2 anyside, but rather telling de bitter truth. SAF has been painting its flights as UN white plane 2 carry out their devil activities all across greater Sudan. In Darfur, SK, Blue Nile, E. Sudan n S. Sudan 2 supply Yauyau, their destabilize agent against GOSS. Reeves highlights mistakes even within SPLA itself. Lack of attention etc. What else do U guys need

    repondre message

  • 31 December 2012 09:05, by mamoun20055

    south sudan state till now hasnt reached to say a country> it is governeed by ilittrate man who didnt complete his primary school, they are a drankard of insects with guns with them what you expect to do< they need tens of years to be civilised people and they are not different from ugandans and kenyans who got independent long before and still most of them living like animals,

    repondre message

  • 16 July 2013 03:05, by realestatemilton
  • 19 July 2013 01:42, by realestatemilton
  • 14 August 2013 23:54, by realestatemilton

    Profi Taping is a drywall Installation and taping company known for our quality residential and commercial work. That’s because Taping Drywall Toronto a high-quality finish and take the time to do the job right. Our projects are never complete
    until you’re 100% satisfied with our work. We won’t leave until you’re happy because it’s jus

    repondre message

Comment on this article

The following ads are provided by Google. SudanTribune has no authority on it.

Sudan Tribune

Promote your Page too

Latest Comments & Analysis

How we can construct a shared vision for South Sudan’s future? 2020-08-01 09:21:58 David Nyuol Vincent To craft a shared vision for the future of South Sudan is difficult but not impossible. To surpass the perilous situation in which we are in now, we need to learn to (...)

Establish capable security force in Darfur 2020-08-01 07:43:40 By Mahmoud A. Suleiman The Darfur region is destined to continue bleeding. Those who believe in that openly say whether Omer Al-Bashir is still in the rule of Sudan or deposed, the region of (...)

An Unconventional Sudanese Muslim Man 2020-07-29 14:42:58 Tribute to My Grandfather By Shahinaz Sabeel In this essay, Shahinaz Sabeel, a young Sudanese woman who grew up between Sudan, Canada and Uganda, recounts her relationship with her grandfather, (...)


Latest Press Releases

S. Korea supports UN communities building resilience project in Sudan’s Blue Nile 2019-09-09 09:26:41 UNDP Sudan September 5, 2019 (KHARTOUM) - An agreement was signed on 5th of September between the Korean Ambassador, His Excellency. Lee Ki-Seong and Dr. Selva Ramachandran, Resident (...)

Sudanese lawyers and Human rights defenders back calls for civil rule 2019-04-26 10:22:06 Press statement by 55 Sudanese lawyers and Human rights defenders on Sudan Sit-in and Peaceful Protest Khartoum -24/04/2019 We, the undersigned (55) Sudanese lawyers and human rights defenders, (...)

South Sudan’s Lafon youth condemn killings of civilians by Pari community 2019-04-03 21:54:29 Press Statement on the Fighting between Pari/ Pacidi and Lotuko/Lokiri on 24/3/2019 Release by The Lafon County Youth Union: We, the Lafon County Youth Union hereby condemn the atrocities and (...)


Copyright © 2003-2020 SudanTribune - All rights reserved.