Home | News    Saturday 15 March 2014

South Sudan unconditionally accepts regional force deployment


March 14, 2014 (JUBA) - South Sudan has unconditionally accepted deployment of an East African regional force, despite protest and rejection by the rebel group which has been fighting government for almost three months since a split in ruling party (SPLM) and army (SPLA) plunged the young nation into conflict in mid-December.

President Salva Kiir attends a session during the 25th Extraordinary Summit of the IGAD on South Sudan in Addis Ababa March 13, 2014 (Photo Reuters/Tiksa Negeri)

The confirmation comes after speculation that the SPLM government in Juba had asked leaders from the East African regional block IGAD - the Intergovernmental Authority of Development - to consider deploying a protection force to the country’s oil fields and other important installations.

Nhial Deng Nhial, the former South Sudanese minister for foreign who is a lead negotiator at talks with the rebel SPLM/A in Opposition, told Sudan Tribune on Friday that his government unconditionally accepted deployment of the regional force in accordance with the communique of the IGAD summit attended by heads of state held this week in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

"The summit had agreed to do two important things. One is the emphasis on the commitment of the parties to the resolve the conflict through peaceful dialogue, which the government of the republic of South Sudan had already accepted as a principle and formed negotiating team", Nhial said.

The other important resolution, according to Nhial, was the seven-member bloc’s decision to deploy a regional force to South Sudan "to firstly provide protection to [the IGAD] ceasefire monitoring and verification mechanism team and secondly to provide protection to key economic zones and installations."

The former foreign minister said that he did not think anyone could object to the regional initiative.

However, the leader of the SPLM/A in Opposition, Riek Machar, South Sudan’s former vice president told Sudan Tribune on Friday that he condemned the proposed deployments of such forces, warning that it will widen and regionalise the current conflict.

The rebels have already strongly objected to Uganda’s decision to deploy troops to South Sudan to fight alongside the SPLA against Machar’s rebels, a loose coalition of armed civilians mobilised mainly on the basis of ethnic affiliations and defectors from the army.

Despite beginning as an internal political argument between rival factions within the ruling SPLM, which was not divided along tribal lines, the conflict has killed around 10,000 people many of whom were targeted because of their ethnic identity.

Machar described IGAD’s decision as "unfortunate" as it interfered in South Sudan’s "internal conflict" between factions of the ruling party and army.

The SPLM and SPLA until a 2005 peace deal was a rebel movement fighting against the government in Khartoum. In 2011 the country seceded from Sudan but did not address its internal political differences.

"We reject it and condemn it in the strongest terms. It is an attempt to regionalize the internal conflict," Machar told Sudan Tribune on Friday by phone from one of his bases in oil-producing Upper Nile state.

Nhial, however, insisted that the deployment of IGAD forced "is to create an environment conducive to continue with the dialogue on other issues". So far the peace process in Addis Ababa has only achieved a weak ceasefire deal that was seriously violated by both sides.

The former foreign minister did not provide details regarding who will fund the force or how many troops would be deployed.

However, sources within the ministry of foreign affairs and the presidency claimed three IGAD member countries had shown an interest in contributing to the force but did not give any indication as to their identity.

South Sudan’s president Salva Kiir had made it abundantly clear at the summit that the upcoming talks should be confined to the SPLM government and Machar’s the SPLM/A in Opposition, Nhial said.

A groups of seven senior SPLM officials have joined the talks as a third group after they were detained and accused of collaborating with Machar to overthrow Kiir’s government in a coup on 15 December.

"The president made it abundantly clearly that the position of the government of the republic of South Sudan is to confine the upcoming talks to only the government and those involved in armed conflict", Nhial said.

This group however, "can participate in the subsequent processes, if they so wish. We will have national dialogue where all the stakeholders would participate. I think this is one of the appropriate forums where these people can participate if they so wish".

Many analysts have warned that a political power sharing deal between the warring factions will not bring a lasting solution to the political factors that triggered the conflict and the social issues that have caused the issue of ethnic identity to polarise the young nation.

Nhial’s comments also seem to rule of the involvement of South Sudanese civil society in the talks, a move that has been encouraged by mediators but not the government or the rebels.

The seven former detainees all deny being part of a conspiracy to oust Kiir from power, as do the four senior SPLM officials whose high profile trial began in Juba this week.

"As for those who are being tried, the president can’t do anything now. He can only decide what to do after the outcome of the trial, if he wishes”, Nhial said.

A senior diplomat at the ministry foreign affairs said Sudan and Uganda were unlikely to participate in the deployment of troops as part of the protection and deterrent regional force.

Sudan, as the country that South Sudan seceded from after decades of conflict the Sudan Armed Forces would not be welcomed by the majority of South Sudanese. Khartoum also has had bad relations with Kampala for decades.

Uganda has already deployed troops to support the SPLA and has effectively taken sides in the conflict so it would be politically difficult for them now to be part of a regional peacekeeping mission.

"So far, we have Kenya, Ethiopia and Rwanda as some of the countries which have indicated their readiness to deploy to the country anytime. They are only waiting completion of necessary arrangements which the government is currently putting in place before eventual deployment. What I know is that their deployment would take place immediately within a month of approval", a senior diplomat at the ministry of foreign affairs, who did not want to be named, told Sudan Tribune on Friday.


Related story

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.
  • 15 March 2014 06:13, by Ayuiu Makuac Lam

    Kiir has no problem about the forces deploy in south sudan.

    • 15 March 2014 06:27, by Mi diit

      I have never seen a very coward president like Mrs Akiir Museveni in my life. He fears Riek Machar to death. The guy will bring every army from Africa continent to protect him from Riek Machar. He doesn’t have confidence in the SPLA or his ethnic militias. He still needs foreign armies to protect him, his palace, resident, oilfields, etc. What is the role of the so-called national army?

      • 15 March 2014 07:04, by Mi diit

        I know Yoweri Museveni and his gay wife, Mrs Akiir were behind the decision to deploy the troops and then Ethiopia and Kenya foolishly accepted the idea without looking into what was behind it as well as its future consequences. Ethiopia will invite upon itself chaos in Gambella region if it will side with Dinka of Salva Kiir. A foolish strategy.

        • 15 March 2014 07:13, by Mi diit

          We the true South Sudanese nationalists will NEVER allow our sovereign country to be surrendered to foreign mercenaries, armies and governments. This is our own internal matter. A dictator who refuses democratic political reforms to take place should not get help. IGAD countries should condemn and sanction Kiir’s leadership instead of coming with more tanks and weapons to kill South Sudanese...

          • 15 March 2014 09:20, by Sir King

            - Dear world,
            Help us, Kiir must go. We are really tired of this man. He is killing our brothers using foreign army. Nuers are our brothers even though they are foolish or crazy, we have to push on bit by bit until they understand the situations. Please dispose both leaders so that citizens remain in peace.

          • 15 March 2014 10:19, by Mapuor

            Hahahahah Kiir Oyeee.Guys our president was chosen to us by God. Just see the wisdom that he has. He knows that Dinkas and Nuer would never refrain from endless revenge killings.Hahahaah wisdom is better than silver and gold. Regional forces are welcomed.SPLA OYEE.LONG LIVE MAYARDIT

            • 15 March 2014 11:19, by Wicdail

              That’s not a wisdom fool. But the opposite is correct. if you really love the people of SS more than that corrupt food with oil, you wouldn’t encorage your dumb leader (Kirr). The mess you have done will need 80 years to fixed. That’s 1/2 generations after you and I die if we can reach the old ages. Advise your Primeval leader before it’s too let. Taking off that big hat, may help.

            • 16 March 2014 02:56, by ngadodo

              Mapour, i agrees with you totally by Said that, God chosed Salva Kiir to be our leader, but in away of evil spirit inorder to destory ROSS as he did now nothings else.
              but people of ROSS supporting evil by tribalism line, his not did good thing politically to all citezens of ROSS,pple from his tribe support him bcse his support his State and he devolop own tribe not everybody bonefits from him.

          • 15 March 2014 14:02, by Rommel

            Mi diit:
            I very much doubt that anyone actually fears Riek. Riek is not a skilled military tactician. Salva is a lot of things, but he’s certainly not a coward. A man that actually picked up a rifle for his people, can never be regarded as a coward in any decent society... But a capricious man — a man who was supplied and financed by the enemy, fits that description quite well.

            • 15 March 2014 14:16, by Rommel

              Salva Kiir has absolutely no need to doubt people that can lose a million of their own and still fight on; people that stayed on for the whole duration of the war — never oscillating between the enemy and their homeland. The men that fought the war with Khartoum largely went home in 2006 and were replaced by Khartoum’s oifield guard-dogs.

              • 15 March 2014 14:18, by Rommel

                The Ugandans have provided him with the necessary respite in which to create new battalions and new divisions. The people who actually fought the war against Khartoum -not you- largely went home in 2006, and on the one (1) year anniversary of this evanescent peace, they graciously permitted the return of Khartoum’s wretched weasels, snakes and dogs...

                • 15 March 2014 14:19, by Rommel

                  .. Snakes and dogs that quite unfortunately became the majority in our armed forces in 2006, even though they were Khartoum’s witless lackeys during the war. Our men are returning to their army; and when new battalions and divisions have been sufficiently conditioned, trained and armed... we will have no need for the Ugandans.

                  • 15 March 2014 14:37, by Rommel

                    What, you’re ’nationalists’ now!? You are not a ’nationalist’! Tell me, do ’nationalist’ protect oilfields on behalf of the enemy!? Do ’nationalist’ fight side by side with an enemy responsible for the deaths of millions of their fellow citizens!? Do ’nationalist’ serve the enemy for decades only to return on the one year anniversary of a peace agreement!?

                    • 15 March 2014 14:42, by Rommel

                      You returned in 2006 — post combat... After all the fighting was done, after precious blood was expended to recapture the vast majority of our land from your masters. You have been in the armed services of Khartoum for decades, and you only returned after all the fighting, after all the anguish and after all the sacrifice.

                      • 15 March 2014 14:53, by Rommel

                        Who do you think you’re fooling in your cheap, stale lecture on ’Sovereignty’!? This is a power struggle between two men that have employed the services of their respective tribes in order to attain and/or hold on to power. Why are you threatening Ethiopia? Stop issuing threats that you don’t have a snowball’s chance in Hades of carrying out.

                        • 15 March 2014 15:03, by Rommel

                          Why are you now condemning mercenaries when that was the role you played during the war? The only difference between mercenaries that you condemn and the mercenary role that you played, is that you didn’t get payed for your services. You did it largely for free. However, Khartoum made men like Matip Major-Generals in the SAF.

                          • 15 March 2014 15:27, by Mi diit

                            There is one important difference you seem not to understand. Riek allied with Bashir as Sudanese in the same government which fought itself. He didn’t go to Ethiopia to bring foreign army to fight Garang like your coward and non-nationalist Kiir is doing? Politically we were one country in Sudan. This is why Dinkas like George Kongor and Moses Machar were vice presidents to Bashir.

                            • 15 March 2014 17:53, by Rommel

                              Mi diit:
                              Ah, I see, your alliance with Khartoum was justified because it was an all Sudanese affair!? How does it change the fact that you went outside the family and begged for assistance from the enemy!? The only reason that anyone ever appeals for assistance from a third party is that they’ve judged themselves incapable of prosecuting the war on their own.

                              • 15 March 2014 17:58, by Rommel

                                The fact that the traitors that you mentioned were Dinka has absolutely no bearing on the Dinka community, as they were not provided with material or personnel from the Dinka tribe. Our traitors are reviled, rejected and resisted. You put your traitors on a pedestal and constantly make excuses for them. Our traitors did not have tens of thousands of Khartoum compliant Dinka militiamen.

          • 15 March 2014 20:23, by The rock

            coming with more tanks and weapons to kill South Sudanese...is that what you just said??? ohoh.. sorry man, they won’t hurt you if you could just keep off your filthy hands off our oil and properties of the South Sudan.
            they are coming for, Upper nile, Unity And Jonglei State, I think these guys hate Nuer so much,...hy talk to your brothers in Gammbella not to foolishly think of something.

            • 16 March 2014 02:17, by Mi diit

              Stop talking nonsense. The Dinka or SPLA were too getting assistance from foreign countries like Uganda. Did you expect Riek to fight you with his bare hands? You lied that the Dinka rejected their members who served Khartoum. Those of Abel Alier, George Kongor and Moses Machar had hundreds of thousands of Dinka followers and fought against Garang too as SAF soldiers.

              • 16 March 2014 02:22, by Mi diit

                My question to you is would it have been fine with you if Riek got military assistance from countries like Ethiopia instead of Khartoum and fought you with it? Riek was making alliance with Khartoum to get what he wanted to achieve (self-determination) from both Bashir and Garang, who were pro-unity leaders. He had to strike the balance and pressurized both of them in that smart strategy.

                • 16 March 2014 02:28, by Mi diit

                  Riek made Khartoum to believe that he was going to be their permanent ally, and so Khartoum appeased his demands for self-determination and put it in form of the KPA agreement and in the Sudan constitution, 1998. Garang on the other hand became weaker and decided to accept self-determination in order to win Riek back. CPA was only signed after Riek and Garang reunited under self-determination. See

                  • 16 March 2014 02:34, by Mi diit

                    Rommel, if your claim is true that you reject your Dinka traitors, Salva Kiir would have been rejected by the Dinka community. He is a traitor who brought in foreign armies to kill his Nuer citizens simply because he doesn’t want political reforms in the country. He has detained freedom fighters for no reason. Or maybe that doesn’t amount to treason in Dinka vocabulary, ah?

                  • 16 March 2014 02:49, by Rommel

                    Mi diit:
                    Did the Ugandans have an air force that intervened on our behalf to bomb your positions during the war? Uganda was significantly weaker than Sudan at that point and didn’t have any of the capabilities of your Arab allies. Unlike Khartoum Uganda didn’t deploy well over a hundred thousand of their troops into the theater.

                    • 16 March 2014 02:54, by Rommel

                      There is no historian that contends that Abel Alier, George Kongor and Moses Machar had ’hundreds of thousands’ of Dinka troops in the SAF. You have no evidence. If you had evidence, why is it that your posts consists only of rhetoric, but not of actual evidence of any kind? You’re not -playing dodgy-. It’s clear, you’re simply stupid. Present your sources.

                      • 16 March 2014 02:55, by Rommel

                        You better stop spinning and find some documents, fast! I have a feeling you won’t be forthcoming in this regard. Two things can happen: 1) You will answer my request for evidence, and if you’re forthcoming, I will thank you for enlightening me. 2) You will not answer my request, in which case the debate is over, and you’ve lost.

                        • 16 March 2014 03:08, by Rommel

                          It would have been significantly better if Riek had solicited and received military assistance from Ethiopia, however, Ethiopia was hostile to Riek — they expelled him from their country in 1996, when he attempted to join the NDA.

                          • 16 March 2014 03:18, by Rommel

                            Did Riek succeed in getting what he wanted from Khartoum!? Did he know what he was doing when he committed the folly of being so desperately reliant upon Khartoum’s supplies, weapons, ammunition and logistical support!? Do you really think that Riek could extract politically exacting concessions when he was entirely dependant on the Ignaz?

                            • 16 March 2014 03:19, by Rommel

                              Riek did not deliver Self-Determination to the people of South Sudan; he delivered internecine tribal war and our oilfields to Khartoum — that’s his legacy. The legacy that allowed Khartoum to arm itself like never before with sophisticated and devastating weapons to the tune of billions of dollars and to the attendant lost and misery of millions of lives.

                              • 16 March 2014 03:21, by Rommel

                                The 1997 Agreement afforded Riek [on worthless paper] tutelage over the oil-fields, only for Khartoum to then rescind on that agreed arrangement. Khartoum revoked its commitment to this agreement by way of a military incursion into the oilfields, while Riek looked on ever so hopelessly as Khartoum increased its military presence, in an absolute, definite and conspicuous display of contempt...

                                • 16 March 2014 03:23, by Rommel

                                  . and disregard for the man. You people seem to always begin with an hypothesis —usually one which is emotionally appealing- to you and spectacularly implausible... which you then attempt to support with unsubstantiated and ahistorical hogwash.

                                  • 16 March 2014 03:25, by Rommel

                                    Here’s a source on what transpired:
                                    "The government benefited substantially from the split inside the SPLA. The government had encouraged the split by sending false signals that it might let the South secede." (Sudan-Contested identities, Ann Lesch)

                                    • 16 March 2014 03:28, by Rommel

                                      Once the split occurred, the government developed a four-prong strategy that encouraged Riek machar to fight the SPLA. It backed away from offering independence, mounted large scale offences against Garang’s forces and used the disintegration of the SPLA to facilitate its repression of the African people in Southern Kordofan, Darfur and Southern Blue Nile. (Sudan: Contested identities, Ann Lesch)

                                      • 16 March 2014 03:30, by Rommel

                                        Riek was bamboozled by Khartoum. He was entirely dependent on their supplies, weapons, ammunition and logistical support... and yet he apparently thought that he could extricate himself from them.

                                        • 16 March 2014 03:30, by Rommel

                                          The fact that Khartoum feigned sincerity when it enshrined the right to Self-Determination in the Constitution speaks volume of their cunning and political skill... and of their ability to manipulate the stupid, the naive and the myopic. Khartoum had no intention of honoring these commitments, especially when it was they that armed, fed and provided Riek’s forces with logistical support.

                                          • 16 March 2014 03:34, by Rommel

                                            You seem to so desperately want to believe that Riek actually knew what he was doing. Did he know what he was doing when Khartoum used Matip to force him out of Unity State!? Did he know what he was doing when he admitted that he got "cheated" [his words not mine] by Khartoum into thinking that they had any intention of honoring any part (s) of the agreements that he signed with them!?

                                            • 16 March 2014 03:39, by Rommel

                                              Khartoum used Riek and Riek admits to this. Riek did not pin anyone down on anything — that’s your delusion. Riek did not frustrate Bashir at any point during his dalliances with them... he helped them - and quite substantially too. Riek’s doom-destined alliance with Khartoum did not convince Dr. John Garang of anything.

                                              • 16 March 2014 03:43, by Rommel

                                                Riek had no hand in the CPA. He was permitted to return by Dr. John Garang out of grace. He was insignificant when he returned. He had very few troops, and returned a dejected man, after Khartoum disregarded every tenant of the pathetic agreement (s) that he signed with them.

                                                • 16 March 2014 03:46, by Rommel

                                                  The fact that you argue that Riek succeeded even when he failed miserably, exposes your sheer desperation. It’s your standard pressure response, and tacky attempt at sophistry. I’m frankly surprised that you keep falling back on it.

                                                  • 16 March 2014 03:51, by Rommel

                                                    I really do think that the Dinka should remove Salva Kiir. The man is now a disgrace. But do you think that his alliance with Uganda is morally comparable with Riek’s alliance with Khartoum? There is no equivalence. Uganda didn’t bomb, starve and kill our people for decades. Uganda isn’t responsible for the deaths of millions of our people.

                                                    • 16 March 2014 04:06, by Rommel

                                                      There’s not a single impartial historian that asserts that Riek’s foolish alliances with Khartoum directly laid the groundwork for our independence. History does not agree with you, Gatwech. Prove to us that you are not as clueless as you appear to be by explaining why accounts by impartial historians don’t seem to agree with you.

                                                      • 16 March 2014 04:07, by Rommel

                                                        Why did you rely upon the grace of a political unit that you so ostensibly wished to distance yourself from!? You cannot seek independence from someone when you’re wholly reliant upon them for every nail, every litre of oil, every platform, every box of ammunition and their logistical support. You didn’t know what you were doing! Even your precious idiot idol admits that he was ’cheated’.

                                                        • 16 March 2014 04:33, by Bentiu son

                                                          Romandan aka Rommel,shut up your nattering mouth mongrel,soon you will die between two warring factions or camps because of your flip flop stance.Ya useless Rommel,sometimes you criticizes Salva Kiir n sometimes Dr Machar Teny.Tell me which faction are you in? All cowards n opportunists do pretend to be neutral when physical confrontation erupts. Are you the ones? Second,ur identity is unknown

                                                          • 16 March 2014 05:24, by Rommel

                                                            Bentiu son:
                                                            You are hilarious. How does distorting my pseudonym to "Romandan" help you exactly? What is it suppose to imply? Was it meant to be edgy and clever? I don’t support either side, but if I had to choose, I would choose a man that didn’t murder tens of thousands of Southerners during the war.

                                                            • 16 March 2014 08:04, by Mi diit

                                                              Common, be realistic! You wouldn’t enter a lion’s den and expect to pull out your calf to safety without expecting a bite from the lion, no matter how charming you could be to the lion, would you?. And give me a break, it is normally expected to be cheated in the political world. Joseph Lagu was cheated by Nimeiri in 1972 agreement.

                                                              • 16 March 2014 08:06, by Mi diit

                                                                John Garang was cheated by Sadiq Al-Mahdi in Asmara alliance of 1996, also cheated by Museveni and lost his life in 2005. Salva Kiir cheated on Abyei protocol up todate. Riek Machar cheated by Salva Kiir on succession promised to him during the 2010 presidential elections, and you can name them. What is important is what you tried achieving and continue holding on to it until finally achieved!

                                                              • 16 March 2014 08:10, by Mi diit

                                                                John Garang was cheated by Sadiq Al-Mahdi in Asmara alliance of 1996, also cheated by Museveni and lost his life in 2005. Salva Kiir cheated on Abyei protocol up todate. Riek Machar cheated by Salva Kiir on succession promised to him during the 2010 presidential elections, and you can name them. What is important is what you tried achieving and continue holding on to it until finally achieved!

                                                                • 16 March 2014 08:12, by Mi diit

                                                                  Riek used a very smart strategy and style which others like you will take time to understand and appreciate. He was wise enough and knew from the beginning that Bashir was going to cheat him. He went for the cheating! He didn’t expect a full cake out of his agreement with Bashir. But he knew to gain two things for sure: 1) That he would commit Bashir (falsely though) to the contents of the KPA.

                                                                  • 16 March 2014 08:14, by Mi diit

                                                                    ...particularly the acceptance of self-determination for the people of South Sudan, for the first time in the HISTORY of Sudan, to be exercised in an internationally monitored referendum. It was also enshrined in the Sudan constitution of 1998 (consult the document, Rommel)! The wording of that clause in the KPA is exactly copied and pasted in the CPA agreement of 2005. How did Riek do it?

                                                                    • 16 March 2014 08:17, by Mi diit

                                                                      He made himself look vulnerable and friendly to Bashir (unique style), giving Bashir false hope that he would be his permanent ally against Garang. Bashir in his mind knew that he was lying to Riek on acceptance of self-determination. Riek knew the trick though but his goal was to pin down Khartoum and expose them to the international community on their FIRST EVER constitutional acceptance of...

                                                                      • 16 March 2014 08:19, by Mi diit

                                                                        ...the right to self-determination for the people of South Sudan. On the other hand, Riek wanted to give the flip flopping Garang a hard time: either to reject his alliance with Sadiq Al Mahdi which was based on the rejection of self-determination, or agree on the right to self-determination if he wanted to buy Riek back and renew SPLM/A’s strength.

                                                                        • 16 March 2014 08:22, by Mi diit

                                                                          Riek quickly made use of his presence with Khartoum and mobilized all the northern political parties to endorse the right to self-determination for South Sudan, also pinning them down in case of future regime change by any of them. He made the issue very public in Sudan that even a Sudanese child knew what was happening because everybody was on TV and radio talking about granting South Sudan the..

                                                                          • 16 March 2014 08:24, by Mi diit

                                                                            ...right to self-determination. He successfully dragged Khartoum to a supposedly false promise which however later on became too difficult for Khartoum to escape from during the CPA negotiations. On the other hand, he made Garang to feel like missing some of his part, and that was the Riek’s faction. Garang felt weaker and coupled with mounting pressures by the western world...

                                                                            • 16 March 2014 08:27, by Mi diit

                                                                              ...he agreed on reconciling with Riek. But this time, he had to accept the right of self-determination as a twin vision with his preferable united secular Sudan vision, and more importantly the former as the basis for the CPA. Remember that the January 6, 2002 Nairobi Declaration between Riek and Garang was based on self-determination. And remember that the first protocol on CPA signed in...

                                                                              • 16 March 2014 08:29, by Mi diit

                                                                                Machakos in July 2002 was on self-determination. And also remember that the CPA protocol on self-determination was signed only SIX months after Riek and Garang reunited and agreed on the self-determination as the basis for negotiations with Khartoum. Of course Riek was not planning his strategies and implementing them free of charge. He was dealing with cunning Khartoum as well as cunning Garang.

                                                                                • 16 March 2014 08:31, by Mi diit

                                                                                  To strike the balance and “Land on his feet” as historians wrote, he was actually expected to risk serious bites by either side of the jaw. Yes he was humiliated by Bashir who divided his forces. But Riek already knew from the beginning that he was going to risk such humiliations in that fake alliance but stayed focus as he knew in the end he would kill two birds with one stone.

                                                                                  • 16 March 2014 08:32, by Mi diit

                                                                                    By then he had already put a great mark which Khartoum was unable to erase, and that was the right to self-determination. At the same time he frustrated the war between Bashir and Garang as he was constantly reminding them about the need for a peaceful resolution to the conflict as the only means to end the war.

                                                                                    • 16 March 2014 08:34, by Mi diit

                                                                                      The provisions of the dishonoured Khartoum Peace Agreement (KPA) became the basis for the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) as the final agreement was signed in his presence as the magnet that dragged Bashir and Garang to the agreement.

                                                                                      • 16 March 2014 08:37, by Mi diit

                                                                                        Riek did all those successful maneuvers while confining himself within Sudan as an internal conflict. He did not lose focus or space and run to beg foreigners to militarily interfere in the Sudanese conflict, contrary to treacherous Sava Kiir.

                                                                                        • 16 March 2014 08:40, by Mi diit

                                                                                          Meanwhile the many years of military confrontations between Bashir and Garang killed millions of people in South Sudan, Riek minimized the loss of lives using his peaceful strategy, even though he was humiliated in many ways. Now, what is the point of bring Museveni to rule South Sudan and take over the role of SPLA to kill the Nuer?

                                                                                          • 16 March 2014 08:44, by Mi diit

                                                                                            You have agreed above that Kiir should be removed. Yes, he is a traitor and should be removed from presidency. But again, you lied that the Dinka community doesn’t support its traitors. Why do they support Salva Kiir, a traitor? Do you still hold to your claim, praising Dinkas for not supporting their own traitors. Are you not a liar? Answer me convincingly, otherwise, you have lost the argument!

                                                                      • 16 March 2014 08:26, by Rommel

                                                                        Mi diit:
                                                                        It’s amazing to witness the human mind in the process of confusing itself via self-inflicted misdirection, convolution and irrationality. Your little feel good narrative proves that you are way past delusional, and that you are a full blown psychotic in need of professional help.

                                                                        • 16 March 2014 08:32, by Rommel

                                                                          Your posts are interesting examples of how you lie to yourself in order to sustain your delusions. It doesn’t matter that the right to Self-Determination was enshrined in the Sudanese constitution — what mattered was your inability to enforce it.

                                                                          • 16 March 2014 08:40, by Rommel

                                                                            A genocidal, State sponsor of terror doesn’t give a damn about some flimsy document, otherwise they wouldn’t have murdered millions of people in contravention of the Geneva convention.

                                                                            • 16 March 2014 08:43, by Rommel

                                                                              Any Southerner who holds the mistaken view that Arab Nationalism now sincere, now means good business, now gives the South local autonomy in good faith and that this autonomy will be guaranteed by a few phrases scribbled on some sheets of paper stapled and bound together and christened “ The Constitution”...

                                                                              • 16 March 2014 08:44, by Rommel

                                                                                ..that Southerner either suffers from acute historical myopia or else advocates the treasonable stand of opportunism, national subjugation and continued Arab Chauvinism and domination; in short, such Southerner calls for surrender in a camouflaged form. ( Captain John Garang Letter to Gen. Joseph Lagu of Anyanya One, January 24, 1972)

                                                                                • 16 March 2014 08:51, by Rommel

                                                                                  The KPA was not the antecedent to the CPA. "The states were entrusted with powers over their own security and public order, but the Federal government exercise power over the armed forces, defence affairs and National security." That’s the agreement that Riek signed; an agreement that allowed Khartoum to control everything: Security, the economy and the armed forces.

                                                                                  • 16 March 2014 08:51, by Rommel

                                                                                    1997 agreement did not have the express support and involvement of the United States or any other actors of international significance. Riek’s pathetic agreement was doomed to failure from the onset. You can’t compare what happened to the KPA [its complete evisceration] with what it is now happening with the Abyei Protocol of the CPA.

                                                                                    • 16 March 2014 08:53, by Rommel

                                                                                      Every tenant of the KPA was dishonored. Riek was promised control of the oilfields; Riek was promised a referendum; Riek was promised respect as an equal... but Riek didn’t get any of these, did he now? The KPA had security arrangement weakness, just like the Addis Ababa agreement.

                                                                                      • 16 March 2014 08:54, by Rommel

                                                                                        Your posts inform on the assumption that an idea, once imagined, must exist as a physical reality, simply because it is imagined. The KPA is not the antecedent to the CPA. The CPA resembles the Chukudum Accord a great more. The Chukudum accord mentioned other regions > southern Blue Nile, the Nuba Mountains, the ingessana hills and eastern Sudan...

                                                                                        • 16 March 2014 08:54, by Rommel

                                                                                          . as did the CPA; regions that were not mentioned by Riek Machar in any of his failed agreements — ever. Furthermore, security provisions in Riek’s pathetic 1997 agreement, do not at all resemble the judicious security provisions outlined in the CPA. There is no credible academic, historian or intellectual that contends that the KPA is the direct antecedent to the CPA.

                                                                                          • 16 March 2014 08:55, by Rommel

                                                                                            No one believes this or thinks this other than you. Though I doubt that you actually believe it, because, well.... it’s just dumb. Full props to you for your imaginative piece of fluff rhetoric. Your rationale is something like this: ("If it makes me feel good, it must be true." And as for the enemy supposedly holding Riek in high esteem...

                                                                                            • 16 March 2014 08:56, by Rommel

                                                                                              Riek was an incompetent hypocrite, an unconvincing liar, a capricious figure — prone to collaborating with the enemy, unscrupulous and a TRAITOR. You have this terrible habit in which you consistently juxtapose fact with lurid fiction. You ignore facts, distort data, or just make stuff up when all else fails.

                                                                                              • 16 March 2014 09:02, by Rommel

                                                                                                Riek did not mobilise ’all the northern political parties to endorse the right to self-determination for South Sudan’. He was completely rejected by them. You don’t have to believe me, I’ll actually go to the trouble of citing my sources:

                                                                                                • 16 March 2014 09:06, by Rommel

                                                                                                  His previous military collaboration with the government undermined his claimed to head an anti-Khartoum, pro-independence Southern movement. Added to this was the Northern parties reluctance either to antagonize Garang or to see a re-unified SPLA. The Root Causes Of Sudan’s Civil Wars: Peace Or Truce, Douglas H. Johnson)

                                                                                                  • 16 March 2014 09:23, by Rommel

                                                                                                    The SPLA regained most of its strength around 1996. There’s no evidence that Dr. John Garang needed Riek at that point or was seeking him out. You’re delusional.

                                                                                                    • 16 March 2014 09:24, by Rommel

                                                                                                      Faced with the demonstration of his powerlessness, Riek complained that while the 1997 peace agreement placed the oil-fields under his control, the government’s support of Matip underminned his position and the entire agreement. (The Root Causes of Sudan’s Civil Wars: Peace Or Truce

                                                                                                      • 16 March 2014 09:25, by Rommel

                                                                                                        Privately he explained to his supporters both inside and outside the country, and to foreign observers, that he would stick to the letter of the agreement to show all concerned that when it collapsed, the fault was due to the government’s own bad faith. Proving the government’s untrustworthiness soon became the main justification for his collaboration. His position was scarcely credible.

                                                                                • 16 March 2014 09:00, by Mi diit

                                                                                  Read my posts well instead of jumping up high in denial. I clearly said the KPA was the roadmap to CPA. Riek initially called it a Peace Charter. I explained how that agreement finally pinned down both Khartoum and Garang to self-determination in the CPA. Yes, Riek knew that the referendum on self-determination would not be exercised without Garang’s faction. The end justifies the means!

                                                                                  • 16 March 2014 09:05, by Mi diit

                                                                                    Now in shameful defeat you are simply copying and pasting your outdated arguments instead of focusing on the points and questions I have just raised above. You are nothing but a pretender who refuses the truth to prevail. Shame on you for failing to address my questions above. Bye...I am doing something else important.

                                                                                    • 16 March 2014 09:12, by Rommel

                                                                                      Mi diit:
                                                                                      ’Defeat’? LOL! What ’defeat’. You have yet to produce any quote, cite any scholar, or produce anything at all in support or your preposterous assertions. You have presented nothing. Must be lonely. There is not a credible historian or political analyst that agrees with your pathetic attempts at distortion.

                                                                                      • 16 March 2014 09:14, by Rommel

                                                                                        No credible, impartial historian agrees with the many supposed achievements that you so perennially ascribe to Riek. You’ve never proven me wrong on any point. You are the only source for these glittering accounts on Riek’s phantasmic successes and his wonderful strategies. ROFL!

                                                                                        • 16 March 2014 09:18, by Rommel

                                                                                          The Nasir Declaration was not what afforded South Sudan with Self-Determination. There are a great deal of historical facts that you seem to be ignorant of. There was for example the fact that on the 29th of July [one month prior to the Nasir Declaration], the SPLM/A had informed the Sudanese government that Self-Determination was to be discussed for the Abuja agenda.

                                                                                          • 16 March 2014 09:19, by Rommel

                                                                                            This is confirmed by the works of scholars such as Ann Lesch. Her book states on page 22: the independence option was therefore included in the still-united SPLM’s proposal for the Abuja agenda that was submitted to Nigerian and Sudanese government on 29th July 1991. (The Battle for Peace in Sudan: An Analysis of Abuja Conferences 1992 – 1993)

                                                                                            • 16 March 2014 09:43, by Mi diit

                                                                                              South Sudanese are the self-historians and witnesses of what I am saying. Those foreign writers who wrote books after 1991 split were hired pens, paid by John Garang to write what he wanted to hear. Most of their sources of information were anti-Riek people like yourself who distorted facts and misinformed them. They never cross checked with Riek. Their books were misinformed...OMG!

                                                                                              • 16 March 2014 10:28, by Rommel

                                                                                                Mi diit:
                                                                                                I know, facts are usually tiresome to people who place too much effort into disregarding them. You must be exhausted then. No one is buying your excuses. Try again. It’s fun watching you squirm. You can’t debate. You can’t cite sources .You can’t even counter facts. You’re only good for laughs.

                                                                                                • 16 March 2014 10:29, by Rommel

                                                                                                  Historians have to follow a high scholarly standard; they don’t just absorb pieces of information like a sponge. Historians disagree with your ahistorial accounts, and no amount of dishonesty and conspiracy theory will help you. You can cry until your eyes drop out, baby boy.

                                                                                                  • 16 March 2014 10:29, by Rommel

                                                                                                    The historian that I cited has lived with the Nuer for years, spoken intimately with the Nuer, wrote books about their religion and cultural practices and was instrumental in retrieving Ngundeng’s dang. Are you suggesting that -despite all of this- that he is biased against the Nuer!? Whoa, paranoid much? He should be predisposed towards you by now, no?

                                                                                                    • 16 March 2014 10:30, by Rommel

                                                                                                      Your on-going postings only prove that you really don’t want to learn anything. What you want is to believe in something ridiculous. In turn, this is why you can’t learn. There is no evidence that Dr. John Garang De Mabior ever payed any historian to distort history. Do you have any evidence for your claim!?

                                                                                                      • 16 March 2014 10:36, by Rommel

                                                                                                        Opinions that are contradicted by facts qualify as wishful thinking or bias. Either bring facts or admit to bias. Choose one. You are stuck in a purgatory of ignorance of your own creation, in which you are unable to learn, unable to think and unable to do anything other than post increasingly unsubstantiated exhibitions of your own ignorance.

                                                                                                        • 16 March 2014 10:37, by Rommel

                                                                                                          Dr. John Garang De Mabior is dead... Stop lying about him. This is just petty-revenge, but you keep the stuff at such a looney level, that no one takes it seriously, so I don’t think it can work, even on a petty-revenge level.

                                                                                                          • 16 March 2014 10:38, by Rommel

                                                                                                            If you’re going to make allegations, you should make sure you have sources that can affirm your assertions, that you are prepared to present — on demand. You are obviously far too self-deluded and emotionally stunted to objectively assess why none are persuaded by your discourse in dishonesty. Present your evidence.

      • 15 March 2014 09:18, by Sir King

        - We want Riek to dispose Kiir Mayardit, so that we easily dispose Riek, because we don’t want dictators in South Sudan. Kiir is a weak, corrupt, thickminded leader we never ever seen here.
        I am here to assure Dr. Riek to intensify his vision beyond Nuer tribe only. We are all tired of Stupid Kiir. In 2005-2011, Kiir has been pointing his fingers to North and now pointing his fingers to workers.

      • 15 March 2014 11:57, by Ayuiu Makuac Lam

        I’m really wondered of the tribe know as Nuers in south sudan for their asumption. When in the history of DINKAS ans Nuers, the minority community the defeat LARGES community DINKAS? It is nonsene. Look #Mi diit and #Bentiu Son, their families are very poor, the uncle of Mi diit was killed in Luel village in Lakes state in cattle raiding. They very poor. I know them.

    • 15 March 2014 09:14, by Sir King

      Simply NO, NO, NO, to regional IGAD forces. This is the idea of dictator Yuweri Museveni. Please, if you don’t want this nation to turn Somalia, you have to stop those ideas. AWEIL,Greater Equatoria, Lakes state will join the war and Kiir must see either to leave of die with foolish rival Dr. Riek Machar. Please we don’t want both leaders

    • 15 March 2014 14:06, by Johndumo14

      What happened to M23 rebels of congo ,will soon happen to Dr Riek Machar Nuer rebels.
      The IGAD troops and SPLA must defeat Riek Machar rebels,
      The Gov.troops and IGAD troops must push the rebels out Nasir ,because Nasir has become a threat to Malakal has become the breding ground for the rebels.

    • 15 March 2014 14:11, by Johndumo14

      The threats to Salva kiir government and to the South sudanese civilians general will soon be over.
      It is just a matter of time,by june there will be no death and runing from place to place because of the rebels.

    • 15 March 2014 14:20, by Johndumo14

      Why do you worry so much about 70 thousand South sudanese run into Uganda?
      These are only Nuer families of those rebels killing people in S.Sudan.Let them run we don`t need them,even if they don`t come back,we don`t need trouble maker.
      More will run soon from Nasir to Ethiopia,the gov.troops are on the move,let them ru even if they run in millions,to give us a Space and Peace of mine!!!!!

    • 15 March 2014 14:33, by Johndumo14

      The warlord rejected deployment of IGAD regional forces.
      Dr Riek is still dreaming to come to power by military Means!His dreams will never come true!Dr Riek Machar simply became jealous ofJames Wani IGGA.He has forgotten that without the suppor of Equatorians by military or by elections ,you will never ,never become a South sudan president,it is a common sense todrop that ambittion of president

    • 15 March 2014 14:56, by Eyez

      Most commentators on both sides of the fence, be it from Kirr’s or Marcher’s camp, are just simply, coward ’keyboard warriors’ who are consumed with hate, driven by ignorance and blinded by tribalism. You people need to grow up, or shut the hell up!
      We need leaders not followers, RoSS is burning!
      God bless S.Sudan!

    • 16 March 2014 04:33, by Mading Makuac

      It is a good move taken by South Sudan!

    • 16 March 2014 04:36, by Mading Makuac

      It is a good move taken by South Sudan!

  • 15 March 2014 06:17, by Mi diit

    Mrs Kiir brings shame and more destruction to our country. He fears Riek Machar so much. He knows he would not have survived for the last 3 months without the Uganda army, which is now exhausted. He also knows he may not survive for the next 3 months unless he brings in more foreign troops to protect him. He doesn’t believe in SPLA or his ethnic militias to protect him. He is so desperate!

    • 15 March 2014 06:25, by Toney Toney Matot

      Hey Mi Diit,
      who fears who between Kiir who remains in Juba to date and Machar who is on hide?? he ran away from Juba fearing that he will be killed by Kiir.if he was a man , why not stay in Juba to face tiger Kiir mayardit.Idiot.

      • 15 March 2014 06:31, by Mi diit

        Toney Toney Matot,
        This is what I am telling you. Mrs Akiir was protected in the first one week by another Nuer general called Gen James Hoth Mai and his Nuer forces, combined with Dinka and other tribes. Remember that some Nuer forces captured the barrack on Dec. 15 but Hoth came with other Nuers and chased Riek out of Juba. Then came Museveni the following week and protected Kiir up to now.

        • 15 March 2014 10:03, by Majongdit

          Mi Diit,
          Everyone knows you are a liar and pretender. You brag for nothing. When did Hoth protect Salva when he needed protection himself from the angry Dinka youths. He failed to protect his own relatives, not even Kiir Mayardit.
          Dinkas are controlling their nerves and they are minding bussiness when you have your people to suffer.

        • 15 March 2014 15:06, by Rommel

          Mi diit:
          You are known for being a liar. You are guilty of investing in fantasy over fact, when it strokes your embittered and childish bias. You not only provide no evidence for your claims. You also ignore all findings that contradict your conclusions.

          • 15 March 2014 15:09, by Rommel

            . Where was our apparent unwillingness to fight you when we routed you from our lands and penetrated deep into Uror, Akobo, Nyirol, Yuai and Ayod in the counterattacks of 1992-3-4!?

            • 15 March 2014 15:11, by Rommel

              Is Kuol Manyang a Nuer? Or do suppose that he was a member of the Nuer tribe when when mostly Dinka soldiers, under his command defeated Riek’s troops in a large and unforgettable battle at Gut-Makur, a village just outside Mongalla. Riek’s forces were then defeated at Wuor Baar. Our forces then entered Dinka territory at Gem, defeated all opposing forces in Nuer territory at Kuac Deng...

              • 15 March 2014 15:13, by Rommel

                .. With Riek’s forces experiencing defeat after being pursued, hounded and cut down as far as Uror, Akobo, Nyirol, Yuai and Ayod... so by all means lie, boast, thump your chest, jump up and down and so forth — but know that we have experienced and endured infinitely more challenging tasks and circumstances before.

  • 15 March 2014 06:28, by Bentiu son

    Dear readers,I wander,did the Dinka kingdom know the meaning of sovereignty n national integrity? I doubt indeed.Salva Kiir shown us clear that he came to power accidentally.He has lost SPLM’s mission,vision n political direction at all.Salva Kiir had betrayed SPLA in particular n South Sudanese at large.Do really Salva Kiir thinks that importing hired mercenaries from IGAD members countries

    • 15 March 2014 06:38, by Bentiu son

      would rescues his genocidal regime from demising? Big No idiot President,bring those bananas soldiers from Kenyan Army,Burundi Army,Rwandan Army,Ugandan UPDF and Egyptian Army Forces won’t stop our causes for fighting as to install democratic system,good governance,federalism,freedom of expression/speech/movement,equality/justice n responsible/accountable/transferable government across the country

      • 15 March 2014 06:45, by Bentiu son

        We will continue fight till you resign from Presidency because you had lost both legitimacy as President after u had massacred the very citizens who elected you in ur current office as well as former Liberator after you had violated our RSS constitution by imported hired mercenaries from other countries to defense our Constitution,territorial integrity, and Sovereignty instead of our National Army

        • 15 March 2014 06:53, by Bentiu son

          SPLA.Moreover,Kiir Mayardit had ordered his mercenaries UPDF to used global banned dangerous weapons like cluster bombs against your country men/women/boys/girls in Mangala,Pariak, Bor Town, Mathiang,Gadiang,Uror,Bentiu n Malakal which will have environmental impacts for generations to come in those areas.We will continue this imposed tribal war till we completely compensate 10 thousands Nuer

          • 15 March 2014 07:02, by Bentiu son

            civilians whom you had coldly murdered in Juba 15-19/12/13. We shall continue fighting till your region Bahr El Ghazal experience the same devastation n destruction as your militias did in Greater Upper region in Bor,Malakal n Bentiu with its all surroundings Mayom,Rupkona,Guit,Tharjiath,Koch, Mir miir,Leer n Payinjiar which you had burned to ashes.Those foreigners won’t help you at all cowards.

  • 15 March 2014 07:14, by Snipper

    When the Dinka come back and take up their rightful position in the army that was left in the hand of militias, we tell all foreign troops to leave and we will sort it out!! Mark my words!! Nuer can’t defeat Dinka even when the war is led by Dinka women. The war will always be at their door in Greater Upper Nile and suffering will be at their stupid villages. Dump people that never think twice!

    • 15 March 2014 07:23, by Bentiu son

      Snipper,if Dinka have gut to face Nuer in war, why your Paramount Chief Salva Kiir is helplessly calling for deployment of African Continent troops to shielding you and protect his genocidal regime from Nuer warriors? No way,man, We are very close to your poor Bahre Ghazal region,soon than later you will run! run! run! for your own lives cowards.We Thokjiok Bentiu will defeat you badly soon since

      • 15 March 2014 07:30, by Bentiu son

        our siblings whom you had misled had known the truth. My friend Salva Kiir knew Nuer very well that he doesn’t trust you Dinkas rather than trusting foreign troops. Waging tribal war against united Nuer is very dangerous n suicide indeed,is is not easy as your dads,mums n uncles stealing South Sudan resources.1000 oriented women of Nuer will certainly defeated 10,000 strong Dinka men.Mark my words

        • 15 March 2014 12:54, by John The President

          Bentiu Son and Mi Diit The war you have been preaching on all media outlets for the last few years is finally here, let’s not cry. Your misleading comments are listened to by some from your tribe.You shld have known that the war will draw international community attention and that foreign forces will be deployed. your tongue has been beating your lips all this long for a war which you are not....

          • 15 March 2014 13:00, by John The President

            .. taking part.keeps on making a tribal war and for sure South Sudanese will not tolerate it any longer, it’s will eventually turn a tribal war as u so wish. Never ever think of Riek becoming a president, you better prepare your candidate now if you don’t Kiir time is running out.

        • 15 March 2014 15:15, by Rommel

          Bentiu son:
          Are you really going to pretend that your people did not establish and nurture a military alliance with Khartoum during the war!? Do you recall the decades in which you defended oilfields on behalf of the Arab oligarchy... like dogs!?

          • 15 March 2014 15:16, by Rommel

            Do you recall how you were so desperately reliant upon their weapons, ammunition, supplies, logistical support and food relief? Do you recall the military engagements that you executed in tandem with Khartoum against us!? The Ugandans have thus far only provided and deployed three [3] to four [4] battalions in South Sudan...

            • 15 March 2014 15:17, by Rommel

              .. That’s a drop in the ocean when compared with what Khartoum did for you. The Dinka had to contend with an enemy [your erstwhile ally], that was well furnished with a palette of destructive weaponry and over 100, 000 men, accompanied by bombers, jets, and helicopter gunships...

              • 15 March 2014 15:18, by Rommel

                .. And tens of thousands of aligned militiamen — the PDF and the Murahaleen, and tens of thousands of Khartoum compliant Nuer militiamen. I don’t want foreign intervention of any kind, but if you’re going to condemn people and bespatter them with smug charges of cowardice... know that we too can dredge up your documented history of forming alliances with Khartoum.

                • 15 March 2014 15:18, by Rommel

                  You formed military alliances with Khartoum during the war; an alliance that targeted and absolutely devastated the Dinka!? Why is it that you people feel no shame for this!? Ah, I get it, the Nuer are entitled to establish military alliances with Khartoum... but you want to condemn the Dinka for establishing a military alliance with a State that actually didn’t murder millions of Southerners!

                  • 15 March 2014 15:19, by Rommel

                    The Arabs brought entire divisions to bear against the Dinka. The Arabs fought beside you. The Arabs fed you. The Arabs gave you weapons, ammunition and logistical support. Why are you people wholly unwilling to discuss your previous alliance with Khartoum!? You people are hypocrites!

                    • 15 March 2014 15:20, by Rommel

                      When Khartoum’s aircraft bombed the Dinka for thirteen [13] years following your defection, operating in tandem with your militias on the ground... Was that not cowardice!? Well, wasn’t it!? Or do you suppose that you are entitled to an exemption from the demands of a moral code that you don’t actually prescribe to!?

                      • 15 March 2014 15:20, by Rommel

                        Allow me to cite for you the work of a historian:
                        Throughout the fighting, not one war casualty was admitted to the Nasir hospital. Riek’s troops sat idle as Khartoum pushed back the Dinka. The results of Riek’’s sell-out to Khartoum could not have been more glaring. The Dinka suffered mightily. (Me Against My Brother: At War in Somalia, Sudan and Rwanda, Scott Peterson)

                        • 16 March 2014 04:45, by Bentiu son

                          Poor Dinka boy aka Rommel,refrain from fabrications claims n baseless allegations.Which war fought by cowards Jaange alone without others tribes in South Sudan? Waw! Dinka refrain from stealing collective efforts exerted by all 64 tribes in South Sudan plus our African brothers from Nuba Mts and South Blue Nile as Dinka rewards alone.Yes,nowadays Dinkas from the top to bottom became liars,cheaters

                          • 16 March 2014 05:00, by Bentiu son

                            untruthful,natters,gossipers and tribal mindsets.Nowadays your thievery uncles,dads,mums n Dinka Youths became liars manufacture at your Dinka owned SSTV.You say Nuer were Khartoum collaborators,right? That is opposite guy,Dinkas are the were the most traitors since Anya Anya One( 1955-1972),Anya Anya Two(1975-1983) and SPLA/M(1983-2005), Tell bme mongrel,whom among your Dinka leaders had no

                            • 16 March 2014 05:11, by Bentiu son

                              bloodily hands in South Sudan History started from Abel Alier who killed Joseph Garang in 1968 and William Deng Nhial in 1964 after the later defected from Anya Anya One Movement SSLM/A and join Khartoum shamefully.Do you known that Salva Kiir Mayardit was Khartoum security spy who killed thousands of South Sudanese who were supporters of Anya Anya Two in Malakal n Bentiu before he joint SPLA/M

                              • 16 March 2014 05:22, by Bentiu son

                                in 1983 while Dr Mabior was a colonel in Sudan Army Forces(SAF)who was bussy hunting anti government elements leave alone those Dinka opportunist elders like Abel Alier Kuany,Aldo Ajok Deng,William Ajal Deng,George Kong Arop,and Dr Moses Machar Kachuol who were working with successive Islamic regimes in Sudan.Come to army struggle movement SPLA/M established in 1983,how many Dinkas commanders

                                • 16 March 2014 05:28, by Rommel

                                  Bentiu son:
                                  Ah, so now the SPLA was equitably comprised of all the tribes in the South, the Nuba mountains and Blue Nile, without any one tribe providing more troops and martyrs than any other tribe or collection thereof!? This quite simply is not true.

                                  • 16 March 2014 05:30, by Rommel

                                    There’s virtually not a single Dinka section that didn’t provide more troops and more martyrs than the entire Nuer tribe following your defection in 1991. I very much doubt that you provided so much as a single battalion after 1991.

                                    • 16 March 2014 05:31, by Rommel

                                      Your contribution after 1991 is so small, so comical and so UN-noteworthy that it’s almost undignified to speak of it. I suggest you keep your mouth shut on the matter. You were nowhere to be seen when we captured Achwa, Magwi, Yei, Kapoeta, Torit, Kurmuk, Kor, Yabu, Zanziber, Gogrial, Rumbek, Tonj, Aweil and many others.

                                      • 16 March 2014 05:37, by Rommel

                                        Your claims against Dr. John Garang and Salva Kiir are based on wishful thinking Why don’t you provide evidence for your assertions? In your response to me, I want you to counter fully and candidly with facts and not with your usual verbiage. I doubt that you will, because, well... you’re a bewildered, confounded, and miserably perplexed man.

                                • 16 March 2014 05:36, by Bentiu son

                                  defected in comparable with Nuer sons? Well,from beginning in 1983,Akuot Atem De Mayen rivaled with Dr Mabior camp which led into split within Anya Anya Two ranks, Second,1987 Arok Thon Arok defected together with Keribino Kuanyinbol against SPLA/M led by Dr Mabior.Third,in 1992,Molona Martin Majer Gai defected from SPLA/M which led into his death. Finally,in 2004 your godfather Salva Kiir

                                  • 16 March 2014 05:44, by Rommel

                                    Bentiu son:
                                    You’re digging your own grave with these examples. Akuot Atem De Mayen and Dr. John Garang De Mabior were members of two markedly different camps, and were instrumental in the creation of their respective movements, so it wasn’t a split within a single movement.

                                    • 16 March 2014 05:49, by Rommel

                                      Akuot Atem De Mayen was murdered by Abdallah Chuol after Akuot rejected Abdallah’s proposition that their movement should receive weapons and supplies from Khartoum. You don’t seem to understand the difference between defecting [joining the enemy] and leaving the movement, without fighting on the side of the enemy. Arok Thon Arok did not join Khartoum in 1987 in any military engagements.

                                      • 16 March 2014 05:53, by Rommel

                                        Majier Gai did not ’defect’ [join the enemy] after having multiple disagreements with the SPLM leadership, its objectives and the way it conducted the war. At no point did Majier Gai ever establish an alliance with Khartoum. Disagree? Provide evidence of his collusion with Khartoum.

                                        • 16 March 2014 05:57, by Rommel

                                          Kerubino Kuanyin Bol is the only Dinka on that list that actually established military relations with Khartoum during the war, and he was terribly hated for it and disowned by the people of Bahr el Ghazal; he didn’t have tens of thousands of Dinka troops under his command, fighting on the side of Khartoum. That’s the essential difference.

                                  • 16 March 2014 05:44, by Bentiu son

                                    defected in Yei Central Equatoria where he had deserted like divorced woman where by Dr Machar whom Kiir hating to death now brought him back to the SPLA/M under the same Dr Mabior leadership. Question ya Dinka thugs,how many Nuer boys rebelled against SPLA/M beside the correction of SPLM/A objectives declared by Dr Machar in 18/8/1991? Non right? Waw!stop blackmailing/blindfolding the public ya J

                                    • 16 March 2014 06:02, by Rommel

                                      Bentiu son:
                                      While it is true that Salva Kiir had a falling out with Dr. John Garang in 2004, he didn’t go to Khartoum, receive weapons and supplies from them and engage in military operations on the side of Khartoum. Would you like me to provide you with a list of the Nuer that joined Khartoum?

                                      • 16 March 2014 06:04, by Rommel

                                        In addition to Riek, other Nuer ’boys’ that worked with Khartoum during the war included Abdallah Chuol Deng, Matip, Gadet, Koang and Tanginya. And you thought that I wouldn’t be able to provide more examples? LOL!

  • 15 March 2014 07:19, by Snipper

    right now there is disciplinary training being conducted and the mighty Dinka will be on the road soon to Greater Upper Nile and stupidity will ends there! The people who delayed independent of south sudan due to their visionless militiasm. Stupidity people!! You get will what you deserve this time!

    • 15 March 2014 07:43, by Aguj-raan

      I totally I agree with you snipper, in couple of months Jiengs are heading to Upper Nile States to bring stability back. these mentally retarded animals call Nuers will be wiped out. I wish President Kiir declares Marshall Law on Nuer Areas, and this shit will be over in one month. Kiir Oyee, SPLA Oyee, RSS Oyee.

      • 15 March 2014 11:15, by John mamer

        @mii dit you are Idiots who will die protecting visionless tribal leader Riek Machar. If not kon-koch your villages will be ashes this war is not tribal but government against rebel, how many Dr we have in government we have from nuer if you are not fool then capturing post would have been through ballot not bullet.

  • 15 March 2014 13:57, by Ayuiu Makuac Lam

    Hai, guys, Mi diit and Bentiu son, their families are very poor. I know them even their really names. For me i cann’t keep in mind their comments. They are preaching the war of tribalism, but Nuers can not over come Dinkas in this War if Dinkas agree generally to fight with Nuers.

  • 15 March 2014 15:41, by Northern Sudanese

    A question to all Nuer citizens
    only a fun question lol
    if for 10 years you were unable to down kiir, would you consider rejoining the north? or consider creating your own state between both?
    remember, the urine drinking dinka want to rule south sudan by itself. you can see with your own eyes, much of the power and truly high positions in the country are controlled by dinka let alone the other

    • 15 March 2014 16:27, by Rommel

      Northern Sudanese:
      The Nuer are not going anywhere, and they’re certainly not joining you. The cultures between the two tribes are virtually the same; the shared cognates in their languages are at a whopping 60%. Where do you think the Nuer originate from?

      • 15 March 2014 16:28, by Rommel

        The Nuer originated as an offshoot of the Dinkas and eventually became distinctive enough to be identified as a separate tribe. (Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychology of Unselfish Behavior, Elliott Sober)

        • 15 March 2014 21:28, by Northern Sudanese

          + you are a Dinka supporting Kiir, I am asking for Nuer opinions

      • 15 March 2014 21:25, by Northern Sudanese

        listen it is not a matter of culture or language or where they originate from. it is a matter of money , power , control , benefits , stability and prosperity. The Nuer would easily create their own state if they lost hope in Dinka Southern Sudan.
        It doesn’t matter if they join us or not, after all the most important thing to us in the north is nothing but the oil.

        • 16 March 2014 03:55, by Rommel

          Northern Sudanese:
          Your country is hardly a paragon of ’stability’ and ’prosperity’. Your wars have been significantly worse than ours, and so I doubt that anyone would join Sudan for those reasons. You have historically played Nuer warlords against each other, with devastating consequences for the civilian population.

          • 16 March 2014 03:59, by Rommel

            Seeing how oil is the only thing of import to you, don’t you think that you should first find out where the oil is? Even if you were to integrate the Nuer and their territories into the Sudan, you wouldn’t have gained significant oil reserves. You actually think that the oil is in Nuer territory, don’t you? LOL!

            • 16 March 2014 04:03, by Rommel

              At least 85-90% of South Sudan’s oil production comes from Dinka lands, with Paloich alone accounting for 80% of South Sudan’s oil production. The largest and most productive oil fields in South Sudan are in Dinka lands. Paloich, Adar-yale, Melut, Toor, Toma south, Nar, Alhar and Manga are all in Dinka territory.

              • 16 March 2014 04:04, by Rommel

                The three oilfields in Upper Nile State [Paloich, Melut and Adar-Yale] are all in Dinka territory. The Dinka territories of Unity state account for up to 75% of that State’s oil production. Out of the seven significant [7] oilfields in Unity State, only two [2] are within Nuer territory — Tharjiath and Unity.

                • 16 March 2014 04:05, by Rommel

                  Toor,Toma south, Nar, Alhar and Manga are in Pariang and Biemmnom counties — counties inhabited by the Dinka. The Unity oil field is a rather large oilfield with wells located in both Pariang [Dinka] and Rubkona [Nuer] counties. You know very little about South Sudan.

                  • 16 March 2014 08:06, by Northern Sudanese

                    I would just like to know, why do you write so much and chat so much shit? The most destructive war in Sudan was the one in the south of which ’’You’’ were the main victims, 2 million dead. furthermore, when did I say that oil is located in Nuer land?
                    I said this ’’It doesn’t matter if they join us or not, after all the most important thing to us in the north is nothing but the oil.’’

                    • 16 March 2014 08:12, by Northern Sudanese

                      you fought 50 years and for this? your country is now proposed to be ruled under UN trusteeship because you seem to be unable to handle a country. look at your country today, within just 3 months , over 10,000 dead and a million displaced. let that think in, just 3 months.... within those you already lost control in 2-3 states to the rebels and are forced to beg for foreign armies to save you.

                      • 16 March 2014 08:21, by Northern Sudanese

                        That is just part of the story.... the rainy season is under way and famine is extremely looming in your country. As of FEB 2014, over 7 million south sudanese are at risk of food insecurity while already 3.7 million are already facing acute or emergency levels. So technically 70% of your people are at risk of starvation thanks to the Dinka government. you see why the UN wants to rule the south?

                        • 16 March 2014 08:38, by Northern Sudanese

                          So imagine if this conflict continues for another year or two (south sudanese are professionals in civil war) we can see million dying thanks to starvation and not just bullets.... this is out of a population of an estimated 8 million people..... Don’t rely on ethiopia or uganda to save you, this is a gorilla war with little difference to the sudanese civil war.

                    • 16 March 2014 08:14, by Rommel

                      Northern Sudanese:
                      If anyone is guilty of talking smack, it’s you. The two million dead figure was a consequence of artificially created famines by your Islamist, genocidal regime. The vast majority of the deaths cannot be attributed to intra-South conflicts.

                      • 16 March 2014 08:19, by Rommel

                        The UN and the World Health Organization estimated that 10, 000 people were dying each and every month when Darfur was its worst. ’Let that sink in’.

                      • 16 March 2014 08:31, by Northern Sudanese

                        may I remind you that much of the war in the south was ongoing even before this government in Sudan came to power. the so called intra south conflicts which you lead resulted in the fall of supply lines and neither government or UN can sometimes reach the people in need because of you. its you who brought death upon your own people whether through starvation or bullets

                        • 16 March 2014 10:24, by Rommel

                          Northern Sudanese:
                          There was war going in *southern Sudan* at that point, but it was not Southerners fighting Southerners. It was Southerners fighting against Northern governments. The SPLA had reconciled with Anyanya II by 1988. There’s no evidence of large scale intra-Southern conflicts that could possibly explain away the millions that died during the war.

  • 15 March 2014 16:11, by Kim Deng

    For how long will these African forces protect coward Jaang/Slaves from Mighty Nuer Warriors?

  • 16 March 2014 02:26, by Nguetbuny de Luelpiny

    If Nuer is to killed all the Jieng of Upper Nile, what kind of government they will be running. Most Naath are warlord criminal tribe. The Goss will win the war against tribal Naath criminal.

    • 16 March 2014 06:00, by Bentiu son

      No Dinka boy,Dinka of Greater Upper Nile had first stabbed Nuer warriors at their backs by aligned with brutal regime of Salva Kiir while their main target were foolish Dinka Majority of Bahr El Ghazal whom massacred their relatives in Juba last year.How comes you leave somebody who attacking you at the back my dear. Madness right?

  • 16 March 2014 06:37, by Snipper

    Being militia, anti peace and robber are qualities praised in Nuer culture! What a people? People who never use their minds! Fighting a foolish war, a war that result into your mother’s suffering? Now their mothers are dying on mud and heavy rains at UNMISS camps and they people they want to defeat are relaxing taking soft drinks in Juba and their Mighty states and the whole Upper Nile smell shit!

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

Sudan Tribune

Promote your Page too

Latest Comments & Analysis

The 21 October March: Who is the Enemy? 2020-10-21 05:52:11 By Yasir Arman One of the main features of the December revolution is its vitality and the broad participation of women and youth, resistance committees, martyrs' families, forces from the (...)

Fixing South Sudan’s economy 2020-10-17 10:54:33 By Manyuon Mayen Manyuon A lot of questions beseech people's minds when it comes to current South Sudan's deteriorating economy. Experts might have been inquisitive on the country's capability (...)

Rome Declaration of Principles: What value is it adding to R-ARCSS? 2020-10-15 18:55:47 By Lam Akol On the 12th of October 2020, the government in Juba and one faction of SSOMA led by Gen Thomas Cirillo issued a Declaration of Principles (DoP) so as to guide their future (...)


Latest Press Releases

Sudan: Performing arts is not a crime, assaulting women and artists is! 2020-09-20 08:54:28 The Strategic Initiative for Women in the Horn of Africa (SIHA) Sudan is still struggling with militant Islamist ideology KHARTOUM: Central Khartoum Primary Court issued a verdict against five (...)

Civil Society Statement in Response to The Law of Various Amendments 2020-08-14 07:11:00 A Collaborative Civil Society Statement in Response to The Law of Various Amendments (Abolishing and Amending Provisions Restricting Freedom) – Exposing ‘a wolf in sheep’s clothing’ Sudanese women (...)

Remarks by SRF leaders at the Friend of Sudan meeting on peace 2020-08-13 07:58:58 Chairman of the Friends of Sudan Conference, Your Excellency, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, The Prime Minister of Sudan and the participating team from the (...)


Copyright © 2003-2020 SudanTribune - All rights reserved.