Archive for: May 2014

Will David Yau Yau-Pres. Kiir Peace hold water in Jonglei State?

BY: John Adoor Deng, Australia, MAY/23/2014, SSN;

This week in Juba, the city was sharply divided in receiving former half-trained clergy, General David Yau Yau, who received a prestigious state welcome in the world newest capital, Juba. A man who was a state enemy for a couple of years was received with open arms by President Kiir and his government, an assurance that he is fully accepted and forgiven for a second time.

Analysts speculate that too much in the agreement has been given to David Yau in the recent signed agreement. The areas of the Murle, Anyuak (Pochalla), Jie and Kacipo shall for the first time in the history of Sudan in general and South Sudan in particular, become separate Greater Pibor Area Administration (GPAA).

The chief Administrator who shall champion this portion of governance shall be appointed and shall exercise powers as equal to that of the state governor.

In other words, Greater Pibor Area is a state in the making. The questions then becomes, did this Cobra faction deserve this much? Is it the best model to award the rebels by dividing the State?

Was this agreement debated in Jonglei state parliament? Were communities that had conflicts with Murle tribe through Yau Yau been consulted for this peace?

Did David Yauyau take up arms because he wanted a state or simply because he lost an state election?

Any different between David Yauyau and late rebel George Athor?

Was GPAA a popular demand of the citizens in Pibor, Pochalla, and Boma? If yes was there any petition presented in the state parliament?

Although these questions may seem to interrogate the intellect and rationale of our respected religious leaders who mediated this peace, it is equally crucial for us the consumers of this peace to understand it better.

However, to the Murle tribal communities and individuals around the world, this peace agreement, though it was narrowly championed by David, it has met their expectations, they feel that their dreamt-up world has materialized.

David Yau Yau in their eyes is a messiah, a savior who has brought freedom, development and prosperity to their land. In fact, songs have been composed to appreciate, appease and edified David.

Politically, Yau Yau in as far as the Murle is concerned, is a king in the making and all other political aspirants must learn how to kneel down to David Yau Yau for their political survival and illumination.

Realistically, not all people in Juba and elsewhere were happy to see David Yau Yau glorified, especially the communities that have been experiencing merciless atrocities for centuries in the forms of child abduction, cattle raiding, loss of properties and killing of innocent civilians, committed by former Murle militiamen and recently David Yau Yau men in uniform.

These communities (Dinka & Nuer) were reminded of their dead ones when seeing David Yau Yau in national Broadcasting television (SSTV) proudly speaking of his so called achievement.

These communities feel that the blood of their loved ones, has unfortunately, cemented the acceleration and elevation of Yau Yau.

As much as Yau Yau is happy celebrating his joyous second come back to Juba, the people of Dinka and Nuer communities are bleeding the pain of the obnoxious uninvited atrocities committed by Cobra faction in recent years.

Conversely, it is now the chance of people upon which the atrocities were committed to file legal proceeding against Yau Yau or take him as the prodigal son, although he has not demonstrated his prodigality.

It is now chance for General David to demonstrate his seeking of forgiveness. As the former pastor in the ministry of God, David must show remorse for his baseless war that has killed thousands of people and displaced many.

David has a chance too, to stop the criminal business of child abduction, cattle raiding and he must work hard to cement broken relations between Murle and neighboring communities. If General David will be strong enough to do these, then this peace, although disbelieved, shall hold water.

The Author is John Adoor Deng, BA, BTH, MPRL (MPP –current), Director of South Sudan Support Foundation (SSSF). He can be reached at

Question of Leadership After the End of South Sudan Crisis

By: James Okuk, PhD, Juba, MAY/23/2014, SSN;

Quote: “If a sect or republic is to survive for any length of time, it must return frequently to its beginning.” – Machiavelli.

It is the question of leadership within the SPLM that brought South Sudan to the current shame of devastating rebellion. It is also the question of the same leadership that is now being negotiated in Addis Ababa in order to end the unbearable crisis of the rebellion. I am saying these because South Sudan has not been lacking the substance for its building but achievements-oriented leadership. What is meant here is the good leadership that is achieved, not by formality of structures, but the integrity of the participants and their willingness to work together with larger vision inspiration.

Fair enough, a political roadmap for peace negotiations has been drawn and agreed upon on 9th May 2014 by the highest authorities of the government and the rebellion in the country. The first significance of that roadmap is recommitment to the implementation of the previously violated agreement on cessation of hostilities. The second significance was a new commitment to the inclusive negotiations of the substance of the peace talks where all the stakeholders are supposed come up at the end of the process with a satisfactory and comprehensive peace document to be signed finally by the highest bosses in the city and jungle of South Sudan.

With the peace roadmap at hands, it is now the time to get down into serious business of ending the war practically by addressing the root causes of the crisis. The hot stage is to commence. Different proposals have been floated already, both from national and international perspectives. Most of the proposals carry commendable consensus on the substance of the expected peace agreement document, though they differ on issues of leadership in the coming post-crises era.

There seems to be a consensus from the spectra of stakeholders that the next era should avoid fatal political errors. Nonetheless, this will not occur unless utmost attention is paid to what Political Philosopher Antonio Rosmini said in his book, the Summary Cause for the Stability or Downfall of Human Societies, that “Anyone who errs in politics, must first err in logic.”

What is then the expected sound logic and truth that needs to be known in the question of leadership after the end of current South Sudan crises?


The first comprehensive proposal was released on 1st February 2014 by ‘South Sudanese Professionals in Diaspora’ (i.e., Prof. Laura Beny, Prof. Charles Bakheit, Dr. Eluzai Hakim, Dr. Mairi J. Blackings and Dr. Martin Mikaya) under the title “Unleashing the Potential for Good Governance in the Republic of South Sudan: A Proposal Addressing the challenges to Nation Building, National Healing and National Reconciliation Following the Mid-December Crisis”.

Jotted down on 24 pages, the professionals took off the substance of the proposal from the premise that “the model of government adopted on 9th July 2011 when the South Sudan became the world’s newest nation is faulty, does not work well and has not served the people of south Sudan well.”

Therefore, the newly proposed sound model, according to them, should be “A federal system of government based on the three traditional geographical regions of Bahr El Ghazal, Equatoria and Upper Nile” and have to be lean and efficient with the aim of releasing “money for vital developmental projects.”

In the epilogue of the paper, they concluded that President Salva Kiir Mayardit should be the one leading the nation up to the time of the next elections so as to avoid setting “a dangerous precedent.” Meanwhile, he should form an inclusive government that will conduct the national census, complete the writing of the constitution and run “the forthcoming election on time.”


For me, the proposal of the aforementioned professionals is commendable as far as the substance of the peace agreement and its government is concerned. However, they failed to be decisive on who should lead the inclusive government in case the elections could not be conducted on time in the first quarter of 2015:

Will it be “a dangerous precedent” too to postpone the elections?

Will it be Gen. Salva Kiir continuing as the President of the Republic even after the elapse of his ‘legitimate term’ on 9th July 2015?

Where will Dr. Riek Machar, Dr. Lam Akol and the rest of leaders of political parties be in the inclusive government of post-crisis South Sudan?

Where will the ten current existing States be when the government structure gets reduced to the three traditional geographical regions, and will the three regions be called Bahe El Ghazal, Equaotira and Upper Nile States or will have new name?

I think it is high time for the ‘South Sudanese Professionals in Diaspora’ to improve on their good proposal and be clear on the crucial issue of leadership of their proposed “inclusive government”. This is so important because, as Napoleon Bonaparte said, “A leader is a dealer in hope.” Also they need to be clear on the new or the renewed nomenclature of the federal states so that it is known that South Sudan is going to have three, and only three federalized states.


The second comprehensive proposal has been advanced on 10th May 2014 by the Ebony Centre under the title: “Mandating the proposed interim government with the laying of the foundation for resilient institutions and effective governance in the post-conflict South Sudan: A Policy Paper Presented at the 2014 First Development Policy Forum.”

According to the 20-page proposal, the current government structure should be maintained (state, county and payam) as it was stipulated in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (2005), Interim Constitution of Government of Southern Sudan (2005) and Transitional Constitution of South Sudan (2011). The type of the proposed national government should be a mixture of Presidential with Parliamentary systems whose size should be lean and effective with mandate for achieving specific objectives:
1) Conducting day-to-day business of the government;
2) Implementing peace agreement;
3) conducting reviews and reforms that ensure the laying of firm foundation for South Sudan.

The proposed leadership of this government shall be the following:
1) Five-Member ceremonial and rotational collegial Presidency symbolizing national unity/consensus/trust and social cohesion;
2) Executive Prime Ministry with two deputies,
3) Eighteen Ministers; and
4) Twelve Commissions/Authorities members. The total number of the executive constitutional post holders of the interim national government shall be thirty eight only.

The composition of the proposed national government shall encompass regional and gender balance with a mandatory representation of an Army General and a Woman in the Collegial Presidency; the head of which is rotated every six months based on the three traditional regional representations.

The tenure of the proposed interim government shall be thirty six months (i.e. three years), starting from 9th July 2015 when the term of the current elected government ends constitutionally.

The criteria for selection of candidates for the proposed interim government shall be as follows:
1) Persons with certain qualities of personality and character, supported by relevant technical knowledge and experience;
2) Persons with career trajectory largely outside the realm of party politics;
3) Persons with no further ambitions in the political realm, particularly elections in the 10-year time following the end of interim period.

The current sitting national and state parliamentary committees shall be tasked with proposing specific eligibility criteria for short-listing of the candidates. But separate parliamentary committees will undertake the vetting of the candidate so as to ensure their diversity, integrity, experience and qualifications.

To this effect, the Intellectuals of Ebony Centre went ahead to propose that President Salva Kiir shall appoint One Hundred national lawmakers from the Eighty Nine Counties of South Sudan each, One from Juba Capital City and Ten from some crucial specialties. The total number of national MPs shall be one hundred only.

If this is not working, they proposed a second option of extending the tenure of the current national legislature to the interim period (i.e., another three years).

Otherwise, they finally proposed that the Collegial Presidency takes the legislative functions since what is mostly needed in the interim period, after all, is execution of specific government programmes and not legislations.

The proposal acknowledges that legitimacy of the interim government should come from the people, but since it is difficult to do this directly any of the following options could be adopted to do it indirectly:
1) Broad national consensus garnered from all inclusive national dialogue conference;
2) Extraordinary Act of the current National Legislature with clear terms of reference;
3) Extraordinary Presidential Act decreed by the current President.

The proposal of the Intellectuals of Ebony centre is hinged on the premise that South Sudan needs a new start based on acceptance of the responsibility by all its elites that they are the masters of their own country and its destiny, and that the system of governance they have adopted in 2005 is not effective and resilient institutionally.


I think the proposal of the Intellectuals of the Ebony Centre is a good start as far as the substance and leadership of the post-crisis interim/transitional government is needed for rigorous discussion. The substance they presented is not complicated. However, their proposal on leadership of the interim government is controversial, especially the idea of five-member rotational Collegial Presidency:

How can somebody becomes a Head of State within the presidency institution and then later step down to become a Deputy Head of State or a normal member? Will this not create protocol irritation of humiliation?

Are the representatives of the Army and Women within the Collegial Presidency allowed to become Head or Deputy Head of State or they shall be condemned only to ordinary membership of the Presidency?

Given the criteria of selection is it not going to be an interim government without participation of Political Parties? How will interim politics make sense without involvement of political parties in the government?

Is the Judiciary of South Sudan so perfect that it does not need reviews and reforms in the interim government?

Are the States and Counties governments going to be re-structured like the national interim government and how?

What is the significance of reference to the three traditional regions (Bahr El Ghazal, Equatoria and Upper Nile) when there are already states representing the decentralized mode of the government of the Republic of South Sudan?

I think it is high time for Intellectuals of Ebony Centre to come out clearly with their answers to these questions in order to improve their commendable proposal.


An appeal in regards to leadership aspect of the post-crisis government was released by Peter Biar Ajak on 12th May 2014 under the title “The Alternative Proposal: Consideration on the ongoing peace negotiations between South Sudan’s Government and the Rebels SPLM/A IO”.

The 13-page proposal presented a persuasive appeal to President Salva Kiir and rebel leader Dr. Riek Machar to consider a bold decision of not taking part in the upcoming negotiated transitional government of national unity for these reasons:
1) to create the most optimal environment for national reconciliation and institutuitional development;
2) to manifest the most noble leadership in the region and the world;
3) to restore confidence to a young nation overtaken by self-doubt;
4) to put aside selfish ambitions or grievances and consider larger interest of the people of South Sudan; and
5) to ensure glory of their names, the sake of South Sudan’s national interests and the promotion of regional security interests.

According to Mr. Biar, President Kiir and rebel leader Dr. Machar should be doing the following as they retire willingly for the interim period:
1) draw up the agenda for the interim government; its work plan, budget, security forces and public service in order to restructure the state;
2) supervise the government work plan during the interim period while sitting in a group of six guarantors (including the Ethiopian Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn, Ambassador Seyoum Mesfin, Gen. Lazaro Sumbeiywo, and Gen. Mohamed Ahmed M. El Dabi);
3) sign a mega deal for laying a solid constitutional foundation for the country, clears its payroll, its army, police and all its institutions;
4) actively engage in national reconciliation process, and later seek public office in the elections if they want to return to power;
5) monitor the implementation of the agenda within the context of regional and international mechanism;
6) enjoy the old age of freedom fighter comforted by the memories of honorable acts while their legacies remained secured.

The foundational premise on which Mr. Biar took the courage to present his thought in the “Alternative Proposal” is that “It is not possible for a significantly reformed state to emerge in South Sudan if Kiir and Riek return to the helm; past mistakes are likely to be recommitted.”

That is, the leadership style (either combine or separate) of Kiir and Riek cannot be successful during the interim period. The evidence proves that both of them were given nine years to lead South Sudan but they continued to make bad mistakes that landed South Sudan into crisis:
1) they missed the opportunity from the abundant oil money that could have facilitated the implementation of the SPLM/A promise and obligation on the delivery of ‘New Sudan Vision’; 2) they betrayed the high expectation of the marginalized people whose cause they were advocating, especially when they allowed the centralization of spree of corruption in Juba that caused macro-economic imprudence;
3) they resigned governance to the realm of personal and factional struggle for power that depends on ethnic and tribal clientele networks;
4) they allowed war-lordism and entrepreneurship in violence to serve as the means to secure a seat at the political table without minding about simmering ethnic hostilities that risk exploding into genocide;
5) they created a South Sudan full of undesirable social indicators like widespread unemployment, acute malnutrition, dire poverty, and high infant mortality rates;
6) they created a political system characterized by highly volatile and individualistic forms and personnel structure;
7) they resisted separating political powers that would have imposed limitation on authority so as to underscore the importance of institutions instead of individuals in sustaining the existence of the state and fulfillment of its functions; and
8) they repeatedly defied calls to act responsibly on sensitive political issues.

Also according to Mr. Biar, the leadership of Kiir and Machar is a failure because both of these principals don’t understand political philosophies that underscore that the purpose of being a leader of a country is to ensure:
1) security from all threats to human life and dignity; past, present and future aimed at improving the living standards of the citizenry within the solidarity on the common good;
2) knowledgeable, political and ethical community are guided by constitution and the rule of law in the course of performing civic duty;
3) Government authority that promote prevalence of justice and order that allow all to live a more fulfilling life through a social contract or consent of the members;
4) right of the citizens to change a government that fails to perform the substantial functions it was contracted for; and
5) building competent and credible institutions for development and democratization.

In short, both Principals seem unable to cogitate well on the concepts of state as widely accepted in political intellectualism and academia:
1) Sovereign jurisdiction over a territory and population;
2) legitimacy through sense of nationhood at home; and
3) legal and diplomatic recognition as equals abroad.

That is, not all South Sudanese at the moment believe that either Kiir or Riek is their right leader. Not all of them are convinced that they could be a one nation under the leadership of either Kiir or Riek. Not only these, but South Sudan diplomacy has become so degraded abroad due to the disastrous crisis created by Riek and Kiir, paving ways to justified dictatorial intervention of super powers.

Given all the above weaknesses, missed opportunities and lack of understanding by Kiir and Riek, Mr. Biar proposed that an alternative leader after the persuasive (not forceful) exit of the two principals should come from the SPLM/A only. For him, the SPLM/A is “to critically look among the mid-level cadres of potential for a leader with intellect, sound judgment, vision and charismatic ability who would implement the peace agreement with rigor and determination.” The alternative leader has to implement the peace agreement that will be signed by Kiir and Riek before they retire, and restore the image of the country that they tainted.


I think the proposal of Mr. Biar is commendable because it is avoiding the common culture “pushing out leaders” from leadership positions in a militaristic manner. Instead, the proposal is trying to cultivate the culture of “persuasion for voluntary relinquishing of power” in a diplomatic manner. Nonetheless, I doubt whether his persuasion seeds will fall into the right hears, especially with the fear from The Hague-based International Criminal Court (ICC), which might spoil the retirement enjoyment and legacy of the two Principals.

But Mr. Biar did not care about what kind of government system, what size, what composition, what tenure or what legislative processes are to be adopted during the interim period. He seems to believe that, at the end of the day, everything will trickle down to leadership. Bad leadership can water down good proposals of what and who need to be led. Good leadership can initiate right things that need to be done and persuade people to join hands in doing this. I think Mr. Biar is right here.

However, Mr. Biar recommendation for SPLM/A mid-level cadres as the only panacea for South Sudan leadership during the interim period could be seen as naivety and lack of recognition of other stakeholders of South Sudan.

What faction of the SPLM/A he is talking about (‘SPLM/A–Government’, ‘SPLM/A–Opposition’, ‘SPLM/A–Former Detention’, SPLM–Democratic Change)?

If Mr. Biar means the current SPLM/A system that claims to be a political party while at the same time owing an army, then this will continue to be a crisis. Whoever tries to emerge from within that systemic deformity could also prove a failure in leadership even if he/she is bright or surrounded by the brightest.

It would be better to encourage formation of political alliances or mergers, and then device a new system (far from anything called SPLM/A) within which a new leader could emerge for leadership of the new government. It is time to get rid of Sudanese names in South Sudan political parties. We need a new era for South Sudan based on political maturity; not a renewed error of SPLM/A hangovers of dictatorial ‘uni-partism’ and lack of recognition of other stakeholders in the country.


The political maturity can come if a considerable attention is paid to what Denis Cleary philosophized that “The supreme, mortal error is to lose sight of the substantial reality which sustains society, and devote total attention to what is accidental…A materially privileged people, full of whining malcontents, is not a society on the march to greater well-being, but a group in need of salvation.”

The maturity that is direly needed for ending the current crisis is to get back to the drawing board and the beginning, remembering what Gen. Salva Kiir’s said during the occasion of the Announcement of Final Referendum Results, 9th February 2011, that “Our purpose is to give to our children what the war took away from us: peace, rule of law, food security, health care, good education, running water, clean water, electric power, and opportunity for pursuit of happiness and prosperity. Let us all work to give our children hope for a better future.”

The peace agreement that is being cooked in Addis Ababa through mediation of IGAD and facilitation of the U.S, EU, Trioka and other friends/partners, and that is waiting to be endorsed finally by all the stakeholders, should dispel the hopelessness created by the SPLM/A leadership in the middle of the journey of the new state and nation building.

It should bring back the happiness that was demonstrated by all South Sudanese during the voting for the referendum for self-determination and at the declaration of independence.

Notwithstanding, the desired South Sudanese salvational happiness lies outside the former deformed system of the SPLM/A that has tried to run the new country wrongly on a bush liberation mentality.

The expected comprehensive peace agreement should put it clearly that an interim period is too short for a successful federal system in South Sudan. Political science shows that centralism is the best practical option for governments of interim periods.

As federalism is the most popular demand of the people of South Sudan, it should then be stipulated in the forthcoming Addis Peace Agreement that the centralized interim government have to prepare the ground for implementation of Federal system of government immediately at the end of the interim period, in order to start the beginning of the normal period of the elected governments.

That federal system should be a union of the current ten states rather than the traditionalized geographical regions of Bahr El Ghazal, Equatoria and Upper Nile.

Also the expected peace agreement should not allow the civil society groups, the faith-based organizations and other non-political entities to participate in the government. Instead, they should be encouraged to remain as pressure groups to both the government and political parties.

The members of such non-political entities who have interest in active politics should join political parties. It is the members of political parties only that should be allowed to be in the government.

The programmed activities of political parties should be funded by the government. This is in the interest of promoting multiparty pluralistic democracy in the Republic of South Sudan. Participation in peace negotiations should not be equated to participation in the government top positions.

However, members of the civil society, faith-based and other non-political entities could be hired on contract basis to do some specific duties for the government or for political parties.

The expected peace agreement should put it clearly that no independent candidates shall run for elections in to government seats in South Sudan. This is to discourage individualism in politics because politics is supposed to be a socialized public affair. Any one who is unhappy with his/her political party is free to cross to any other political party but not to become himself independently.

A political party that is popular in a particular state should be allowed to operate as a state political party and not a national one. It should not get into the federal union directly but indirectly through alliance with national political parties that enjoy popularity across a sufficient number of states.

Lastly, the past should become history. The future should usher new hope. The present should appreciate the good history and maintain the right steps in the journey towards a prosperous and bright future for the Republic of South Sudan.

The new era should not be erroneous. It should be led by leaders who are dealers in hope and not selfish perpetrators of unnecessary sorrow.


Dr. James Okuk lives in Juba. He is reachable at

Understanding the positions of the stakeholders in the Addis Ababa peace talks

By: Abraham Deng Lueth, USA, MAY/22/2014, SSN;

The ongoing peace negotiations in Addis Ababa have seen several difficulties that are caused by the confusions and misunderstandings regarding the positions of different stakeholders in the talks. In this article, I want to highlight those positions, their possible shifts, depending on the negotiation processes and the aggressors who capitalize on violence as a solid means to achieve a peaceful settlement.

The government
Right from the onset of the conflict, it is clear that the government was the aggressor. The fatal decisions that have been made and most predominantly, the cunning use of the December 15 presidential guards’ incident as a coup incident and the subsequent decisions that took place after that started and escalated the conflict to its high peak are key evidences of the government as an aggressor or cause of the conflict in the country.

Currently, the government has taken a position that provides hope for South Sudanese. It does not seem to be the aggressor at the moment; something that, if it was observed in the beginning of the conflict, we would have ended up with a much better outcome today.

The Rebels
Dr. Riek’s decision to launch a rebellion after the facts of December 15 helped further the already escalated violence in the country. Dr. Riek’s decision might have been necessitated by a couple of reasons.

One, it might have been the fact that a plan (as evidenced in the attack on his home) to capture or kill him was launched and that he had to protect himself. Secondly, he might have consciously figured it out that the only way his colleagues (the former detainees) would be released was to stage a military confrontation (a fight back as opposed to surrender) in order to pressure the release of the detainees.

What Riek Machar did to take up arms was a self defense rebellion (though he fabricated it to test overthrowing President Kiir) and that is understandable —- it is a human nature.

Had he kept it to that without going rampant on killing innocent people (Bor, Akobo, Malakal and Bentiu) in an attempt to revenge for his tribal people killed in Juba, the ex-detainees could have possibly come out of the prison and joined him, both on the negotiating table and in the frontline, because he would have been fighting a just war.

I still believe that Dr. Riek, in terms of political stand, is an ally to his former colleagues. Some of the housekeeping things that he needs to do in order to get himself closer to his colleagues are: one, stop being an aggressor when it comes to violence.

Second, completely commit to what he was asking for on December 6 which is dialogues through peaceful means, now happening in Addis Ababa. He needs to go out everywhere his rebel soldiers and support bases are and educate them on the need for peaceful settlement to the conflict.

His supporters need to understand now that government is willing to resolve the conflict through peaceful dialogues; the opposition must respond positively because that is what South Sudanese people need and what the opposition needed, in the first place, before the December 15 crisis.

They need to understand that peacefully ending the conflict does not let go President Kiir but in fact, it speeds up the process for justice for people killed in Juba and as well as those killed in Akobo, Bor, Bentiu and Malakal.

The Former Detainees
While they were exercising their political rights on December 6, they were victimized by the power holders. They were calling for reforms and whatever happened on December 15 should have been contained as an isolated incident to be investigated and addressed.

While it is important to note that Dr. Riek’s rebellion is against what the ex-detainees and Dr. Riek, himself, originally stood for on December 6, it is equally important that the ex-detainees recognize that Dr. Riek was pushed into rebellion.

As long as Dr. Riek abandons his rebellion, the former detainees should remain his allies in the quest for peace in the country.

Leaving Dr. Riek alone, even when he abandons hostilities, is a clear betrayal in the eyes of many members of the rebellion and it does not bring a just peace but a fake one (one with grudges embedded among people). It does not unite the people of South Sudan.

Therefore, I see it absolutely important for peace for the ex-detainees to maintain their position of being for reforms as well as recognizing that the rebellion of Riek Machar was enforced on him and that they should kindly ask him to put down his guns and join them in the quest for meaningful reforms.

The detainees are up for grab by any of the two groups; the government and rebels, depending on which group positions itself as the aggressor. Any one of these two warring parties that positions itself as an aggressor and impedes the negotiation processes will risk losing the detainees alliance because their defining stand is a democratic change in the country through nonviolent ways.

Otherwise, as long as the warring parties maintain to push for war or try to win on the ground through military victory, the former detainees should continue to remain a third block because that is truly who they are and they should work with regional and international leaders to continue to pressure the warring parties to abandon war and negotiate a settlement to the crisis.

They represent two important things; reforms through nonviolence and also a just peace where all the things that went wrong are recognized and people forgive each other and chart a better foundation for the nation.

The Civil Society and the Church
These are concerned South Sudanese civil society organizations that want to see the end to the conflict, however, it started. These are South Sudanese peoples’ representatives in the talks. They are our watchdogs that make sure whatever is being agreed to and signed is in the best interest of South Sudanese people.

They should also make us understand who is stubborn and is impeding progress in the talks through their campaigns for peace. They should organize rallies and meetings to educated South Sudanese people on the progress being made and the challenges in the talks.

At the end of the day, we need a just peace that provides for strategic directions for truth and reconciliation, assures justice and accountability for the crimes committed and above all, sends our nation back to its firm stand as one nation, undivided, under God.

Accountability for the war crimes committed is a task after peace. It does not have to hold the nation hostage. It is a matter of revisiting, after peace is achieved, different findings by the UN, AU, South Sudanese different organizational bodies and analytical commentators and asking the international community to help in the process of delivering justice.

Therefore, let’s us secure our peace, first.

On a separate note:
The people of Jonglei who had become victims of David Yau Yau now have the opportunity to file a lawsuit to take him to court and have him to answer for the crimes he committed. He must not be allowed to get away with those crimes. END

Peace cannot hold with Kiir as president for life!

By: Anderson Riek, Nairobi, MAY/20/2014, SSN;

Since this crisis started in December of last year, and the months preceding this, I had decided to go underground, for reasons best known to myself. It wasn’t because there was nothing to write about – a lot of stories and events that needed another person view/bird’s eyes. Since then, a lot of water seems to have passed under the bridge.

South Sudan, a country born in 2011, is now in flames. Only God knows when and how this conflict will end, but as its now, only innocent women, children and the elderly bear the brunt of this senseless war imposed on the people by Salva Kiir and his cronies.

The events which unfolded before the December 15th meant that we were headed for a serious crisis, one worse than any other crisis (es) in history. We all knew that the actions (the unpopular, so-called presidential decrees and the vile threats at the December 14th SPLM national liberation council meeting) of the then president Kiir were antithetical to peace and stability in South Sudan, and any right minded person would have concluded that it was a declaration of war on those deemed as his opponents or stumbling block for him to cling on power endlessly.

What happened on the night of December 15th in Juba was not a coup attempt by any definition, as attested to by many witnesses who have written before this little author. It was a premeditated plan to eliminate all the political opponents of Kiir, and a plan that went terribly wrong, as it didn’t hit the right targets.

Yes, they managed to arrest some innocent political leaders of the party, who only woke up to the guns rattling at night and didn’t know what was happening. The prime target, on hearing gunfire at the presidential guards unit, had to look for escape route as his dear life was in danger – knowing fully well that it was all about him.

What started as an internal fighting within the presidential guards unit, turned out to be tribally motivated killings of innocent Nuer civilians, because the man they wanted to kill had escaped unharmed. They had to use a tank to crush/kill the children, women and whoever they found in his house on the 17th of December when they realized that he was not in the house.

The records we have at our disposal put the number of innocent Nuer civilians killed in Juba alone at 17,000. Most people were killed at their homes during the door-to-door search for Nuer by Kiir’s militias from Bhar el Ghazal with strict orders ‘shoot-to-kill’. Others were killed as they tried to go to UNMISS compounds.

The author narrowly escaped on the 16th of December and bear witness to what happened.

A shaky cessation of hostilities agreement was signed in January and on the day of its signature, the pro-government forces went on the offensive, attacking the anti-government forces in multiple fronts, in total disrespect of the agreement.

They burned Leer town to ashes; and raped, killed women and children on the 6th of February. They looted the town and took everything they could find around – heck!, they also looted UNICEF school’s bags, which attracted UNICEF condemnation from their HQs.

But then, judging from what has been said by the so-called ‘international community’, the world is simply not fair!

A certain guy called Toby Lanzer has been promised renewal of the contract by Kiir’s government but on condition that he had to report falsified information regarding the alleged atrocities committed by the rebels.

When more than 200 innocent (Nuer) civilians under the protection of UN in Bor were killed in broad daylight, the death toll was reduced to 60 people; so as not to disgrace the UN, while treading on a fine line not to arouse Makuei’s wrath.

When civilians were targeted and killed in January (in Bentiu) after the JEM and pro-government forces recaptured the town from the anti-government forces, Toby Lanzer never opened his mouth to condemn it. Likewise, civilians were pulled out of churches and hospitals in Malakal and killed in huge numbers after the town was recaptured by the government forces and the UN never said anything about it.

It has become abundantly clear that the UNMISS is doing according to the whims and caprices of the illegitimate government of Kiir and Makuei, with regards to the ongoing conflict in South Sudan.

It’s either the so-called “international community” is blind to the truth or doesn’t want to know the truth.

After all, we didn’t want somebody, who decided to be blind to the truth, to tell us that so and so is the legitimate president when his hands are full of blood from innocent’s civilians killed, with his full knowledge.

If there is still something called “international community”, they should start calling on this illegitimate president to step aside in order for peace to prevail over chaos and anarchy, as evidenced now.

The only acceptable transition is one without Kiir as president of South Sudan. Otherwise, we are wasting resources (time, papers, inks and money) in Addis Ababa hotels, trying to negotiate peace that will not be achieved in the foreseeable future as long as the conditions are not ripe for it!

The truce cannot hold with Kiir as the president unless we are not seriously for peace. The US and the wider international cannot just impose an impractical and forced peace while turning a blind eye on the glaring and blatant violations by Kiir’s government.

The truce cannot hold with Kiir who has conspicuously and categorically declared he is president for life, as he tightens his grip on power and extend his contract beyond 2018 or thereabout. The truce cannot hold with Kiir who does not believe in peaceful resolution of this conflict but believes in crushing the rebellion through the bought mercenaries – the Ugandans, JEM, SPLA-North and Egyptians with vested interests; and the world doesn’t see anything wrong with this.

Salva Kiir is bent on exterminating ALL the Nuer in South Sudan so that he can rule for life, and nobody will question his dictatorship tendencies; and the US cannot see it because they have decided to be blind to the truth.

What is happening now in South Sudan has all the hallmarks of genocide in it. The world is not fair because when 17,000 innocent Nuer civilians were massacred in Juba alone, nobody bothered to condemn or talk about it.

The world isn’t fair because when more than 200 innocent Nuer civilians, mostly children and women; who were supposedly under the protection of UNMISS in Bor were killed by government soldiers, nobody condemned it much.

I just cannot understand it; and thus, don’t envisage peace in South Sudan as long as Kiir is still claiming legitimacy that has gone to waste with the 2011 referendum papers.

Needless to say he burned his card/credit when he killed 17,000 civilians in Juba in December 2013, and many more elsewhere since January up to now.

The Author is a civil society activist based in Nairobi and can be reached via:

Press Statement from South Sudanese Nuer Community in Canada

Press Statement from South Sudanese Nuer Community in Canada

H.E. President of the United States of America, Barack Obama
H.E. UNSC Chief Secretary General Ban-Ki Moon & Members
H. E. Ethiopian prime minister & Chairperson of IGAD, Haile Mariam Desaleg
African Union & IGAD Leaders
All European Union Leaders
Hon. Canadian Prime Minister, Stephen Harper
UK. Prime Minister David Cameron
H.E. French President Francois Hollande


We are expressing our regrettable and disappointment to the international community for its inaction of the killing of the Nuer innocent civilians in Juba and other states; we the community members known as the South Sudanese Nuer Community in Canada have been affected by genocide committed in Juba as well as the ongoing conflict in the Republic of South Sudan.

In the light of the political crises prevailing in our beloved country, South Sudan, we the Nuer Community members and leaders in Canada are very sad and deeply concerned by the loss of innocent lives and continuous living in fear of our people in the Republic of South Sudan, especially in major cities and towns in Juba, Jonglei, Unity and Upper Nile States because of the tribal government’s ignorance to the people.

The tribal government has killed enough and continues to kill hundreds of thousands of people from the Nuer Ethnic Group in particular, as it hires many notorious criminals, and terrorists or mercenaries from Uganda and M23, three Rebel groups of Sudan, and recently from Egypt.

The international community should not sit and watch all the foreign armed groups that have been hired by the government in Juba to massacre millions people of Nuer so the tribal government implement its long term plan to displace Nuer people from their territories in South Sudan to Ethiopia and to other neighboring countries.

We regret for the loss of innocent lives of foreigners who are assisting us in various capacities, including peacekeepers, humanitarian activities, capacity building, and businesses in Juba and across the country. We convey our condolences and sympathy to all the families who lost their dear/loved ones and those who have been wounded in the recent violence in various parts of South Sudan.

After careful assessment and deliberation on messages coming from different sources including our own relatives, news media, South Sudanese Government, the opposition within SPLM Party, various levels of governments, we the Nuer people in Canada’s leadership reached the following resolutions based on how the international community views the current conflict in South Sudan:

1. We condemn in the strongest terms possible any act of violence aimed at settling political differences but ended up in massacred one ethnic group by the Salva Kiir Government. We encourage our people, the international leaders at the United Nations Security Council, the European Union, the United States of America, IGAD, African Union, and Government of Canada and the people in South Sudan at large to look at the root causes of this current conflict, including who did what in the first place to embrace a true and genuine dialogue for the interest of our new nation to prevail.

We have learned through our history of struggle that through a just and a true dialogue we reached in Addis Ababa Agreement and the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) were achieved because the world bodies understood the root cause and the way forward. We do not want more bloodshed, self-inflicted suffering to our people, and loss of property as well as the massive displacement of our people both within South Sudan and to the neighboring countries.

We do not want the implementation of displacing Nuer from their places into Ethiopia as a solution. Instead, we want our people to enjoy the fruits of their collective struggle without loss of lives and fear under self-claimed dictatorship. We urge IGAD and other international community partners to expeditiously resolve the political differences through condemning the main genocidal of the leadership in Juba and embark on really reconciliation, nation building, and development.

Without pointing out those who planned to kill the people of South Sudan’s one ethnic group, the Nuer People in Juba from December 15-30, 2013 that fueled this conflict, South Sudanese’s various ethnic communities’ future are in jeopardy/danger.

2. We, the South Sudanese Nuer People have condemned the turning of what was purely a political differences in order to serve the nation well within the SPLM Party into tribal conflict. Any ethnic group whether from Bari, Moru, Shilluk, Murles, Anyuak, and Dinka to be massacred by their own leader is a crime, leave alone Nuer People being deliberately and intentionally killed in Juba.

We the South Sudanese Nuer Canadian members and leaders in Canada have condemned the tribal government and its like who incited our tribes to involve in violence for the interest of Salva Kiir and his inner circle leaders, who planned the massacre to gain leadership. We want to make it clear that our general populations in South Sudan and around the world have strongly condemned the killing of innocent people by Salva Kiir in order to remain in power; this is a crime.

We the Nuer Community at home and in diaspora still wonder of why a political differences within the SPLM Party unfortunately turned by some opportunists into a tribal confrontation. The SPLM Party does not only belong to the Dinka and Nuer as the initial killings in Juba suggested; it is the South Sudanese Political Party with the membership from across all tribes in the South Sudan. For instance, those who eager to reform the SPLM Party are not from Nuer Tribes alone. If so, why there were no other tribes got kill in Juba?

3. Therefore, we urge the international communities of AU, IGAD, and UN to Not only condemning Salva Kiir but to stop him and his government from killing one ethnic group, than bring him and those perpetrators to book in order to have a nation that belongs to all people. Abusing, harassing, and killing of the innocent citizens based on their tribal affiliation leave a lone Nuer is a crime in 2014. Killing people in order to defamed individuals is unacceptable in South Sudan.

The people of South had suffered a lot and fought the war together to create this nation. All opposition leaders and media leaders have been targeted due to their being informed and promoted the spirit of working together and continue to live together as one nation for generations to come. Killing and dividing the citizens and human rights abused was not what the People of South Sudan Fought for. Is it what the international community members were looking for to be upheld in our entire country? Our leader and his inner circle groups should desist from using hate or provocative languages that could prolong the conflict and misery of our people.

4. This message is to the Leadership in the United States of America under the current leadership of President Barack Obama. For South Sudanese Citizens to have bright future as America Dream, the Obama Administration has to look back into the American Transformations, the long struggle for freedom for all Americans, including the Black Walk to Freedom in the US History that inspires the whole world.

5. It is important at this juncture that the United States’ Leadership and the UNSC Chief (Secretary General Ban-Ki Moon) understand the US Secretary of States, John Kerry’s recent sanction that involved Peter Gatdet Yak has been received as unjustified based on reality. We and many other people both in South Sudan and in diaspora did not receive this sanctioning of General Peter Gatdet as legitimate for one reason. Peter Gatdet didn’t commit any crime rather, refusing and reacting to the systemic humiliation and killing to citizens of South Sudanese who were intentionally displaced from their country by their own government in Juba.

Killing one ethnic group in Juba unlike the rest of the state men, women, children, and elders in South Sudan is unjustifiable. We believe the US Government should head up to it principles of all people. We hope the people of the United States have to re-read the long walk to freedom and how it came to be as a nation. We hope Secretary of States John Kerry recalls back his speech when he endorsed President Barack Obama at the National Convention of the Democratic Party to run for the US President.

The question that the American people may answer is this; is it okay for them to to see South Sudan be a country like the US in terms of its political system? Or does the US want another dictatorship country in South Sudan? The common citizens of the people in South Sudan and in diaspora not one tribe were the ones consenting nation to be led by Salva Kiir in 2010 Sudan General Election and 2011 through the ballot box at the time of the Referendum.

Every single citizen is important and dear in South Sudan and indeed, in the eye of the international community. The question is this; why did the AU, IGAD and International Community Leaders recently condemned the fighting in Bentiu, Unity State while forgetting or turning away from one of the most painful killings in the nation’s Capital, Juba? Instead, the international community forgot the long planned of South Sudanese’s Massacre in Juba.

6. We, the South Sudanese Nuer Community in Canada want to alert the international community of what happened in Bentiu, the Capital of Unity State, South Sudan on May 04, 2014, immediately after the U.S. Secretary of States John Kerry left Juba, South Sudan. For instance, after he (Salva Kiir) met with the U.S. Secretary of States John Kerry in Juba; at the same time, Salva Kiir ordered his (South Sudan SPLA) troops to recapture Bentiu, the Capital of Unity Stat, Nasir, and Longchok Counties in Upper State.

This can be termed as that, he the President of South Sudan Salva Kiir deceived the U.S. Secretary of States, John Kerry as he was advised not to use violence in the country again while peace process is going on. Moreover; Salva Kiir’s constant lies, he brought the North Sudanese Rebels of Blue Nile, Nuba Mountains, Darfur of Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), and his SPLA troops that enabled him to storm Bentiu, the Capital City of Unity State until now. We need all the international community leaders to take a look of how Salva has been supporting Sudanese Rebels in order to use them to preserve his power.

One of the best examples from Salva Kiir Government’s lies was in 2011 when he lied to the U.S. President Barack Obama that he had no longer allied with the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), SPLM-N whose missions are to topple the Khartoum Government. This president is using what so called “pretext” tactic. What happens daily is that Salva Kiir is using those (Sudan Rebels) as tools in South Sudan by financing them to fulfill his plan.

The killing of Dar Fur in Bentiu was not done by the rebels in Opposition. The JEM personnel in uniforms were the one being killed in action. Two days before fighting, rebels announced to the civilians in Bentiu Capital to leave the city and to report themselves to the UNMISS Camp. Instead, government troops prevented the civilians to leave and used them as human shell. At the same time, most of the mercenary fighters had no military uniforms.

Moreover; since South Sudan President Salva Kiir announced the state of emergencies for both Jonglei and Unity States in January 2014, there were no civilians from external traders. Those who might have been killed were mercenaries. What we the people of South Sudan and the UNMISS Authority in Bentiu knew was that all civilians left Bentiu since December 2013.

Salva Kiir announced the state of emergency and that had never lifted. How did these people come to Unity States? Who provided them with vistas to come to a state that has been in the emergency? Therefore, those people are the rebels (mercenaries) allied to Salva Kiir for all these years.

7. We urge all South Sudanese in Diaspora to be united, work together, and avoid promoting a tribal state like what Libyan Leader Mohammed Gadhafi did in his country before the citizens woke up and deposed him recently. One of the best examples of Salva Kiir’s Tribal Government is when he recruited his tribal men to be his presidential guards whom he ordered to kill the Nuer in Juba on the 15th-30th of December 2013. Salva Kiir has done this in his three states of Bhar El-Gazale Region by recruiting his private republic guards like what Sadam Hussain did in Iraq a few years ago.

Another important example the international community and world leaders have to recall was one ethnic group that was being massacred in Iraq by the dictator, the notorious leader Sadam Hussain in Iraq a few years ago. Sadam Hussain killed the Kurdis Ethnic Groups in Iraq by using nerve gas in the present of the international community. Indeed, Saddam and his inner circle did the crimes against humanity in the events that took place in Dujail in 1982 (see also human rights abuses in Iraq) reference to the human rights abuses in South Sudan.

Burning the Nuer People in Juba is one of the worst human rights abuses in modern human history. Even the Khartoum Regime with whom the people of South Sudan fought with never burned South Sudanese people in Khartoum by the Khartoum Government during civil war.

8. The people of South Sudan cannot afford to groom a dictator who will deliberately kill them in the years to come by using his own chemical weapons. A dictator who has been murdering people for the last 8 years and still killing them today in a bright day light. We wonder how the international community leaders view the leadership that is intentionally destroying the country.

Is the international community waiting for a dictator to acquire biological weapons to kill more people in the years to come? Massacre had taken place in December 2013 in the National Capital City of Juba and still taken place daily in other parts of the country.

9. Killing of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) of children, women and elderly in Jonglei State, Bor Capital inside the United Nations Camp is a great example for the international community’s failure. National Minister of Information, Michael Makuei Lueth and Defense Minister, Kuol Manyang Juuk ordered the killing of the vulnerable Nuer Civilians in the UNMISS Camp. These are the nations’ national ministers.

Back in the past, the same Makuei Lueth with SPLA Army Forces from his own ethnic tribe tried to enter the UNMISS Camp in Bor, Jonglei Sate, which accommodates the same thousands of IDPs Nuer Ethnic Group whom he killed.

10. The United States needs to sanction the Presidential Guard General Marial Chieinuong Mangok, who killed the Nuer Civilians in Juba that fueled the current conflict. How does the US leadership view its position as it has been the human rights and democracy advocacy?

Many people believe the United States and other international leaders would fairly direct sanctions to the following known officials. Defense Minister Kuol Manyang Juuk, Minister of Information Michael Makuei Lueth, Former Governor and Chief of Staffs Paul Malong Awan, Foreign Affairs and International Corporation, Dr. Barnaba Marial Benjamin, and President Salva Kiir. These are the rights people who planned the genocide plus some of the SPLM National Liberation Council Members. Paul Malong Awan was the one who recruited his private tribal militia men from his own Bhar-El Gazale Region whom Kiir used in December 2013.

11. President Salva Kiir issued his God Given Presidential Decree in January 2014 and declared both Jonglei and Unity Sates as the states of emergency. That decree has never been lifted till today. We believe the African and Western leaders know the term “state of emergency” than we the ordinary people know. There were no civilians in Unity State with the exception of the host citizens and those in the UNISS Camp.

We, the people of South Sudanese Nuer Community have realized that the world now is implementing the plan to eliminate the Nuer People (Tribe) in South Sudan. This plan has been there for years even during the 21 years’ war between North and South Sudan that the Nuer should be pushed to Ethiopia by some ring leaders in South Sudan and the neighbouring countries’ leaders. Could that be nation’s resources?

12. South Sudan’s elected leader VS. Egyptian Revolution against their elected leader; when comparing the current South Sudan’s conflict to Egypt’s conflict, this can be termed as naivety. The Egyptian People removed their dictator of Muslim Brotherhood Government three years ago because of his divisive leadership between communities and religions.

We, the people of South Sudan are wondering what Foreign Minister Barnaba Marial Benjamin and the Egyptian Leadership signed a month ago so Egypt to send its troops to fight alongside with Salva Kiir troops against opposition Forces. Even the United Nations, the United States, European Union and IGAD leaders did maintain their positions in Egypt, Syria, and Libya conflicts and support those are eager for democracy.

Furthermore, now Egypt deployed its military assets and began fighting in South Sudan alongside Salva Mercenaries against opposition forces. Some are deployed in the Ethiopian border with North Sudan and South Sudan.

13. We wanted the international community to recall back the security situations in South Sudan before the current conflict. Many journalists and media personnel were abused and some even murdered by the regime in Juba. Isaiah Abraham who was murdered is a good example. When Isaiah Abraham was murdered, the United States of America sent the FBI Team to investigate the case. Did the team announce its finding in the media up to now? Not really.
Reference to citizens being murdered in South Sudan Isaiah Ding Abraham Chan Awuol

14. Therefore, we want the international community leaders to recall back their best experience in the leadership in Juba. We urge the international community to be relevant when reacting to the reports on the ground and the damaging the media reports and rumors that is tearing South Sudan apart. Those media outlets and some neighboring leaders have their own interests in South Sudan.

Take Uganda’s Military involvement in South Sudan for example. We wanted the world to view the situations in South Sudan as what happened in Iraq many years ago. There is no different between the current conflicts in South Sudan with what happened in Iraq under Saddam Hussain in the 1980s. Sadam used nerved gas against Kurdis Ethnic Group in Iraq using the country’s military assets (helicopter gunships and jet fighters). Salva Kiir used Uganda’s military assets in exchange for oil money to remain in power while doing nothing for the nation except divisions. The results were very clear when Salva and Museveni used cluster bombs against the civilians and rebels in Jonglei State.

What were the international world leaders’ reactions? None. Instead, they all praised the Ugandan President by killing the Nuer People. Do IGAD and other international world believe in the unity of the people of South Sudan? The message of hope and peace to the people of South Sudan both in South Sudan and in diaspora need the world to carry out a thorough investigation into the current conflict not randomly in order for our various communities to promote peace and a national reconciliation among our political leaders and tribes.

We need the international community to set a thorough and a genuine investigation in regards to the root cause of this conflict and who did what. Why did the political differences within the SPLM Party resulted in one ethnic group (Nuer) being? Without publicly denouncing the Government of Salva Kiir for the crime he had planned for years, South Sudan will not be a perfect nation. We want the troika countries to recall back the experiences their officials from embassies in Juba, South Sudan had experienced from the security situations in the country.

15. Violations of freedom of expression and censorship of the press: In the months prior to the outbreak of Nuer Genocide in South Sudan, the climate for freedom of expression in South Sudan had progressively worsened. With the outbreak of violence on 15 December 2013, a sharp deterioration was evident by all the embassies: US, UK, IGADs, and other European Diplomats. That a political debate between the party members, particularly those who eager to reform SPLM Party and those who opted for dictatorial rule.

Because Salva Kiir and his inner circle groups have planned to remain in power without democracy in South Sudan, he ordered to massacre the Nuer to turn/incited communities against one another. Recall his announcement for the postponement of the election supposed to be held in 2015 and extended to 2018-2020. In mid-January, the HRD was informed of dozens of incidents involving the illegal arrest, detention, intimidation, harassment, and expulsion of national and foreign journalists, as well as the surveillance and censorship of media houses.

We call upon the international community to look back and analyze what the regime in Juba has done to the UNMISS personnel, including the representative of the UN Secretary General. Calling the UNMISS Representative and other officials rebels and abusing their names in the media is another important violation of international norms the Juba Government has deliberately has been doing.

This government has some of the most notorious elements, who have committed war crime and crime against humanity for so long and has torn the country apart. Because of all these human rights violations and atrocities committed by President Salva Kiir against the same people who brought him into the power, we the people of South Sudan concluded that Kiir must go so that the people of South Sudan will remain united as one people, one nation and to live in peace and harmony for the generations to come.

Signed By:
South Sudanese Nuer Community Members and
Leaders in Canada, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

South Sudan is too deformed a Nation to be Reformed

By: Daniel Amum Odwel, MAY/19/2014, SSN;

The intuitive expression here came as result of statements and reports given by the leaders of government of South Sudan as if there was nothing that happened in the nation.

Irreparable damage and atrocities committed are being denied by the system. Irreconcilable attitude of the government of South Sudan is a stumbling block to any progress in achieving a just peace.

You could observe this in the speech of the minister of information and broadcast, Mr. Makuei Lueth in Nairobi, when he says, “even if some people say that he (Kiir) mismanaged the affairs of South Sudan, he was democratically elected.”

Critical analyses suggested that Mr. Makuei is saying that President Kiir has absolute immunity and had full rights to kill his subjects without question, and nobody should temper with his removal and citizens must not think in this the way to remove a democratically elected government.

Whether the nation is in a hemorrhaging condition or not, Kiir is still the legitimate President, and even if all people are finished in South South, Kiir will remain legal president.

Yes, he will remain a president of heartless and criminal people and animals in bushes that have no qualified leader to lead them except the master of jungle.

Irresponsible behavior of minister Makuei exposed his immaturity in politics and discreditably to be the spokesman of the government of South Sudan.

No one is above the law and the President is not an angel that cannot be reproached and be accountable for crimes committed under his leadership.

The president Kiir massacred his subjects in sight of parliamentarians because they are toothless, for they were supposed to impeach him immediately.

How come the Legislative Assembly allowed Kiir to train special guards from one ethnic group without question, and these guards were the people who caused the genocide in Juba.

Noticeable up this moment no condemnation was made by the Legislative Assembly to challenge what happened in Juba.

The public must know that the folks they elected to represent them in parliament were there in passive and dormant position to protect only their selfish interests, even though the masses who voted them are being slaughtered like chicken.

Look to the statement uttered by vice president Wani Iga that, “no Transitional Government without Kiir,” what does this childish position imply?

It shows that Wani cannot manage the affairs of the nation without his God-angel Kiir. In other words, he wants Kiir to complete the elimination of the Nuer together with Riek so that he may not surface again to claim his leadership position within SPLM party if the worse comes.

This is the argument of a low esteem person who cannot stand alone.

President Kiir shouts from the bottom of his heart that, “I’m still president of South Sudan.” What is a jock without shame from a big man like Kiir who knows the tribulation and agony of war he imposed on people?

Sensible person will know that Kiir is a warlord who trundled to create his empire in South Sudan.

The President should know that South Sudan is in a constitutional vacuum and a State of Emergency that need quick solution before the nation totally collapses that will be counted on his bad records.

The SPLM party does not want Kiir to leave leadership for the sake of peace and tranquility and brotherhood living, despite their belief that the president Kiir had destroy the image of the party world-wide by his poor performances and weak style of leadership.

Painfully, the South Sudan has becomes a dustbin for many dead bodies are rotten in sight of the government. SPLM government is fanatic even if they saw people famished, they never take courageous decision to rescue the situation because the inflicted pain is not experienced by their children.

Another dilemma, some Dinkas seem to see that if President Kiir lost the leadership to someone else, it meant Dinka have lost. This phobia is unrealistic because before Kiir became president, Dinka enjoyed the status quo in the South Sudan.

The deceptive decision made by the government of South Sudan, in which they announced to blind the public that the war is not between Dinka and Nuer, it was the only thing that kept the government to remain in power to this end.

In case if other communities were clear that the war is between the two rivaling communities, they would have quit the front-lines, arguing that why do they die for sake of one particular tribe and the situation would have been different today.

For the South Sudan to surmount the deformation, the leadership within the government, opposition parties, SPLM party, and renegade groups must admit that their problem that need to be addressed by all for the welfare of entire nation, and people must avoid resistance position that said we are liberators.

What I know all southerners had participated in liberation, and no one has a right to blackmail others. The pit some of us are trying to dig by now, all of us will fall into it. Let every organization in South Sudan transform itself into a national entity rather than ethnic entity.

The South Sudan is a deformed nation to be reformed because no ethnic group that will accept constructive criticism from a member of other communities and no single tribe that will challenge its members who committed heinous mistakes.

Let me illustrate this point with few examples, some years back in Juba, one minister was accused of corruption and was put into custody for investigation, but his tribal mob stormed the police station and took the man out by force, and that was the end of the case.

Again, in Wau, a lawyer sentenced a criminal to prison and the family of the criminal had threatened the lawyer by death and he had to escape the place for his life.

This is clear indication that the law is in the hands of powerful people in the South Sudan, and it is only applicable to weak people, for the powerful people are above the law.

Irreversible mentality of gangsters within the government of South Sudan is clear indication that people were massacred intentionally to let them remain in their positions. Indeed, the initiated killers must be protected so that they may continue governing the masses deceptively.

Ibrahim Wani, director of Human Rights in South Sudan, exclaimed that Southerners must rethink that “there is something larger than the individual, something larger than ethnic group and that together they can actually build South Sudan where everybody’s aspiration and dream can be realized so that the younger generation in South Sudan will not again face the kind of catastrophe that today’s generation had faced.”

I think what Wani exclaimed will be attained if nationalism spirit control our daily life in all governmental institutions, because most of departments in Juba and all states are families, clans, and tribe entities that never portrayed the image of the nation or state that should encompassed all citizens.

Sorry to argue that these younger generations were already infected by a virus that is killing this generation unless they discover that fathers are the cause of downfall of South Sudan and they refused to consume the bloody money earned by their fathers.

For most of the offspring are enjoying stolen funds from South Sudan abroad.

The South Sudan nation is too deformed to be reformed because the behaviors of its leaders are off-put and moronic in character.

To reform the South Sudan into a viable state, we must deal with those giants diseases called corruption, nepotism, favoritism, segregation, tribalism, disunity, inter-tribal conflicts and insecurity.

In case if those giants are not addressed thoroughly we will remain deformed for the rest of our life until Jesus come back. END

Tears of noble sorrow on commemoration of May 16th, 1983

QUOTE: “A nation is not defined by its borders or the boundaries of its land mass Rather, a nation is defined by adverse people who have been unified by a cause and a value system and who are committed to a vision for the type of society they wish to live in and give to the future generations to come.” ― Fela Durotoye

BY: Matiop Alier Ngueny Gaker, MAY/16/2014, SSN;

When I grew up, I was then growing up with lots of heart-wrenching war stories being narrated at firesides in our village, about our past generations and forebearers, who fought and achieved exulting victories over the enemy, including how they had managed to bring more glory to our home villages.

In their admiration of fatherland, they lost sight of all other things, even if they mattered to them and staked their lives, on the cause, which was greater than their individual human needs.

As matter of fact, with such brave men of the past, such ones, there’s always a better relief for aggression and oppression, as they fought those past callous wars over the pasture lands and grazing fields with neighboring tribes.

Those glorifying war victories to this day are still told with vivification and exultation, not only as source of our inspiration, but they called upon every single generation of our people to step forward to sacred duty and to the defense of fatherland with blood and human life.

The fact is, ladies and gentlemen, telling such stories, was always the best way of relaying the origin of the Dinka society to its posterity and future generations.

Those stories and others of their kinds were source of our inspirations, bravery and courage, to which every age-fellowship of the Dinka country, who had come and gone, learned the very way of the tribe.

Yet, they instill valor and fortitude to face the enemy head on. And even today in seven out of ten states of our republic, those heydays are not forgotten but they are still our greatest sources of bull songs and tribal history.

However, the first generation of South Sudanese people, who would later joined the movement en mass drew unmistakable lesson from those war stories.

The subsequent generations of our people who would later joined the war of liberation, were inspired by their bravery and leadership they have shown in battlefield of war.

This fact can be attested to by decisive military victories, which were quite won by men of then the SPLA guerrilla organization.

The magnitude with which those sons of cattlemen, peasant farmers, and goat-herders managed to dislodge well-equipped Sudanese armed forces, supported by its air forces, however, had not remained behind the wall of those battlefields of war, but it’s quite well documented in the libraries of the world.

Not to mention, our gallant men of SPLA of Locust, Muor Muor, Zalzal, Intifada Divisions, just to mention a few, were simply inspired by heroic deeds of their past generations, and they were out to fulfill their chore at all cost.

Those men staked their lives for nothing else than a greater good and cause for liberty, including an independence of now the Republic of South Sudan.

These village illiterates were men who’ve no illusion to stab the cause of liberty like their forefathers, who had fought countless wars with their neighbors to defend the glory of their fatherland at unimaginable cost and price in human lives.

Every single one of those foot soldiers, let me tell you, was not angelic in nature, but they’re regarded as saviors of African people in the Sudan, and even to this day, every single one of them, is still commanding a very high regard across the motherland.

On July 4th, 1985, for example, a group of unknown ragtag barefooted soldiers stunned the whole Sudanese political and military universe, by staging unprecedented systematic dismantlement of a well-equipped ‘tens of thousands of forces’ of former President Jaafar Mohamed Numeiry, then a renowned dictator of Sudan, in a battlefield of war between Jemessa town and Pariak village.

Those foot soldiers, to the dismay and disappointment of Sudanese establishments, or “the sons of the land,” were nothing than combination of people who hailed from cattle-camps, peasant farming, and youth from various Sudan secondary schools and university backgrounds, and they constituted the very first SPLM/SPLA “Liwaa al-Jared” or “The Banner of the Locust” division.

Although I was then a small boy, I had a privilege to witness history written by those fellow countrymen.

For instance, while our cattle-camp was perching on the west embankment of the Nile at Magok, a divine summer camp of Gwalla de Bol, in late 1985, a company of SPLA soldiers under young officer, Mayen Lual Abiei, ambushed and destroyed large convoys of Sudanese armed forces at old Malek Village in less than an hour.

Then again by October 23rd, 1985, the three battalions of Cobra, Raad and Zindia, under stewardships of great personalities of Makor Lual, Geu Atherkuei, Kelei Riak Makol (popularly known as Abdelfatah), Gai Garang, Alierakuom, Thon Agoot, among others, under overall command of Major Thon Ayii Jok and Benjamin Nyakot Paka, had won the war over tens of thousands of Sudanese soldiers between Jemessah and Panwell village.

This war came to be known as the war of ‘tens of thousands.’ Those men were not men to look back in battlefield of war and as a result, many of them have disappeared in radar of war and political establishment.

To this day, those of Arok Thon Arok and Benjamin Nyakot Paka are all still idolized in every quarter of Bor Dinka and beyond. Posterity and history of nascent South Sudan would never forget these fallen heroes and architects of our political struggle throughout South Sudan.

Today as we remember and commemorate the 31st year of war inception on May 16th, 1983, those past war victories are now façades of faded war glory as our new republic sinks further into abysmal conflict of leadership struggle and lack of management skills.

Unfortunately, the very comrades, who used to dodge lethal bullets of the enemy under the same banner, are now having different ideas at the backs of their minds.

The last thing we needed was the event of last December 15th, 2013, which had set our country at unimaginable collision course, but the whole country was bracing for more violence.

Today in our nascent Republic of South Sudan, if you have a chance to set barefoot on the soil of our republic, you’ll therefore be faced with similar question: “where’s my country?”

Then again, just set your leg in back countries of our homeland as if you’re going to witness the waste of our country, and believe you me, you’ll therefore, be confronted with simple English question: “Who’re our good leaders?”

Just be braved enough to pay homage to local businessmen in Konykonyo Market and you’ll therefore, be face to face with same question: “Where are our so-called “good liberators?”

Comrades, set your foot there today in Republic of South Sudan, but you’ll then encounter the same question: “Where’s our government?”

The little bastard child of war has every reason to ask those questions, because is this the very country our people staked their lives in her honor and glory? Where is the future of our republic?

The cry of ordinary citizens in corners of the so-called our cities, Shantytowns, villages and hamlets, is very real. The cries of those internal displaced persons are no longer a matter of survival and fate.

It’s a matter of life and death. Theirs are deep sorrows of government turning a blind eye to their plights and agonies.

Their lamentations are deeply seated in noble grief of surreal neglect and latent flames of misery.

The orphan, the widow, the widower, the old, the former child of war is asking plain questions: “who in our and your generation, from every village and hamlet; town and city, back country and shantytown of our nation of South Sudan, would be the next George Washington of our republic and bring us out of this current conflict?”

“Who would be the Mao Zedong of our motherland to spearhead a new peasant revolution to the uplifting of our people from flames of poverty to a better standard of living?”

“Who among us is a man without self-seeking and self-ego to act on behalf of our posterity?”

“Who among us would rise up above petty tribal politics and realize that South Sudan in every walk of life is at the bottom of the totem of humanity and human development index?”

“Who’s a man of clean record among us here to fulfill the dreams and expectations of our forebears, to bring about a new development for their children up to the fourth and fifth generations?”

Where are our men and women of Washington’s caliber to bring our beloved country out of backwardness and tribal fiefdoms? Who among us is a man of unquestionable integrity? Who’ll come and go without looting from public coffers and riches of our homeland?

Who and when? Oh, thy Motherland!

From a small village of Rubkona in Western Upper Nile [WUN], to hamlet of Murle and home country of Anuak in eastern plains of Jonglei State [JOS], to villages of Ruto, Nyangatom, Taposa and Acholi tribes in Eastern Equatoria State [EES), to villages afar in Zandeland in Western Equatoria State [WES], to Fertit villages in Western Bahr El Gazaal State [WBS], to ironstone plateau homeland of Malwal Giernyang in Northern Bahr El Gazaal State [NBS], to the cradle homeland of Dinka tribe in Warrap State [WAS] and to small village in Aliab Dinka Valley, and further into Rumbek Agar, and to Ciece Dinka habitat in Sudd swamplands, our motherland, South Sudan, will you ever listen to cries of your citizens?

The tears of your children, your inhabitants, Oh, thy motherland, South Sudan, The land of brave and countless sacrificial heroes, are tears of killings, and insecurity, tears of tribalism and corruption, tears of embezzlement, and underdevelopment, tears of neglect and lack of direction and lately, cries of blood spilling.

Oh, thy motherland, is this the country our fathers staked their lives in your honor and glory? Oh, thy motherland, Is this country your sons and daughters sacrificed their lives in her glory and honor?

Oh, thy Nation of South Sudan, Our home country, the cry of your people stems from tears of noble sorrow, the killings, the tribalism and agonies of languishing in flames of poverty, which has becomes their daily staple food.

Oh, our homeland, our country, your people are not only yearning for a charismatic leadership, but they are meandering like sheep without shepherd and guardian in dark corners of refugee and internal displaced persons camps.

The common person who had previously offered his grain and cattle to finance the war of liberation in then tattered state and flame of poverty Sudan, is obsequiously still yearning to see the fruits of his investment bear better results.

He longs to see to it that the needs of his next generation of his kinsmen and fellow countrymen are concrete realities not mere slogans on Juba newspapers and media.

The recent bastard child of war is longing for service deliveries, but to his chagrin and despair, the war of liberation might have or had robbed him of the best father he held dearly, the lovely brother, the mother, who’s only source of his comfort and sister he would have found solace.

This little bastard child of war, according to this fact, has every reason to ask this question: “is this republic our fathers staked their lives in her honor and glory?”

If western traditional democracies, sovereign countries and nation-states are organically, socioeconomically, and socio-politically identified by their national frontiers, geopolitical realms, and their citizenry, then why can’t we have our own democracy here in South Sudan?

Let me take this last important part as the ending-point for presenting the relevant facts — again with an apology and a reminder that I am not a politician: We know definitely, today, that the greatest test and challenge in building foundations of viable civilized country, as a result, is to call for concerted more efforts of unselfish compatriot and patriotic citizen, the one, who may deny himself/herself of some basic wants and material things, which he/she deems fitted to have no meanings in his/her belief system.

These countrymen and women, for instance, the founders of western democracies, who planted trees and seeds of many generations, remain not only the greatest leaders and noblemen of their people, but they didn’t have political aspirations to reap or harvest fruits of their labor.

These leaders are still idolized as demigods in their own right. Such noble ones were not men to look back, but they rather set everlasting cornerstone —foundation of their home civilizations.

To look back was uncalled for in their unwavering political philosophies and this, however, would not answer the purpose and call of nation building.

What then the Westerners and Chinese of the time vividly knew and aspired for were everlasting solutions to problems of their subsequent generations of their people to start off of a life on certain foundations and economic footholds.

Several generations and multitudes have come and gone, yet the works they have set up may and will outlast many men and women of their respective countries.

If such developmental projects were correctly prioritized in our case; then they may help to enlighten the current and future generations of our posterity, from first unto the fourth generations, for example.

Unfortunately, without aggressive objectives and leadership pursuing them, especially men of high integrity, this ambitious tenet, without doubt, can lead us anywhere, or even worse, they would falter on their search for surreal cultivation of everlasting seeds and trees of a great cornerstone of human civilization.

Even equally important, if these seeds and trees of new human civilization were to be effective; then they’ve to take deep roots or changes in the lives of compatriot fellow citizens here and now.

Such men were not men to look back and questioned their actions. They’re born for service of their homeland.

However, since the departure of those noblemen and women; each and every subsequent fellow countrymen and women of those human races, who had come after them, have worked tirelessly on the footprints of their predecessors and forebears for the good of their posterity and offspring unto the third and fourth generations.

Such ones weren’t only selfless beings, but they were mortal geniuses, who have not only inscribed their noble names in good legacies of the world, but their subsequent compatriots had reasons to rightfully revere them with their good names now and forever.

At the same time, they had every right to cherish their ideals for betterment of their lots. To this end, monuments and memorial settings are built in their home countries in order to reward such ones.

Their good names are vivified in great admiration as long as history of human immortality continues to live on this life.

As a result, many of the world class universities and colleges also carried their good names; major roads and highways, airports, museums and libraries are named after every single one of them.

Cities and towns such as the District of Columbia named after the first American president George Washington is the living example of what hard work means in those countries. Such leaders and citizens were born to work. They were born to work and love their countries and people.

So, who is our George Washington at this hour to rescue our masses in shackles of poverty, remain a daunting challenge and question that might not be answered in our generation.

As I recall those years of selfless sacrifices of my parents with difficulty and in human imagination; I can still fathom those images of fellow villagers carrying roasted maize, gourds of grounded groundnut, and other seasoned foods on their way to Bilpam for military services.

I remember that very evening when children of our village’s renowned polygamous Machthui Bol, Alier Bol Pach, among others, left their homesteads as if they would return the next day, but only to learn the fate of their passing through other villagers and distant relatives.

As I write this piecemeal today, I still recall with difficulty those nights of fears, a claustrophobic one, the mass exoduses the village over; the relatives, and other village kinsmen murdered in a cold-blooded killings and their bodies tossed onto the Nile River, because they had been suspected as supporters of the SPLM/SPLA; the beautiful courage, the fortitude, the stamina and the resiliency of ordinary sons of peasant farmers in former Sudan to stand up to the might of Arab chauvinism and indiscriminate terrorism, and finally dismantling every root of Arab hegemony; Numeiry, in-between demagoguery rulers of Sudan, including Sadiq El Mahdi, the man whose family acquired massive wealth through slavery and predator tool of commerce on then Southern Sudan population and finally, Omar El Bashir in South Sudan, once and for all, to bring about the current nascent Republic of South Sudan.

Today is their day and posterity will always follow them wherever they are now. Now, even if we have a conflict today, the people of South Sudan have their day under the African sun! They have a place they call their homeland. May Almighty God rest souls of our martyrs in eternal peace!!

Views contain in this article are solely therefore, the opinions of the author only and he does not speak or represent any group, organization and political party. The writer is a trained biochemistry and chemistry scientist. He can be reached at

United Nations is being silly and unfair to Nuer nation

BY: Gattua̱k C. Guek, MAY/17/2014, SSN;

Since the faked coup war began five months ago, a lot of things have gone unpredictably wrong under the United Nations protection, in particular under the supervision of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan or UNMISS.

Nuer civilians who form the larger number of internally displaced persons (IDPs) were either agitated, kidnapped or dragged out from under the hands of UN troops and officials in Juba, and for the calmness of UN, this had led to the massacre of many Nuer civilians in Bor camp where the armed Dinka Bor youth and SPLA soldiers overpowered the unstable Indian peacekeepers unit, which forms part of the UNMISS team.

The UNMISS who at first had downplayed the severity of the situation as well as the numbers of the Nuer civilians that had been butchered in Juba, something that was seen as fishy and was deemed as a lack of honesty from the UN whom had also refused the relocation of the trapped civilians in Juba, Bor, Malakal and Bhar el Ghazal region.

The UN might truly think its brazen failure to intervene may not be questioned but that is untrue, because unarmed Nuer civilians are yet being abused and dragged out from their gates by Salva Kiir’s Tiger guards.

United Nations is two communities, a global organisation aimed to maintain peace and a security body, to safeguard basic human rights, provide humanitarian aid to hungry and displaced persons and to provide international law.

Since its formation on 24 October 1945, UN has been working entirely to bring to end starvation, conflicts and diseases that are upsetting the human progress, however, in the case of South Sudan; UN has been unjust and really silly to the Nuer people who are largely locked inside UNMISS camps.

The Living conditions for example, for those who are stuck in Juba’s Tongping camp are described as ‘impossible living conditions’ by Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) on its official homepage on 5 February 2014.

This is because infectious diseases spread quickly and high numbers of diarrhoeal diseases are an everyday thing due to the lack of clean water. More than 40,000 of IDPS are squeezed into two crowded camps and as a result of that the living conditions are believed to be unbearable, especially for newborn babies, young mothers, wounded, disabled and elderly persons, and too often the response of the UN for those trapped is so often far too little.

The UN seems to be showing less care in terms of providing humanitarian aid including food and medicines though the Nuer civilians are entitled to.

Officials from the UNMISS were opposing to the then upraised number of Nuer civilians murdered in Juba genocide, for what reason one may ask, no one comprehends.

Somewhere around December 15-20 over 7,000 unarmed Nuer civilians were systematically slaughtered by Salva Kiir’s armed tiger battalion, and instead the UN diplomats were quoted by BBC as saying on December 18 only 500 were killed.

The UN was reluctant to disclose the full truth and attested that there was something shady happening because on those 5 straight days Nuer civilians were being targeted based on their ethnicities, and sufficient evidences of who were targeted were seen on those whom were chased into the UN camps, burned in their homes and the bodies that lay scattered down on the streets.

Specially, when the directed ‘door to door’ operations were conducted in Nuer inhabited suburbs such as in Gudelo, Manga, and Khoor-William, and yet the UN were hesitant to report the correct figures until when the International Crisis Group suggested that 10,000 people may have died. Consequently, this was the unfairness of the UNMISS team.

Of course, the UN could provide protection to those lucky ones who made it to UNMISS compounds in South Sudan. However, there is some sort of criticism going around particularly from the IDPs as they claim that UN troops have failed to secure their safety.

My trapped twin brothers, nephew, uncle and cousins in UN camps in Juba also see no freedom. Since December for instance, around 80 persons have gone missing and are presumed kidnapped by tiger guards from their gates in Juba and the UNMISS team has never reported any missing persons.

It is perhaps the Salva Kiir’s bribery team may have reached officials inside, otherwise internally displaced persons who are registered under the UN protection cannot just disappear as such.

Many uncounted numbers of civilians were evidently mistreated and lugged out from under the hands of UN troops in Juba, Bor, Bentiu and Malakal and that was an undisputed letdown.

Salva Kiir, the illegitimate president
Ban Ki-Moon and his team should not fear Salva Kiir for he has lost legitimacy due to his failure for not ending this war that has displaced millions, though his aides are backing him in instigating more bloodshed.

Several civilians who lost their lives and some who are yet trapped were clearly because of him and his tiger guards. Kiir has also lost 80% of Upper Nile region where the oil is pumped out from, whereas 70% of his national army the SPLA are either defected or uncommitted to him.

In addition, a great number of the invited foreign troops can be found everywhere in S. Sudan. The UN, EU, IGAD and Troika should not thus be blindfolded by Kiir as citizens have had enough of his actions that are dragging the country into further mayhem.

Salva Kiir thus far deserves only isolation and condemnation for failing his own nation.

UNMISS’s Bor Camp massacre on 17 April 2014
On this tragic day, Nuer civilians were caught by surprise when the armed Dinka youth and SPLA soldiers stormed their base. Over 147 persons included children and women were suddenly shot dead along with some youths who tried to jump over the fences.

What made this tragic disastrous was that the small Indian peacekeeping force alleged to be only 30 men according to Upper Nile Times was overwhelmingly chased away. Of course, this brutal attack on guiltless civilians could have been avoided if the UN troops were in their thousands.

And to worsen the situation the UN officials until now did not disclose the correct number of those perished. One would now wonder if this UN protection was meant for certain group.

Battles for Malakal
Opposition forces are often seen as victors but when they seized Malakal for the 2nd time (Jan. 14) and 3rd round (Feb. 18), their actions were doomed by the UN and US despite the fact that Koch, Guit and Leer counties of Unity State were blazed by the SPLA and their allied forces when the signed ceasefire was already effective on January 23rd.

The UN claims were largely against the guiltless white army who did not cause the destruction.

Not only that, unforgettable atrocities were also instigated by the SPLA in many parts of Upper Nile region. On December 20 for example, over 17 Nuer civilians and MPs included Bang Duop Lam who tried to escape death from Malakal to Ulang were intercepted and executed by the mixed SPLA soldiers and Dinka Ngok youth in Baliet, and also for more details refer to Daniel Wuor Jok paper summited on April 21 in

Within the same week over 75 Nuer vendors, students and oil workers who got panicked by the Malakal ethnic onslaughts were denied access to UNMISS camp by General Nhial Batoang in Paloich and before they even tried to walk some 300 KM to Nasir, they were gunned down in bushlands.

Besides, another 300 Nuer families included children and wives of those defected soldiers from Wadekona and Kaka who were travelling along the Nile River by boat to Malakal on February 4 for search of UN protection were intercepted and burned to death in a place called Lul between Kodok and Malakal by the SPLA soldiers under the command of Gen. Johnson Oliny.

On this particular incident there was only a sole survivor, a woman. Gerger is another scene of war crimes where over 300 civilians were brutally butchered on April 25 on its port by the same army only this time, under the order of Brig. Gen. Guot Akuei, and yet the UNMISS leadership under Hilde Johnson and Toby Lanzer had never mentioned nor condemned any of these shocking events perpetrated by the regime.

But when the ferry capsized on the Nile prior to pro-Machar forces assault Malakal on February 18 it was condemned by the UN and world leaders including Salva Kiir himself only because the drowned majority were Dinka civilians.

Last but not least, on May 9 a renewed truce inked by Salva Kiir and Machar was once again dishonoured. Government troops and their allied forces attacked Bentiu on May 10 making everyone wonder if Kiir is a man of peace.

Ulang, Nasir and Ayod were before that torched in a time when rebels were committed to the signed Cessation of Hostilities and again the UN response was negative. The only good thing UN does is condemning both sides for atrocities that were perpetrated by the mighty SPLA forces.

Does this mean UN is not a friend of Nuer people, if not then it should consider the succeeding recommendations?
 Provide further security protection by deploying more of UN troops
 Provide adequate medicines and food including to those starving civilians in the rebels controlled areas by air dropping food.
 Provide land and war transports to relocate the trapped Nuer civilians in Juba, Bor, Malakal and Bhar el Ghazal region to Nuer-land
 UN should also condemn and order all foreign troops (UPDF, SPLM-N, JEM, etc.) to exit South Sudan for they are worsening the crisis.

Otherwise, the United Nations goals of consolidating peace and security, protecting human rights, providing humanitarian aid to starving and displaced persons and providing universal law to all global citizens would not be achieved if those Nuer civilians in Juba, Bor, Malakal and Bahr el Ghazal region are not served equally.

The UNMISS should be fairer in its games by providing enough medicines and food. It should also learn not only to condemn rebels but also to quickly condemn the SPLA and its allied forces of JEM, SPLM-N and Uganda’s UPDF when they attack rebel positions as they are famous for violating Cessation of Hostilities.

Otherwise, this UNMISS operating in South Sudan will be discredited if it’s only backing Salva Kiir and his infamous regime and turns its blind eyes on Nuer nation.

Hilde Johnson and Toby Lanzer should thus fight hard on behalf of those victimised civilians locked in UN camps since war crimes, human rights violations, atrocities and sexual extortion are being easily committed, and also to avoid criticism.

South Sudan: Why Ambassador Francis Mading Deng Is Naked!

By: Tongun Lo Loyuong, Germany, MAY/17/2014, SSN;

When Ambassador Francis Mading Deng was appointed as the permanent representative of South Sudan to the United Nations (UN) by the end of August, 2012, I was thrilled. When he accepted the offer and took oath to represent the people of South Sudan at the world body, I was beaming with hope and was convinced that South Sudan is finally entrusted in safe and able hands of a brilliant, experienced and probably even principled diplomat.

The future of South Sudan foreign relations, particularly in relation to how international relations are conceived of and articulated at the global center of power in New York seemed bright. Abyei was probably on course to rejoining South Sudan from its nativity in Sudan, so I thought.

Ambassador Deng’s glittering diplomatic career needs no introduction. Since the early 60s Dr. Deng has been in and around the United Nations corridors of power, serving on various capacities and scope. He rose to the highest level of humanitarian and peace policymaking positions at this global institution.

Deng laboriously toiled and climbed the UN ladder from humble beginnings serving as a mere human rights officer between 1967 and 1972 to the under-secretary level, representing the Secretary General on issues of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) by 1992.

He then served as a special advisor of the current UN Secretary General on the Prevention of Genocide from 2007 until his appointment as South Sudan’s special representative to the UN.

Successive Khartoum regimes have recognized Deng’s brilliance and diplomatic prowess as early back as mid-70s. He was one of the few Southerners cherry-picked on merits (he is a Scientiae Juridicae Doctor) by Jallaba ruling elites to preside over Sudan’s foreign relations.

He served as Sudan State’s Minister for Foreign Affairs between 1976 until his resignation following the abrogation of the 1972 Addis Ababa Peace Accord and declaration of Islamic Sharia as the supreme law of the land by president Nimeri in 1982, which is one of the factors that triggered the second liberation struggle.

Ambassador Deng claims he tabled his resignation from Sudan’s Foreign Service then in protest to the central government’s conspicuous relapse to Islamist policies.

But by 1992, Professor Deng was back working for Sudan’s Foreign Affairs Office and serving the more ruthless Bashir’s Islamist government in Khartoum. He was assigned as Sudan’s Ambassador to several Western countries, including the United States, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Sweden and Canada.

Dr. Francis Deng is also an international public figure by virtue of his articulate scholarship and seminal academic contributions in international law, global politics and international relations and conflict management and resolution.

He is one of the architects of the moral humanitarian intervention principle now commonly referred to as responsibility to protect (R2P) or responsibility to act (R2A).

In this moral humanitarian intervention principle Deng and his colleagues shifted the burden of normative conception of state sovereignty from above to below and from territorial integrity to the dignity of the people.

The state sovereignty Deng and cohort pioneered dispensed with more than 340 years of established state sovereignty tradition in legal and political theory. Sovereignty up until Deng’s intervention as articulated in their book, Sovereignty As Responsibility: Conflict Management in Africa, published in 1996, was a geographic and regime friendly concept, where territorial integrity of states are sacrosanct and states may not interfere in internal matters of other states, even when totalitarian regimes brutalize their subjects.

The R2P moral principle came to refine the traditional sovereignty norm and articulates three factors that guide modern international relations and the moral obligations of a state.

These moral principles delineate that: a state has a responsibility to protect its citizens from human rights violations and mass atrocities; that the international community has a responsibility to aid the state that is unable or unwilling to protect its citizens to overcome this failure; and finally that in seeking to halt human rights violations and mass atrocities and enforce peace and security, the international community has a responsibility to use force as a last resort when all other avenues have failed.

R2P has now evolved into a soft law in international law and serves as a fundamental principle in humanitarian interventions around the world.

The ouster and lynching of the draconian Mouamar Khadafi of Libya following his iron-fist and violent repression of the Libyan revolution was pretext on the R2P moral and legal principle discourse coined and championed by Professor Deng and company.

On the national level, few have written so expressively and voluminously on the South Sudanese societies, particularly about the Dinka ethnic group as does Professor Deng.

He has written much on Dinka cosmology and worldview, from which Dinka cultural values on peace, social justice and the importance of dignity are derived and around which Dinka social organization, folktales and folk songs revolve.

The gist of Deng’s exposé on his ethnic group, the Dinka, is to lay bare Dinka egalitarianism, and the centrality of peace, justice and dignity values in the Dinka culture so as to dispel any lingering negative perceptions and stereotypes that reduce the community to some unprovoked proneness to violence.

This message is a persistent pattern of Deng’s Dinka writings traceable in his discussions of Dinka worldview, cosmology and religion all the way down to social organization and the role of elders and women in inculcating these integral cultural values in children through the use of folktales and folk songs for example.

“Cieng,” which is a Dinka term that captures the importance of peace, permeates the society’s linguistic expression, including in folktales and folksongs, as Deng argues.

In a book chapter entitled “The World of the Dinka: A Portrait of the Threatened Culture,” Deng writes: “Despite the warlike profile of the Dinka, their moral values emphasize the ideals of peace, unity, harmony, persuasiveness, and mutual cooperation. These values are highly institutionalized and expressed in a concept known as cieng (pronounced “cheng”)…. The contradiction between the requirements of cieng and the violent reputation of the Dinka can be explained in terms of the gap between the ideal and the real, institutionally manifest in the difference between generational roles. While elders strive to live by the ideals, the young warriors find self-fulfillment, social recognition, and dignity in their valor, fighting ability, and defensive solidarity…. Nevertheless, frequent and pervasive as it is, warfare reflects a negation of the ideals, an alternative that should only be resorted to when peaceful methods have failed.”

Elsewhere in a book entitled, Tradition and Modernization: A Challenge for Law among the Dinka of the Sudan, Deng argues: “Cieng does not merely advocate unity and harmony through attuning individual interests to the interests of others; it requires assisting one’s fellowmen. Despite the violent nature of Dinka society, good cieng is opposed to coercion and violence: for solidarity, harmony, and mutual cooperation are more fittingly achieved voluntarily and by persuasion. Cieng has the sanctity of a moral order not only inherited from the ancestors who had in turn received it from God, but also fortified and policed by them. Failure to adhere to its principles is not only disapproved of as an antisocial act warranting temporal punishment; but more important, it is a violation of the moral order which may invite a spiritual curse—illness or death according to the gravity of the violation. Conversely, a distinguished adherence to the ideals of cieng receives temporal and spiritual rewards.”

In short, Professor Deng is an accomplished public figure and a diplomat, a scholar and a peace advocate whose reputation transcends our local South Sudanese borders and the African continent into the world at large.

Deng’s presentations of the Dinka society are not only breathtaking but also leave the impression that he (Deng) is what he is today because he was probably nurtured and driven by these same Dinka cultural peace and justice values and egalitarianism.

However, following the litmus test of the violent outbreak in South Sudan mid-December last year, it is conspicuously noticeable that many a Dinka intellectual who hitherto could be identified as peace activists, have recoiled and thrown their weight behind president Kiir and his violent and destructive policies.

This holds particularly true for those Dinka members who hail from the Greater or to use a more politically correct expression, the larger Bahr El-Ghazal geographic region, which includes Abyei, and which was part of this region before it was annexed.

Could this be the “defensive solidarity” that Professor Deng describes above? If so, how far can a defensive solidarity of a president who has declared a war on his people go?

Should it go as far as undoing all the peace principles and values that one stood for, dedicated one’s entire life advocating and built a global let alone local reputation as a man of principles and the defender of rights, dignity and values?

During his last Security Council address, diplomat Francis Deng did not fail to invoke the viability of raising such questions.

By ardently defending a regime that the whole world is aware has instigated a war on its people and massacred thousands of a segment of its citizens on the basis of sheer identity difference, Dr. Deng like several other doctors from the region have needlessly undressed themselves.

There is no justification for the reaction in kind and the atrocities committed by the other side against those sympathetic with Kiir’s regime or identified with the president’s tribal belonging.

But Deng of all others should not explain away the targeting of IDPs in a UN protection of civilians (PoC) site as happened in Bor and as defended by Deng to have been provoked by the IDPs celebrations of the fall of Bentiu and the gunshots fired by their UN peacekeeping custodians.

There is nowhere in the world where those engaged in a peaceful protest arm themselves. No such thing as armed peaceful protest.

Professor Deng’s last Security Council address was shameful and is antithetical to all that he stood for, including representing IDPs before the world body and the international community and advising the UN’s Secretary General on the Prevention of Genocide.

Importantly, that speech negates your groundbreaking contribution and redefinition of sovereignty as state moral and legal responsibility to protect its citizens.

Diplomat Deng, you should condemn the violent madness in South Sudan and resign from representing Kiir’s regime at the UN, before you further risk tainting your hands with innocent blood, tarnishing your national and global image and reputation and undoing your impressive and rich resume and contributions to make the world more peaceful and just. Peacebuilding begins at home.

Tongun Lo Loyuong is a freelance policy analyst from South Sudan. He holds two Master’s Degrees with honors and academic excellence from the United States. The last of his two MAs is in International Peace Studies and Policy Analysis for Political Change, from the University of Notre Dame – Indiana. His research interest is in South Sudan’s governance and peace and conflict issues. He is reachable at: For South Sudan news feed, follow him on tweeter @TongunLoLoyuong; and for more commentaries visit his blog at:

Minister Michael Makuei says West to blame for conflict

By: JOHN NJAGI, DailyNation, MAY/16/2014, SSN;

A senior South Sudan government minister has blamed Western nations for helping fuel the conflict in the country due to their alleged interest in the country’s oil fields.

South Sudan Information Minister Michael Makuei Lueth said when the country got independence it was agreed the oil companies, mainly from China, Malaysia and India, operating in the country continue to do so, which, he claims, could have angered the West.

“Oil exploration in South Sudan is a Chinese affair and that may have resulted in an undeclared war from those who may have wanted a stake in it. South Sudan is a young country but we are sovereign and no one will dictate to us what to do,” he said.

Mr Makuei said the West may have felt left out, and blamed the international community for being dictatorial instead of diplomatic in pushing its agenda, which had further cemented his country’s move towards the East.

The minister, who is also lead negotiator on the government side in the talks in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia to unlock the South Sudan crisis, blamed the international community for supporting the rebels by pushing for the removal of a democratically elected president.

He called for Kenya, the region and the international community to support President Salva Kiir instead of acquiescing to rebel demands that he stands down, which would set a bad precedent as any other democratically elected leader in the region could also be hounded out of office.

“We understand the Kenya parliament is preparing a motion to sanction the South Sudan government because of the ongoing crisis. We would persuade them not to go down that route because lack of peace in South Sudan would also affect Kenya which has huge investments and many of its people are also earning a living in our country,” he said.


Violence in South Sudan has continued unabated following an attempted coup on December 15 blamed on rebel leader and former Vice President Riek Machar, and has continued to date despite a cessation of hostilities agreement signed between Mr Machar and President Kiir in Addis Ababa on May 9.

Mr Makuei said the government was willing to continue with the negotiations despite what he said was violation of the peace deal by the rebel side.

The minister also castigated the international community and UN secretary general Ban Ki Moon, accusing them of rushing to slap sanctions against officials from both sides of opposition and government for violating the agreement, saying hasty decisions should not be taken without establishing who was responsible for the violation.

“We do not fear sanctions but let the decision not be done hastily because what is required is an informed decision,” he said.

Mr Makuei was speaking at a press briefing at the Serena Hotel in Nairobi accompanied by deputy South Sudan ambassador to Kenya Mr James Morgan.

The minister also blamed Igad for supporting the rebels, saying the regional body together with the international community compelled Mr Kiir to sign the agreement in Addis Ababa yet the government position was that the signing waits until over 2,000 stakeholders from the world’s newest country were present to discuss the deal before it was signed.

“The government agreed to the deal in principle because the President’s signature is on it and now it is up to Igad to transport the stakeholders from over 64 parties, religious institutions representatives among others to Addis Ababa so that they agree on the national unity government,” he said.

However, he said, Mr Kiir would remain the President and the government would not agree to another alternative. END


Kiir blames the West for election delay until 2017 or 2018


South Sudanese President Salva Kiir says his country’s first General Election has been postponed for up to three years due to objections of the Western nations.

The world’s newest state gained independence from Sudan in July 2011 after more than two decades of civil war and was due to hold its first poll in 2015.

With widespread fighting, President Kiir said, it was essential to hold the elections on schedule, as an answer to claims of dictatorship that his rivals have labelled against him.

“I had said that we go for elections in 2015 as it had been scheduled. Let these people stand, let whoever wants to contest stand, we will all stand,” President Kiir said, referring to rebel leader Riek Machar and a group of 11 former political detainees.

“The Westerners know that their groups will all lose. No one will win votes. So they say ‘No, postpone it for three years’ because they know that within the three years, they will provide these groups with money to come and buy your votes,” he said.

“There is no problem. If you are given money, take it, it is your right. Take it and do the right thing. When we contested with the National Congress here in Juba and all over South Sudan in 2010, what happened? They brought money to the South here, but I told you then at the Garang Mausoleum that this money is yours.

“If it is given to you, take it and give us your vote. If the same thing happens, we will tell you that message.”

Attempted coup

Former vice-president turned rebel leader Machar has described the election postponement as an embarrassment.

President Kiir says the three-year pre-election period will now be used to conduct a population census and hold national healing and reconciliation.

Kiir was elected in April 2010 as president of the then regional Government of Southern Sudan, and named Dr Machar, a controversial politician with a big ethnic backing, his vice-president.

At independence, Mr Kiir became the newest country’s president, with Dr Machar remaining his deputy.

However, differences between the two persisted.

Dr Machar, who was critical of the government and had reportedly launched a bid to oust his boss, was sacked in a Cabinet reshuffle in July 2013.

After five months of bickering within the ruling party, an attempted coup shook Juba on December 15, 2014.

President Kiir blamed the failed coup plot on Dr Machar, who denied the allegations.

A peace deal the two principals signed in Addis Ababa last Friday has so far faltered as fighting continued between the rebels and government troops on several fronts. END
————— ———— ——- —– — — –

How Kiir and Machar fell out before independence:

The crisis that South Sudan is facing was destined to befall Africa’s newest nation. A chronology of events that preceded the December 15 alleged coup attempt indicate that President Salva Kiir had long fallen out with his then deputy, now turned rebel leader Dr Riek Machar.

The grudges went public well ahead of Independence, when Dr Machar circulated his version of a proposed transitional constitution to govern the country after Independence.

In his draft, Dr Machar proposed a maximum of two five-year presidential terms and lobbied for Mr Kiir to step down. He presented his draft at a ruling party meeting but was voted out. It was shot down both in the Cabinet and in Parliament.

“This shows that there is parallelism: You cannot identify, you cannot really say; is there one government or are there more than one government?” Kiir said at the sixth Speakers Forum on June 7, 2011. “There is no country that can be run by more than one government,” he said.

In the months that followed, the rivalry only intensified, with each building his own camp within the ruling party — the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement.

In the wake of a deadly cattle raid, former elected Lakes State Governor, Chol Tong Mayai, was sacked on January 21, 2013 and a new caretaker appointed.

In reaction, Dr Machar wrote warning of a glaring Constitutional crisis. “I believe the main issue is the status of the care-taker Governor. I think your comradeship will either relieve him and re-appoint him or re-instate the elected governor Chol Tong Mayay to avoid the looming constitutional crisis,” he said in a letter dated March 13, 2013.

On April 15, 2013, Kiir withdrew all powers he had delegated to Dr Machar, and restricted him to only those duties stipulated in the transitional Constitution.

The transitional constitution gives the President the powers to sack an elected governor and/or dissolve state parliament when there is a crisis threatening national security and territorial integrity.

Dr Machar urged for the reversal of Mr Taban’s sacking, or else Kiir’s own legitimacy was in the line. Church leaders tried to reunite the two leaders, but failed.

In July, Kiir dissolved the entire cabinet, sending Dr Machar packing. Most of the ex-ministersunited with Dr Machar in a desire to regain their ministerial portfolios.

The group, in a press conference on December 6, accused Kiir of “dictatorial tendencies” and said there was a “shift in decision making process from SPLM national organs to regional and ethnic lobbies around the SPLM chairman when it came to appointments to positions in government; that membership of the SPLM and one’s participation in the revolutionary struggle became irrelevant,” the statement said.

The group also said that Kiir had directed state governors to name their preferred members for an impending national convention.

“The intention is to sideline and prevent SPLM historical leaders and cadres categorized as ‘potential competitors’ from participation in the convention,” the statement read.

The statement also recommended that a meeting of the party’s highest decision making organ — the political bureau — is convened to set the agenda for a national liberation council meeting.

Mr Kiir decided to call for the meeting of the latter. On the opening day of the meeting, Dr Machar stuffed up to 30 armed men into four cars and drove to the meeting venue at the Nyakuron Cultural Centre in Juba.

In the meeting, Rebecca Nyandeng Mabior, the widow of the late leader Dr John Garang, criticised Kiir, the party and government system. Dr Machar then spoke in a tone similar to Ms Nyandeng’s and walked out, followed by Ms Nyandeng and some of the now-detained 11 politicians.

On the closing day (December 15), Dr Machar and his group were absent. At about 6pm, after Kiir closed the meeting, gunmen, driving past in a car, shot at the venue.

The number of soldiers guarding an arms depot at Gieda military base near the town centre was increased from one to four.

Later, at about 9 pm, a colonel in the Presidential Guards Unit shot dead his deputy, a Major also shot his deputy.

A fight ensued over the control of the depot. The gunfire was echoed at the military headquarters in Bilpham to the north of the capital and spread to the presidential compound.

The fighting continued throughout the night until the next morning and spread to army garrisons outside Juba. The country and the SPLM were already plunged into the abyss. END