Archive for: February 2015

Revolutionary Movement for National Salvation (REMNASA): It’s Objectives

Why REMNASA was formed.
South Sudan is not only a failed state but is at the verge of disintegration very fast. The
economy has virtually collapsed with the country reported to be in debts of 1.6 billion dollars.

All these borrowed funds are deviated to buy military hardware while government employees
are not getting their salaries. The South Sudan security forces have disintegrated on tribal lines.

Development of the country has halted with roads becoming impassable. Majority of the
citizens are facing starvation while the tribal regime is spending millions of dollars on foreign mercenaries to keep it in power in Juba.

In the last 14 months, the country has been engaged in self destructive war pitting mostly two
tribes. This war was ignited when estimated 20,000 South Sudanese civilians mostly Nuer were
massacred in Juba by President Salva Kiir tribal militia which he trained in Luri while
thousands of mostly Dinka killed in Bor, Malakal and Bentiu by the unfortunate act of revenge
by Nuers. The war has completely destroyed the unity and social fabric of the country.

The root causes of the current turmoil in South Sudan stemmed from the dictatorial, corrupt,
tribalistic and incompetent nature of the regime in Juba. This regime is a product of a South
Sudan imperial president who has worked successfully to subjugate the national institutions
such as parliament and Judiciary and turned them into rubber stamps.

While South Sudan states are supposed to be service delivery organs that should bring power and resources nearer or close to the people, the central government continues to retain 80% of the resources for their own lavish lives or embezzled by individuals creating a small clique of “haves” in Juba while majority of the people of South Sudan wallow in abject poverty.

On the other hand the constitution has created a dictatorial monster who is welding his
constitutional powers to disregard the bill of rights in the constitution thus using tribal militia to commit grave human right atrocities at will. The events of 15-16 December 2013 in Juba and subsequent outbreak of fighting in South Sudan is the case in point.

While many South Sudanese thought that the current rebellion in the country would be the
savior to emancipate the country from the current deep crisis, it appears the rebel movement
has also fallen short of addressing the root causes of the problems that South Sudanese have
been yarning for since independence under the corrupt leadership of Salva Kiir.

Indeed the current peace talks in Arusha and Addis Ababa have become circus for either SPLM unification and apportion of jobs while the real fundamental problem facing the people of South Sudan have be relegated to the periphery.

The recent SPLM agreement in Arusha was nothing but a slap in the face of South Sudanese, because they are the same leaders who promulgated the so call transitional constitution that made Salva Kiir a monstrous dictator. They deprived the poor of the much needed development and created a state of despondency.

On the other hand the IGAD led Addis Ababa talks have degenerated to sharing of power The much heaved reform agenda put forward by SPLM-IO has been swept under the carpet while emphasis is being laid on who should be a president, vice president, prime minister etc.

Even IGAD forced power sharing agreement signed by Kiir and Riak is likely collapsed because it is obvious that the current leadership in Juba with its cohorts would not bulge if they are not assured of the positions that they want; positions that will enable them continue with their merciless endeavors to return the country to the dark ages of impunity.

South Sudan is a country of 64 ethnic groups which became independent through combined
struggle of all these nationalities regardless of their individual populations.

For this reason, REMNASA therefore having been deeply touched by the suffering of the people and the urgent need to salvage the country from complete disintegration, has developed firm determination to unite and reconcile all the 64 nationalities of South Sudan in order to maintain the existence of the country everybody fought to liberate for prosperity of the people and posterity of the future generations.

We are inspired by the spirit and need to create new political dispensation in the country that is based on principles of freedom, equality, democracy, unity and respect for human rights
anchored in federal structure as the basis for uniting and rebuilding the country.

The Motto of this Revolutionary Movement for National Salvation is, “I am a South Sudanese
and I am proud to be South Sudanese”. The mission is to establish and sustain a multiparty
democratic Federal Republic of South Sudan where freedom and equality are paramount while
the aim is to end the current war and work for permanent peace, reconciliation and unity of the
people of South Sudan.

The main objectives to REMNASA are to:
1. Establish a political/military peoples’ movement to dislodge the genocidal President
Salvatore Kiir in order to bring the much needed reforms and services to the people of
Sudan.

2. Mobilize, recruit and continuously train a national military force to engage in the
salvation of South Sudan from the current conflict

3. Advocate for the movement both internally and internationally

4. Create awareness among the people of South Sudan to enable them fully understand the
motto, mission, aim and objectives of the movement and own it as their own movement

5. Engage all other political parties and stakeholders in South Sudan on peace process,
reconciliation and harmonious co-existence

6. Draw up strategy for achieving peace and reconciliation in the country

7. Establish Federal system based on a multiparty democracy

8. Reform the governance system, security apparatus and civil services in South Sudan in
line with the proposed federal structure in South Sudan

9. Establish contacts with neighboring and friendly nations based on mutual respect and
respect for each other territorial integrity10. With the resources the country has, provide the badly needed social services our poor people including offering free quality education and free health care services.

The achievement of these objectives will be guided by the following principles:
1. Reform of the governance structure, security sector and civil services based on Federal
constitution and structures
2. Equality and equity at all levels of governance
3. Inclusivity of all nationalities in South Sudan
4. Nondiscrimination according to gender, religion, tribe, political affiliation, colour, creed
or disability
5. Transparency and accountability
6. Respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms
7. Respect for rule of law. Therefore nobody shall be above the law regardless of his/her
position
8. Separation of powers between the three arms of governance (Executive, Legislative and
Judiciary) so as to create checks and balances
9. Equal share of power and resources in the country based constitutionalism.
10. Noninvolvement of security organs in political arena i.e. intelligence service shall be
purely to gather intelligence and inform leadership.
11. Commitment to adequate delivery of services to the people of South Sudan
12. Create corruption free country with strong transparent and accountable public
institutions.

In conclusion, South Sudan is a country which badly needs salvation; salvation from an
autocratic leadership that has hijacked it for its own interest and domination.

REMNASA strongly believes that the South Sudan crisis cannot be solved by unifying the dreadful SPLM or by creating yet another monolithic government by the defunct SPLM politicians. What both AGAD and Tanzania government should look at is how fast reconciliation and reform agenda
can be put forward.

Secondly it needs reforms in governance, security, socio-economic and rule of law. These reforms must be enshrined in a permanent constitution based on federal form of governance. Once this is done, it really does not matter who leads the country because institutions would have been created that regulate the conduct of the leaders and prevent impunity in the country.

This is indeed where REMNASA stands and is prepared to bring to the people of South Sudan.

REMNASA JAN/02/2015
Information Department
South Sudan

Is IGAD a mediator or a business dealer?

BY: Yien Lam, South Sudan, FEB/02/2015, SSN;

To me, it is simple as this, an Igad role in kiir’s mess is to do its business at the expense of South Sudanese as its definition does not purport peace mediator than the business developer. This is the main purpose of it.

By the definition, IGAD stands for Intergovernmental authority on development. If that is so as we all know, why does it mediate peace? Judge it by yourself. In basic reality, should the organization as such make peace in south Sudan?

People, this is a jesting. It will never bring peace at all because its interest blindfolds it to totally expunge the root cause of the war and the organization does not want to hear the word “root cause ” because its members are involved in the war with its knowledge. Namely, Kiir and M7.

Due to that, IGAD will never press Uganda to withdraw from the south Sudan territory because it is a part of the deal that the rest of the world does not know for certain.

As you can see the businesses in action, Arusha agreement was seen as positive step by many, now the organization goes back to square one to reinstate kiir as president and Dr.Riek as the Vice president as well as Wani.

The organization avoided the previous parliamentary system that includes prime minister and the president. What does that tell you?

What brought back the very system that killed the people in the first place? Where is the system that involved the prime minister? Should we go back every gathering when we try to negotiate peace? Be the judge!

In this respect, I am always being irritated by the word “elected president.” Referring to kiir. This word should have no meaning of whatsoever if not because of the business being ran in south sudan.

Kiir could not be revered as elected president while he himself killed the people who elected him. What the hell is going on with Igad? Should someone who killed his own people still be entitled elected president or simply should resign?

This is rubbish. What kind of system should that be rather than the business that is being ran by this organization if not more?

However, in my view, IGAD now imposes itself to be the government of south Sudan than being the mediator. When I saw the copy of the imposing document that says two vice presidents in the country in the newly created system.

This triggers a lot in my mind that this organization has entrenched itself deeply into south Sudan as far as saying “the speaker of the parliament will be from Equatoria” in which nobody has the problem with it.

When I read that, I reminded myself with the article that I wrote on December the 5 last year about the IGAD Titled “Is IGAD a trustworthy organization to bring peace in south Sudan or a dealer in question”. This is exactly what I was portended.

Nonetheless, when it comes to the power sharing in south Sudan, it imposed the ratio giving government 60% and opposition 30% and the rest 10%. If this is the real power sharing, why would the government that openly said 70% of its soldiers defected to the rebels in January last year be given 60% of total share?

Folks, Guinea fowl cannot be tamed as seeing you as such. There is no way at all to favor one side than the other if you are legitimate mediator rather than the business dealer.

This won’t be the case at all because kiir lost 70% of his forces that was why he brought in Uganda. If that is so, is IGAD saying 60% will include Uganda in the government of South Sudan or who is going to be given 60% while majority of the people of south Sudan rejected the specious president?

Moreover, not only that, a legitimate mediator has a system of its own to follow. Now it seems that An IGAD that is given an important role as mediator is likely to have obscure system that is guiding it.

It comes with this today and tomorrow changes it to a different one. Which one to believe in? If the organization has no system as it seems to be the case, why would the parties in conflict refer the case to advance level of the AU or UN to solve the problem?

In my view, this should only be the option now because this organization seems not to be a good referee because its rationality is being compromised by the internal business.

Nevertheless, the organization went even further to create 68 additional members of the south suduan parliament. Why does it add that number to the parliament? Is that to accommodate others minorities or what does that mean?

To be frank with this organization, this problem does not need the increase of the parliamentarians. This one will not solve the problem in my view. IGAD can increase the number to whatever it wants. But will not be the solution of the south Sudan problem.

The Only solution to all this mess is to take the killer out of power. Keeping him as the president of whole south Sudan will never bear fruits of any kind. A killer must be ousted by any means possible.

There should be no reason to leave him hanging on with blood on his hands. The IGAD decision to keep him as president could only be done by toddlers not grown up people ever. It may be a first to negotiate peace without finding the cause of it ever in the history of the peace in the world.

If an IGAD wants to apply logic, it could first ask what cause the war? Was it a coup or not? Then investigate it as the neutral body. But it shows not to be as expected by many now.

In essence, one cannot imposed power sharing and whatever case without finding the cause of the problem. Believe me, you could not achieve peace without investigating the cause of the war or anything in that matter. A good mediator does whatever it takes to find the bottom of the case.

In addition, IGAD is being blindfolded by its business than finding the root cause of the problem. A real mediator always finds a common ground for the parties in conflict.

Does IGAD think that keeping kiir as the president will solve the problem without finding what led to the killing of only one ethnic group in the capital of the nation? This will not be case and the business will no longer work in the months to come if not days.

Finally, unprincipled IGAD will never bring peace in south Sudan instead, will add gas into fire in order to gain. Keeping kiir as the president is otherwise a recipe for more catastrophe that needs not to be accepted by people of South Sudan.

The author is Maverick concerned south Sudanese that can be reached by lam981@hotmail.com

An Open Letter to South Sudan’s Rebel Leader, Dr. Riek Machar

BY: Kuir ë Garang, Alberta, CANADA, FEB/02/2015, SSN;

It’s common knowledge that you are one of the most divisive figures in South Sudan’s political life whether you intended it or not. And that will go down in history as part of your leadership and political legacy.

It doesn’t matter who’s to blame for all the historical mishaps you’ve been involved in; history will always remember you in a manner that’s outside your perception of yourself. And it’s a personality tragedy you seem to brush aside as you continue to bargain and fight for your political life.

Tribalism
More than 90 % of your camp [military and political] is made up of your tribesmen. Your supporters can blame circumstances surrounding December 15, 2013 mutiny in Juba and subsequent incidences thereafter.

My judgement tells me that you didn’t start the problems that brought us to the current crisis; however, you contributed to the crisis in many ways than one.

Corruption flourished while you were still the Vice President, your office employees, like those of many other ministers, were from your tribe and you wanted to shut down SPLM-DC.

Besides, you criticized your own boss [Kiir] while you were still VP. Those factors don’t belong in a resume of a democrat, who sees himself as a genuine reformer.

And what is even more appalling is how you see yourself as a national leader when you rely exclusively on your fellow Nuer. The few non-Nuer in your camp joined you not out of your exemplary leadership but for the mere convergence of your grievances against the government.

With no doubt, these folks had bones to pick with the government. What gives you some semblance of credence isn’t what you offer but what the government of President Kiir isn’t doing.

• You are as tribalist just as Kiir Mayardit is.
• You are bargaining for political power and that’s what Kiir is doing.
• Your camp is mostly Nuer and Kiir’s camp is mostly Jieeng.
• Both of your camps have committed atrocities.
• And more importantly, none of you seems to strike a tone that promises the advent of peace in South Sudan.
• President Kiir has a tribal militia and so do you.
• Your deputy is from Central Equatoria, your army chief and your spokesperson are from your Tribe. That’s the same thing Kiir has done.

I don’t see how you could claim to be any better than Kiir. If you are, then you’re still to show us.

War Atrocities
You were once asked by a journalist to apologize to South Sudanese regarding the atrocities committed by your forces. Against all required logic and democratic sense of nationalism, you asked the journalist who you should apologize to; arguing that you are a victim.

Not only did that bury any shred of leadership decency and nationalism, you portrayed yourself as a selfish megalomaniac.

So many South Sudanese people died in this war. As someone who considers himself a national leader, you owe it to them to comfort them whether you are to blame or not. And the apology being asked isn’t meant for President Kiir, who’s equally required to apologize for his camp’s atrocities, but for the affected South Sudanese.

The likes of Mabior Garang De Mabior and James Gatdet Dak, including yourself, believe you have nothing to hide when it comes to war crimes. You even recently asked for the release of African Union commission report.

We know the Human Rights Watch report blamed all the warring parties for atrocities committed. AU preliminary report also blamed both sides in the conflict. It’s bizarre how you think you’d wish the content of these reports away.

It could have been a great justice to South Sudanese citizens if you’d called a press conference to apologize. That’s what good leaders do. But no, you want someone to apologize to you! I hope you don’t want the dead to apologize.

You think Kiir lost legitimacy because of the massacres of Nuer in Juba, but you remain mute on what the massacres in Bor, Bentiu and Malakal mean to you as a leader. Can we just forget about those lives because they are mere causal narratives of December 16 -18 Massacre of Nuer in Juba?

Peace Talks
These have actually become job-sharing conferences of either-or conditions. Peace is the only way in which this conflict can be ended. Neither you nor President Kiir would win this war militarily.

Both of you know that a total defeat of any side wouldn’t bring peace to South Sudan. It’d only lead to perpetual insecurity in the country.

Unfortunately, none of you seems to care what this crisis would continue to engender as long as you negotiate yourself back into the government and Kiir renegotiates himself back into presidency.

When you rebelled in 1991 and came back in 2002, it was the current VP James Wani Igga, who humbled himself and gave way to you. This humility was once shown by Gordon Muortat Mayen when Joseph Lagu took over both the political and military wings of Anya Nya war prior to 1972 Addis Ababa agreement.

Remember Wani Igga is a human being with feelings. He’s one weak, comical politician but he symbolizes something greater than himself; and that is, the political position of the three Southern States of the country relative, bizarrely, to Jieeng and Naath people.

Why can’t you, for once, compromise for the sake of peace and tell your camp that part of being a great statesmen is not simply being a top leader.

In all essence, establishing a legacy that has both long lasting and positive impact would go a long way in establishing yourself as a true democrat and reformer.

Negotiating yourself into power is not only selfish, it shows your lack of political muscles. IGAD peace initiative seems like your backdoor plan B. Give South Sudanese peace and they’ll reward you for it. Bring peace and campaign with a positive vibe.

IGAD’s leadership has proved itself a total failure by being peace imposers rather than peace negotiators.

President Kiir and you should therefore show some nationalistic care and attitudinal change for the good of the country.

If the two of you don’t care, who will?

Kuir ë Garang is the author of ‘South Sudan Ideologically’. For contact, visit www.kuirthiy.info

Arusha resets SPLM for another round of senseless violence

BY: ElHAG PAUL, South Sudan, FEB/02/2015, SSN;

The agreement for the unification of the SPLM signed in Arusha, Tanzania, on 21st January 2015 by the three factions of the SPLM party must not be bought by South Sudanese as a solution for stability in the country. Right from the word go the IGAD leaders believed that for the ragging conflict in the country to come to an end, the SPLM/A needs to be united.

This belief is based on assumptions that the SPLM represents the entire people of South Sudan. How they reached this conclusion nobody knows. IGAD ignored all the facts presented to them by the media and continued to pursue their misguided plan. Please see, ‘IGAD inadequate strategy in South Sudan’ http://allafrica.com/stories/201404140864.html and ‘The solutions to South Sudan’s political problems lies in new blood’ http://allafrica.com/stories/201404040507.html

What is clear is that the SPLM represents the interest of a single social group and it is this concrete fact that is responsible for the chaos and fragmentation of the country.

SPLM/A is the cancer of South Sudan and reunifying it and supporting it will just lead to more uncertainty and insecurity as there is today.

The IGAD leaders exerted all their efforts to realise that end. Now they have their agreement. Will it really bring peace and stability to South Sudan? This remains to be seen.

SPLM/A is incompatible with the state of South Sudan. It’s very foundation is anti-South Sudan and because of that it has not visualised itself governing an independent South Sudan.

Its vision looked towards seizing power in Khartoum and configuring the entire Sudan to realise its objective of the so called “New Sudan”.

The very notion of independent South Sudan has always been an anathema to the SPLM/A. To embed this fact, let us revisit the words of this infamous organisation’s late leader Dr John Garang.

In his speech of 3rd March 1984 he boldly and confidently declared, “The Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) has been founded to spear-head armed resistance against Nimeiri’s one-man system dictatorship and to organise the whole Sudanese people under the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM), through revolutionary protracted armed struggle waged by the SPLA and political mass support.” (John Garang Speaks, 1987 p19.

The following year, Dr Garang went on to elucidate this position in his speech of 22nd March 1985 (ditto pp 25 -37).

SPLM being broad based movement adapted policies reflecting its main objective. For example, it promoted a wide multi-isms in the social and political space intended to destroy the dominantly imposed Arab culture and identity of the Sudan to realise a ‘New Sudan.’

Theoretically, there was nothing wrong with this policy except that practically South Sudanese had had enough of Arab oppression based on culture and religion and they wanted an out from the Sudan.

As SPLM had been concentrating on its grand objective it failed to develop plan ‘B’ policies for governing South Sudan should it break away. So when the South Sudanese voted for secession SPLM was caught with its pants down.

All of a sudden, it lost its objective as a liberation movement and became a hollow shell. It no longer had a ‘vision and direction’.

The internal report which identified the loss of vision and direction of the organisation in 2013 appears to have failed to pinpoint the real cause of this situation.

Dr Riek opportunistically on 5th March 2013 seized on this finding and nominated himself to the leadership of the organisation in its national executive meeting.

Impatiently and imprudently, he heaped the entire blame of failure on President Salva Kiir while distancing himself from everything that had been going wrong. For example, the massive corruption and lawlessness crippling the country.

It must be remembered that this was the source of the current conflict destroying innocent lives in South Sudan.

Dr Riek all along since 2005 till 23rd July 2013 had been a member of the leadership of SPLM running the country. He bore equal responsibility for the failure of SPLM like President Kiir and the others.

The reality is: the loss of vision and direction of the SPLM is neither President Kiir’s nor Dr Riek’s making. It is the result of a default occurrence emanating from the secession of South Sudan from the Sudan. President Kiir being semi illiterate can be forgiven for failing to foresee this important development.

However, Dr Riek who is highly educated should have identified the vanishing vision with the emerging ideological vacuum in the SPLM.

The supposed apparatchiks of this infamous organisation – Pagan Amum, Dr Anna Itto, Suzanne Jambo and so on who are well educated should have equally identified this very problem and reacted to it.

No one among them asked the simple question in January 2011 after the referendum: Now that South Sudan had decided to go its own way, what would be the vision of SPLM?

The answer to this question would have helped them to think of alternative ways to adapt their party to realities of independent South Sudan.

Unfortunately all of them were asleep and busy plundering the new country of its resources. Please see, ‘Corruption saga: The SPLM five big guns or the quintet squirrels’ http://www.southsudannewsagency.com/opinion/articles/corruption-saga-the-splm-five-big-guns-or-the-quintet-squirrels

It is surprising that all of them latched on to the finding of the SPLM report to advance their own personal interests without examining the root cause: the secession of South Sudan has rendered SPLM irrelevant in the new environment of a new country. It has become like an empty shell abandoned by the snail owner.

Another thing that Dr Garang constructed into the working of SPLM is conflict. Conflict is an important part of SPLM’s life. It is what gives it the ability to constantly rejuvenate itself.

For instance in mid 1980s the SPLM/A targeted the Uduk people of Upper Nile and the Equatorians in the far south of the country to advance its unionist policies as well as its hidden agenda of building Jieng power base in the movement simultaneously.

This argument may sound bizarre but careful examination of it makes proper sense. Since SPLM officially is supposed to liberate the whole Sudan, it needed to be seen to bring all the people of the Sudan together.

However, because SPLM also had a hidden tribal agenda, the two can not go in tandem. Bringing the people together meant that it would be impossible to concretise Jieng tribalism.

The way to go round this obstacle was to institute a policy of divide and conquer. Dr Garang openly boasted of his ability to hit one tribe with the other in the then radio SPLM/A beamed from Ethiopia.

Tribalising the SPLM was not difficult for Dr Garang. The schisms of 1970s and early 1980s between the Jieng and the Equatorians discouraged the majority of South Sudanese tribes from joining the movement.

The Jieng incensed by the decentralisation of South Sudan flocked to the movement in massive numbers with the intention to revenge. As a result Dr Garang filled the entire structure of the movement with the Jieng although there were people from other tribes present who qualified for such positions.

This tribal construction has since become the key generator of conflicts in the organisation.

For instance, in mid 1980s saw SPLM/A target the secessionists, the Nuer and Equatorians; in 1991 saw the SPLM/A targeting the Nuer again; in mid 1990s saw the SPLM/A targeting the Equatorians especially the Didinga and Toposa; in 2004 saw the Jieng fighting among themselves over the governance of the movement; in 2008 saw the SPLM/A targeting the Chollo which resulted in the founding of SPLM-DC and then in December 2013 saw the SPLM/A targeting the Nuer for the third time.

In all these schisms except the 2004 one where President Kiir and the late leader of SPLM/A disagreed over management issues, the rest on surface appear to be wars over the objective of the movement but underneath they also were tribal wars of dominance just like the current ongoing conflict.

Whenever a non-Jieng expresses interest or aspires to challenge for leadership of the movement, the Jieng react violently while lying and rallying the other tribes to hit their target.

It has become a habit of the Jieng to constantly vilify any non Jieng who wants to lead as a traitor. In 2008, in defence of Jieng interest Dr Lam was violently pushed out of the party and labelled as an Arab agent.

These internal wars within the movement and within South Sudan together with the larger war with the Sudan government in Khartoum coupled with the abysmal tribal management of the movement ushered in a culture of violence in the society which awfully has taken root in the psyche of the state of South Sudan.

From the foregoing SPLM/A clearly is a violent tribal organisation that does not represent the people of South Sudan. Its very existence is the fuel of conflicts and divisions in the society.

This is all the reason why it is difficult to understand the reasoning of IGAD and the SPLM supporters in promoting its reunification. Obviously the IGAD countries have a reason and that has to do with their own interest which I will dwell on in a later piece.

Nevertheless, anybody arguing that the reunification of the SPLM will bring peace to South Sudan only exposes their ignorance of the organisation and its dynamics. Such a person knowingly and wilfully promotes the destruction of the country.

If anything, the SPLM/A needs to be disbanded or dismantled by any means available for the sake of survival of the state of South Sudan.

SPLM members of-course would not welcome the contents of this piece. They are busy promoting the unification of the SPLM as the only thing that can bring peace to the country even when the evidence point to the other direction.

For example, the writings of Dr Luka Biong Deng which unethically promotes Dinkocracy and those of Dr Peter Adwok Nyaba which mainly is leftist oriented.

I will not waste time to critique Dr Deng for obvious reasons but it is important to comment on Nyaba’s recent new position if only because he is a true patriot.

Dr Nyaba publicly resigned from this monstrous organisation in June 2013 following its implosion. He unequivocally accepts it is a total failure (organisationally, structurally and ideologically). However, he finds it difficult to admit its slow but sure demise.

In his article ‘Our intellectual journey towards a coherent political ideology’ published by South Sudan Nation on 16th December 2014, he nostalgically argues, “The SPLM remains the only viable political force that united South Sudanese across ethnic and regional fault line. It is therefore the only guarantee against fragmentation of South Sudan.”

This argument is grossly misleading because it seems to stem from a surface analysis and not from an in-depth examination of the realities of the struggle in the then Sudan from 1983 to 2005 and thereafter.

SPLM has since its inception been an exceptionally violent, divisive, chaotic and tribal organisation. The evidence litters Dr Nyaba’s own book: The Politics of Liberation in South Sudan.

The current destruction of the resources of South Sudan including its people which the internationally community calls, “man-made” derive from SPLM’s concept of ‘born to rule.’

The Jieng, the owners and managers of this useless outfit proudly proclaim – the SPLM is the Jieng and Jieng is the SPLM. The two are faces of the same coin.

SPLM benefitted from backlash to local, regional and international Islamic violence. Thus the reason South Sudanese joined the SPLM is not because it was a unifier of the people, but rather because Arab intensive oppression coupled with Islamic extremism and intolerance of the ‘other’ pushed the people of South Sudan to the bosom of SPLM.

Khartoum’s theocratic policies left the people of South Sudan with no option but to flock to the SPLM in pretence in order to survive. In essence what appeared at face value as ‘love’ of SPLM by all the people of South Sudan giving it a false image of a unifier is in fact a ploy for survival.

The true feelings and secessionist aspiration of South Sudanese was later to be proven at the referendum.

Remember SPLM’s objective has firmly been unionist in nature and antagonistically to the aspiration of the South Sudanese people. The late leader of the SPLM Dr John Garang proved the point by persecuting secessionists ruthlessly and crowing loudly that ‘our first bullets were fired against the secessionists.’ Garang violently imposed unionism on South Sudan through the killing of Akot Atem and Samuel Gai Tut.

Nyaba undoubtedly is a formidable intellectual and a gallant fighter. He fought for South Sudan as an SPLA officer losing a leg in the process. His fearsomeness and audacity can not be questioned.

Nyaba, while in Juba, the lion’s den, used his pen to demolish President Kiir’s lie of a coup in December 2013. Please see ‘From Dr Adwok: Sorry Sir, it was not a coup.’ http://www.southsudannation.com/from-dr-adwok-sorry-sir-it-was-not-a-coup/

When Nyaba resigned from the SPLM those of us who respected his intellectuality believed he would at last be shading light to the right path for South Sudan. Unfortunately, to our deep disappointment he regressed by rejoining the same hopeless organisation he quit in June 2013.

His current position arguably can be seen as the embodiment of SPLM very pathology. Please see, ‘Arusha agreement briefing: We can’t leave the SPLM party to Salva Kiir’ http://nyamile.com/2015/01/25/arusha-agreement-briefing-we-cant-leave-the-splm-party-to-salva-kiir/

Now the Arusha agreement intends to unify this monstrous organisation yet again, which will reset it for another round of bloodletting, as soon as a non-Jieng aspires to lead it.

However, even before this happens the agreement itself lays the seed of divisions in the centre of Jieng power. If the SPLM truly unites, the Jieng generals and their militia and the Jieng Council of Elders are likely to find themselves pushed away from the centre of power.

This may lead into internal violent squabbles fracturing the delicate unity of the Jieng.

Another scenario which may be more likely is that the generals may take matters into their own hands by seizing power and handing it to one of the members of JCE.

Whichever option that will transpire will be unacceptable to the people of South Sudan which means the conflict may continue to rage on for the unforeseeable future until the SPLM/A itself due to its violent nature hacks itself down into non existence leading to capture of power by the people.

The only positive thing from Arusha is that the process has exposed the facade of the Jieng system in Juba. It has educated the African leaders and shown light on the true culprits in South Sudan. This is highly welcome.

So, neither SPLM-IG, nor SPLM-IO, nor SPLM-G10, nor SPLM-DC (now excluded from the deal), individually or collectively or united can provide a solution to the country.

They have never had a vision for South Sudan other than theft, corruption, killings, tribalism and chaos.

What is needed is a new group with a new vision and humane values driven by the concepts of ‘common purpose’ and ‘common good’.
[Truth hurts but it is also liberating]

Elhag Paul
elhagpaul@aol.com

Equatoria! Stop fighting for “second” position

By: Justin Ambago Ramba, UK, FEB/01/2015, SSN;

As an Equatorian who believes that the people of Equatoria have all what it takes to lead South Sudan into stability and prosperity, I was indeed saddened to see my old school mates like James Wani Igga and Martin Elia Lomuro reducing the Equatorian fight to only a fight for the second office in the country.

We Equatorians, we are better than that and our aspirations must truly reflect who we are. Since we are equally capable of running the country from the top position, why not join in the fight for the top job?

Do it for the top position. Those lower positions like the vice what! Or deputy what! Or assistant what… name it, are not worth our fights. And any fights for that matter!

My call to every Equatorian is that ‘if we have to fight for a position,’ then we go fight for the top job in the country. However we must understand that to get the top job in the country needs more than just following others.

Like football, if you want to be on the top, you must not only be contended with good play, acrobatic styles, skillful dribbling. What counts in the end of the day is the number of goals scored and who scored them, before we even talk about the people who created the opportunities for the scorers to score and win a victory for the team.

We Equatorians, we are better than that fighting over deputy positions. The fact we like everyone else also have the best for the top job, then let our aspirations truly reflect who we have and are capable of doing other than being other people’s deputies all the time.

It is time we join in the fight for the top job the fact that we believe we are equally capable of running the country from the top position!

Whatever Mr Martin Elia Lomuro came up with is not representative of the people of Equatoria. His smart move to rally the three governors and dispatch them to Addis Ababa solely to protest what they perceive is injustices towards Wani Igga and hence the people of Equatoria are all nonsense.

Once in Addis Ababa did the three Equatoria governors remember to talk about their people calls for federalism?

Not only were they silent on federalism, but they have already shunned it because the same view is now shared by the SPLM-In-Opposition. What is the name of this news game, my dear Equatorians!

The truth be said and said loud, “Wani Igga who currently is Salva Kiir’s deputy got that position as a favour from Kiir himself. Kiir is the elected president and the only person to decide who works on his team”.

No Equatorian voted for Wani Igga to deputize the president. And all South Sudanese people for that matter did not vote Wani Igga to his current position.

As President Salva Kiir appointed Wani Igga as his deputy, it is also true that the same president still has the powers to keep him in office or kick him out if he so wishes.

Unfortunately, the three Equatorian governors have been misled by Martin Elia Lomuro to travel all the way to Addis Ababa only to protest in solidarity with Wani Igga to continue being the second man.

Again I doubt how many Equatorians would sincerely want Wani Igga to be the president if they were to choose between many.

The truth of the matter is that, per the IGAD proposal, Wani Igga remains where he is now – vice president. Per the same proposal the three governors also remain secure in their places.

Now the only people who become insecure are the types of Martin Elia Lomuro who are more likely to lose their ministerial positions once the transitional government of national unity is constituted.

Is this not why Mr Lomuro is feeling insecure?

Brothers and sisters, if you want an end to this rampant insecurity and helplessness, then you better do something about it, by ceasing to always limit yourselves to being deputies while people from Bahr Ghazal and Upper Nile are doing everything to top the list.

If you are confused you should know where to turn to. Just look beyond your nose and salvation is waiting for you!

Dr Justin Ambago Ramba. A member of the South Sudan’s Political Parties’ Delegation to the IGAD led Peace Negotiations for South Sudan. A voice for the voiceless.