Archive for: May 2015

Museveni tells UN he saved South Sudan from ‘genocide’

By KEVIN J. KELLEY, MAY/06/2015,

Uganda President Yoweri Museveni has accused the United Nations Security Council of being slow in involving African troops in peace missions in the continent.

He said slow response to turmoil in African states was leading to loss of lives, which he said, can be mitigated by quick action by African states.

Mr Museveni said the civil war in South Sudan could have escalated to “another genocide” had Uganda not intervened.

The Ugandan leader said the UN is still debating the issue while his country sent in troops soon after the conflict began in December 2013.

“If we in the region had not acted when we did, quickly, the region could possibly have had another genocide.

“The UN Security council is still debating the issue up to now,” Mr Museveni noted in a speech to the General Assembly on the theme of UN cooperation with regional organisations such as the African Union.

Uganda sent two battalions of soldiers to the neighbouring country to evacuate its nationals.

The Ugandan forces have remained in South Sudan ever since. They are seen as providing support for President Salva Kiir’s government as it battles rebel forces led by former Vice President Riek Machar.

HARM TO AFRICA

He said African forces could also have stopped the 1994 genocide in Rwanda but “we could not do it because the UN was obstructing us,” he said.

He said Africa’s voice on the continent’s security matters was being ignored by the Security Council.

“This is a big mistake, and has already caused a lot of harm to Africa,” he said. END
Daily Nation, NEW YORK.

IGAD peace talks must be inclusive

BY: ALHAG PAUL, MAY/05/2015, SSN;

By virtue of my membership of an Equatoria internet forum I came across an article authored by Mr Eriasa Mukiibi Sserunjogi titled ‘South Sudan needs fresh start without Kiir, Machar – Dr Miamingi,’ published by the Ugandan newspaper, Daily Monitor on 26th April 2015. This article features a photo of Dr Remember Miamingi wearing the famous Nelson Mandela shirt.
http://www.monitor.co.ug/Magazines/PeoplePower/South-Sudan-fresh-start-Kiir-Machar-Dr-Miamingi/-/689844/2697290/-/ecinnuz/-/index.html

In addition to this article Dr Miamingi also appeared in an NTV debate discussing the same topic. Please watch the video: ‘Fourth estate: South Sudan, a conflict with no end in sight’ on youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiRx1hb7bII

On reading the article, I found it very stimulating. The timing of this piece obviously suggests Dr Miamingi may have doubts about the ability of the newly revamped IGAD-Plus mediating team in bringing peace to South Sudan unless it abandons its flawed strategy of wanting to concentrate power to the two principals of the conflict by diversifying the peace talks to reflect the entire social groups in the country.

Who can blame Dr Miamingi for thinking like that?

IGAD since appointing itself to the role of mediator in South Sudan has done nothing to demonstrate its impartiality. Throughout it has been biased in favour of the regime in Juba and so its failure on 6th March 2015 was not a surprise to South Sudanese. Please see, ‘To achieve in South Sudan, IGAD talks must be diversified.’ http://www.southsudannation.com/to-achieve-peace-in-south-sudan-igad-talks-must-be-diversified/

Dr Miamingi brightly highlighted the obstacles to peace in South Sudan. It must be emphasised, his arguments are not new. Many writers have articulated these views in the last 16 months of the conflict and IGAD for reasons best known to it ignored them.

For example, the South Sudanese professionals produced a document titled ‘South Sudanese professionals in Diaspora’ capturing the issue. https://paanluelwel2011.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/negotiating-peace-through-federalism.pdf

There can be no doubt that the arguments raised are useful in the current atmosphere of hopelessness created by the failure of IGAD in mediating peace. If only IGAD could unplug its ears, the key to peace in South Sudan lie in some of the arguments Dr Miamingi is promoting which will be slightly modified in this piece.

Having given this brief background, let us look at the point of view expressed by Dr Miamingi as reported by Mr Sserunjogi. In the article, Dr Miamingi under the sub title ‘Who are the “We”?’ describes himself as a member of diverse group at home (South Sudan).

He asserts ‘the ”We” represent South Sudanese who are in the Diaspora, who are in refugee camps and have been basically uprooted from their home, who are united in the desire for peace in the country.’ What is intriguing is that this “we” has no name given its wide membership. Dr Miamingi claims this identity less organisation is ‘organised around what we call the “Four point campaign for a just peace in South Sudan”.’

He goes on to outline them as: 1) Just peace through inclusivity. 2) The architects of the war should be excluded from the process of peace making. 3) Peace talks and establishment of an interim government, and 4) Military intervention by African Union (AU) backed by United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Article 7.

These points Dr Miamingi encapsulated and promotes are useful in helping those involved in the mediation. Since there are only 4 points let us briefly talk about all of them in their current order and they can then be re-arranged in order of priority suitable for resolving the problem in South Sudan.

It goes without saying that for peace to return to South Sudan the peace talks must produce a “just peace” through an inclusive process that values all the people of South Sudan. What this translates to is that all the stakeholders and civil societies of South Sudan must have a say so that the process and outcome is owned by the “people”. It becomes a “people peace” and not an “SPLM/A peace” in which the “people” are excluded.

The question asked is: Why is IGAD naively conniving with the abusive SPLM/A to deny the people of South Sudan their right in deciding their own future? Is the sovereignty of South Sudan not vested in its people? If it is, then the right thing is to let the people participate in the peace talks as of right. If it is not, why not? Why are criminals allowed to run the show? Please see, ‘President Kiir, Riek and the SPLM are the problems of RSS.’ http://allafrica.com/stories/201405070248.html

If IGAD truly is seeking a lasting “Just Peace” it must abandon its short sighted strategy of pursuing grand empowerment of the destructive SPLM/A, the very party responsible for the chaos as a solution. Otherwise, whatever outcome from its mediation will be short lived and the region will once again sooner or later find itself in the same position like now. This takes us to the second point for barring of the culprits responsible for the chaos from the peace talks.

This point is plainly clear and no reasonable person will disagree with it. All over the world people involved in crimes are apprehended and arraigned in court of law. They are not tolerated and treated as if they were decent people. The mistake the world has done with South Sudan’s case is to tolerate ethnic cleansers and listen to them as if they have not committed grave crimes against humanity.

The world unfortunately seems to have not learnt a lesson from the history of the Second World War. The major powers of the time appeased Adolf Hitler of Nazi Germany and treated him initially as a decent person possibly in the false hope that he might change. But what did the world get from this unethical act? Holocaust! with a sharp shock to the global system.

In terms of saving lives, the late intervention of the world to save the Jews was too little too late. The lesson from this horrific and heinous crime of Hitler tells us not to entertain dictators and totalitarian rulers who have tendencies of extreme hate of rival social groups especially if such leaders have already started ethnic cleansing on small scale.

The late President of Iraq Sadam Hussein gassed the Kurds of Halabja and the world paid a blind eye. Sadam got emboldened and he went on to further his military adventures in Iran and later on Kuwait. As a result the whole region eventually got thrown into turmoil.

President Salva Kiir with his false image as a peaceful person indisputably belongs to Sadam Hussein-like class of dictators. The world should deal with him appropriately now to account for his crimes before he plunges the region into turmoil. He should therefore not be allowed to call the shots in Addis Ababa.

Does this make sense? Yes, certainly it does, he should be barred from the talks. Please watch this video, ‘President Salva Kiir of South Sudan on BBC Hardtalk’ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_-WncqcZ5o

As I write now, the economic mismanagement initiated on the watch of both President Kiir and Dr Machar from 2005 following the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) and promoted by the entire SPLM/A leadership coupled with the political mismanagement of the last decade which blew up in December 2013 has brought the country to its knees socially, economically and politically.

When the country was at a relative peace the SPLM/A entire leadership looted the coffers of the state and in war as now the revenue is spent on lethal weapons and the regime supporters. Unsurprisingly, South Sudan has just gained a new name, ‘Kleptocratic State’. Please see, ‘In IMF view, a kleptocratic state bordering on bankruptcy.’ https://mail.aol.com/webmail-std/en-gb/suite and ‘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

The third point Dr Miamingi raises is very crucial as it relates to the issue of security of the stakeholders itself. Dr Miamingi argues that the peace talks should be taken back home. In other words he wants to see the peace talks held inside South Sudan. This proposition is imprudent and fails to take into consideration the safety of the stakeholders.

Any talks held inside the country will not yield a lasting solution. The reasons are:

1) Lack of security for the participants. What will stop President Kiir from intimidating the stakeholders? What will stop President Kiir from arresting some or all the stakeholders and declaring peace achieved?

Let us not forget, the regime in Juba has neither respect for human rights nor values of decency. To understand these points just think about the experiences of Mr Peter Sule and Dr Lam Akol Ajawin with regards to their invitation to the IGAD peace talks. Did President Kiir’s government not deliberately obstruct their travel plans to the peace talks and threatened to harm them?

If the regime was intolerant to allow stakeholders to attend the peace talks in Addis Ababa, would it tolerate their participation in such talks inside the country under its jurisdiction?

Actually as much as nobody would want to say it, should the talks be held inside the country President Kiir may be pushed to silence a good number of the stakeholders whose voices he does not like hearing.

2) The regime does not believe in freedom of speech and expression. Those who speak freely in the past like Isaiah Abraham paid the ultimate price with their lives. The outspoken leader of civil society organisations Mr Athuai Deng narrowly escaped death on two occasions for speaking out.

The first time the security agents of President Kiir kidnapped him, beat him up thoroughly and threw him into a garbage site by the river Nile thinking he had died. He was lucky to be rescued by locals.

The second time, President Kiir’s agents in broad day light shot him in public. Luckily the bullet hit his leg and he survived.

These are just few examples of the government’s usual tactics to muzzle the people. With such an environment of terror, how could Dr Miamingi make the futile proposition for the talks to be held inside the country. For the sake of a lasting peace the peace talks need to continue being held outside the country in a neutral secure venue.

This brings us to Dr Miamingi’s final point of African Union intervention backed by United Nations Security Council Article 7. The first thing South Sudanese need to acknowledge is that since the Independence of South Sudan on 9th July 2011 the country has been under UNSC Article 7. So the UN can actually exercise this power any time if it wants.

Military interventions are always fraught with difficulties to both the interveners and the intruded because of the issue of emotions linked to pride and humiliation.

Apart from this, it is not clear whether the international community will want to commit to such a project given its costs and the uncertainties around success.

Nevertheless it is something worth pursuing because already there are foreign forces in the country – the Uganda People Defence force (UPDF) in addition to the Blue Helmets of United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS).

UPDF can not be part of a solution as it actually deployed to protect the government of President Kiir which has been carrying out ethnic cleansing of the Nuer. Therefore, UPDF needs to withdraw back home soonest. It has no business being in South Sudan – Uganda interest or no interest is immaterial.

These four points delineated by Dr Miamingi are poorly arranged and for them to be effective, the order should be reversed starting with the last point and ending with the starting one.

Therefore, African Union backed by the United Nations should take over the country for a strictly specified period as recommended by the leaked Draft Report of the African Union Commission of Inquiry on South Sudan. http://nyamile.com/2015/03/07/draft-report-of-the-au-commission-of-inquiry-on-south-sudan/

There should be no worries because the report clearly sets out a hybrid plan of action (comprising South Sudanese and international experts) regarding the intervention.

Point three should take the second place. The interim government can be set up as envisaged by the Obasanjo report without any peace talks, but with wide consultation with all the stakeholders without those allegedly involved in illegal acts like the Jieng Council of Elders (JCE).

Point two becomes redundant simply for the reason that when the country is taken over by African Union and United Nations, the architects of the chaos would vanish into exile or they will have been arrested and farmed off to some detention facilities to await trial for their grave crimes.

Point one becomes feasible and essential to implement in a violence free and peaceful environment. The main purpose would be to address the vital constitutional issues and the critical problem of national reconciliation and healing.

Following the above re-arrangement, the modified “Four point campaign for just peace in South Sudan” of Dr Miamingi now becomes ‘Three point campaign for just peace in South Sudan’. This can offer a solution to the quagmire South Sudan is in now.

However, whether this plan will be considered by IGAD or not, the most important thing is not to let the SPLM/A in all its different forms and shapes to dictate and monopolise the peace talks.

For South Sudan to be de-tribalised socially and politically, state power must equally be de-tribalised which means the talks must include all the stakeholders and it must be in a neutral venue.
[Truth hurts but it is also liberating]

Elhag paul
elhagpaul@aol.com

Khartoum firm targets South Sudan assets with Nairobi suit

BY: BRIAN WASINA, Business Daily, Nairobi, Kenya, MAY/05/2015,

IN SUMMARY
***Active Partners Group wants Kenyan courts to enforce a Sh3.8 billion claim against the government of South Sudan.
***The firm was awarded the amount by an arbitration panel in January as settlement for a failed mega power project contract with the Juba government.
***Active Partners is targeting South Sudan’s assets in Nairobi after it failed to enforce the arbitration settlement in Juba, whose courts it says are hostile and partisan.

A Khartoum-based multinational company has turned to Kenyan courts for enforcement of a $40.9 million claim against the Government of South Sudan, setting the stage for a possible diplomatic row between Nairobi and Juba.

Active Partners Group was awarded the colossal amount of money by an arbitration panel in January as settlement for a failed mega power project contract with the Juba government.

The company, through its Kenyan subsidiary, had won a tender for the electrification of South Sudan in 2008 but the deal fell through after Africa’s youngest nation was hit by ethnic war and severe drought.

Active Partners is targeting South Sudan’s assets in Nairobi after it failed to enforce the arbitration settlement in Juba, whose courts it says are hostile and partisan.

Arbitrators Philippe Pinsole, Karel Daele and Richard Omwela in January found South Sudan responsible for the failed contract and ordered Juba pay Active Partners $40.9 million (Ksh3.8 billion).

South Sudan is yet to respond to the suit filed at Milimani Law Courts but it is feared that enforcement of the claim by a Nairobi court could extend ongoing Juba-Khartoum tensions to Kenya.

“If the situation of the debt is not arrested fast enough there is every likelihood that some of Active Partners’ creditors may file for winding it up, a situation that might bring to naught all the effort, energy and expenses that I have put in pursuing the claim,” says Mohammed Fagir, the firm’s managing director.

A possible casualty of the suit is Kenya’s diplomatic ties not only with South Sudan but also with the Khartoum government. Kenya has maintained cordial diplomatic relations with both nations despite their differences with each other.

South Sudan awarded Active Partners the $197 million (Ksh18.7 billion) project from which the contractor says it expected to make a 35 per cent profit or $69.7 million (Ksh6.4 billion).

Active Partners reckons that South Sudan’s failure to provide a bank guarantee is the cause of its frustrations. The firm told arbitrators that South Sudan had sufficient funds to issue a guarantee but opted to use the money for other purposes.

South Sudan had in its defence said its financial fortunes were changed by the 2008 ‘dura saga’ in which it lost $4 billion (Ksh378 billion) through irregular contracts with 441 companies contracted to supply relief food.

Dura is the South Sudanese name for sorghum, one of the grains involved in the scandal.

Juba also argued that the ongoing war in key northern and eastern towns like Bentiu and Jonglei forced it to close oil wells in Heglig, a decision that ripped its financial reserves apart.

Active Partners says it spent $12.1 million (Ksh1.1 billion) in project survey, design, salaries, air charters and assorted equipment and urgently needs to be paid the money.

South Sudan was to pay Active Partners $19.7 (Ksh1.8 billion) for excessive delays in commencement of the project in the eight towns that were earmarked for electrification. The contractor argued that Juba had delayed the project for 1,479 days after signing the deal.

South Sudan, however, held that Active Partners jumped the gun by spending lavishly on the project before getting the green light from the government.

South Sudanese authorities also argued that the contractor was to bear the cost of survey and design, making false its claim for a refund of the same.

“Damages can only arise from delays, but the contract had not been implemented. The claimant was not entitled to start preparations without receiving a letter of commencement from the government,” the Juba government argued.

The arbitrators found that South Sudan had breached clauses of the contract it signed with Active Partners, which provided for a bank guarantee to secure the multi-billion-shilling project.

They further held that Active Partners was right to terminate the contract following South Sudan’s negligence.

“South Sudan breached its obligations to Active Partners. Active Partners is entitled to damages under the clauses of the technical contract in the amount of $35 million with interest amounting to $4.1 million as of January 20, 2015,” the arbitrators said.

Mr Fagir says he was forced to flee Khartoum in 2009 after some of the firm’s creditors instituted court cases against Active Partners after it failed to pay for supplied equipment intended for the electrification project.

Some of the Khartoum cases were criminal, forcing the company’s managing directors to seek refuge in Kenya in a bid to rescue the multinational.

Mr Fagir has been living in Nairobi for six years pursuing South Sudan through the arbitration and now wants the High Court to help him collect the sum awarded to his firm.

The company has been unable to pay salary arrears for its employees as its investment in the project took a toll on its finances, he says in court papers.

“Some creditors initiated criminal proceedings against Active Partners directors, necessitating me in particular to come and camp in Nairobi to pursue the claim. As a result I have stayed away from my family for six years to the detriment of my children and the entire family,” Mr Fagir says, adding that the amount awarded by the arbitrators could get Active Partners’ creditors off its back, and allow him to return home to help the firm pick itself up.

Active Partners says the failed project cost it several other planned deals with other countries that would have earned it significant profit.

The firm says it was forced to abandon a multi-million-dollar deal with Egypt’s Elsewedy Company that was to see it construct factories for the production of prepaid electricity meters. The factories were to be based in Kenya, Ethiopia and South Sudan.

Justice Eric Ogola certified the matter urgent, and allowed Active Partners to furnish South Sudan with the suit papers and court summons through courier services. The firm has already notified South Sudan of the suit, but a hearing date is yet to be set.

Kiir, Machar lack ‘leadership’ to end South Sudan crisis – John Kerry says

By AGGREY MUTAMBO, Daily Nation, MAY/05/2015, SSN.

In Summary
**South Sudan, the world’s youngest nation at four, fell into chaos in December 2013 after rebels loyal to former vice president Machar engineered a failed coup against President Salva Kiir.
**On Monday, Mr Kerry was briefed on the progress of negotiations by his host, President Kenyatta.
**President Kenyatta has privately tried to end the conflict by making parties sign a deal for power sharing. In January, both signed on a document, which was later rejected by their supporters
;

Nairobi: Visiting US Secretary of State on Monday criticised warring South Sudanese leaders, accusing them of lacking “leadership” to end the violence.

At a news conference in Nairobi, Mr Kerry, who held talks with President Uhuru Kenyatta, said both President Salva Kiir and his nemesis Riek Machar are to blame for refusing to make compromises.

“We all know of that country’s great promise. We saw at first hand the dedication and resilience of its people, but let me be clear: That promise is now at a great risk of being squandered,” he said.

“The country’s leaders failed to act on behalf of their people and their nation.

“This is not happening except for the absence of the leadership necessary to bring it to a close,” he added, describing the violence which has so far killed more than 50,000 people and displaced another two million.

South Sudan, the world’s youngest nation at four, fell into chaos in December 2013 after rebels loyal to former vice president Machar engineered a failed coup against President Salva Kiir.

Soon, the war spread around the country.

Since then, talks led by regional bloc, the Intergovernmental Authority on development (Igad) and supported by the US, UK, Norway and the European Union have failed to reach an agreement.

ADDITIONAL FUNDING

On Monday evening, Mr Kerry announced an additional $5 million funding for “justice and reconciliation” programmes in South Sudan, which he argued would be used to improve the justice system and reprimand war merchants in Juba.

But an emotional Kerry, who has previously warned South Sudanese leaders of sanctions, said they had both abandoned their responsibilities.

“For more than a year, regional leaders, the US and others have been urging South Sudan leaders to live up to their commitment that can set their country up on the path of peace and prosperity.

“Unfortunately, South Sudan’s leaders, both those officially in government and those contesting those who are in office, have not yet chosen to make compromises needed for peace.

“And it’s that absence of compromise and absence of leadership that is leading to the challenge to the region.”

The parties have previously signed seven ceasefire agreements, but all of them were broken just days after the ink was put to paper in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa.

BRIEFED ON PROGRESS

On Monday, Mr Kerry was briefed on the progress of negotiations by his host, President Kenyatta.

“President Kenyatta also informed the Secretary on efforts by Igad leaders to end the conflict in South Sudan,” a statement from State House said.

“Secretary Kerry felt that there was need to find a lasting peace in South Sudan and urged President Kenyatta and regional leaders to increase efforts to bring the conflict to an end,” it added.

President Kenyatta has privately tried to end the conflict by making parties sign a deal for power sharing. In January, both signed on a document, which was later rejected by their supporters.

And when Igad presented a similar proposal in Addis at the end of January, the parties failed to agree.

Despite pressure from the international community, the two sides have yet to agree on a long-term solution.

“The choices south Sudan leaders will make, ultimately will determine whether the country continues the path of conflict or restores the hope which its citizens richly deserve.” END

“Predator Genes:” A threat to public funds and a cause of economic collapse in South Sudan

By: Justin Ambago Ramba, MAY/04/2015, SSN;

The independent Indian Ocean Newsletter has recently exposed the institutionalized corruption network of the infamous Jieng “Dinka” Council of Elders in South Sudan. In its report, the Newsletter ascertained that there is a small number of “privileged people close to the ruling circles” in South Sudan who are benefiting from the country’s collapsing currency and shortage of dollars.

According to the report those well placed corrupt individuals continuously access dollars from the Central Bank at a rate of about 3.1 and then sell them for pounds at a rate of about 9.1. God knows, this could just be the tip of the iceberg on how damaging the hidden hands of the infamous Jieng Council of Elders can be.

It is also true that the IMF made no secret of it when it recently warned the regime in Juba of the imminent economic catastrophe. Summing all these whistle blowing, one conclusion comes to mind… that this new country’s economy is literally now gasping its last breath.

Yet many who have keenly followed the developments in South Sudan can tell you that in actual fact this new country has never had any economy to start with, and it would be too much of a courtesy to thus talk about its collapse.

A country totally dependent on Oil revenues and again spending the whole of that revenue on paying millions of unproductive soldiers, security agents and idol civil servants cannot be said to have an economy. I mean, what is the economic activity here!

A country dependent on Western Aid for the last decade to run its rudimentary institutions while services like schools, hospitals, roads, clean drinking water, and electricity are all non-existent or run by foreign NGOs cannot be claimed to have an economy.

Even the claim that the government was working towards diversifying the economy to shift from Oil dependence to agriculture, is itself becoming an empty rhetoric. This overdue and long term plan will not solve the immediate economic crisis in a country looted dry by its own government.

What agriculture are they talking of in South Sudan when an average member of its ruling nomadic pastoralist community still cannot tell the difference between spinach and wild vegetation or between maize, millet, cassava and elephant grass?

Indeed South Sudan has a lot of potential to diversify its economy, especially in the area of agriculture and other resources, including untapped minerals and livestock, but not in a population genetically ingrained with “predator genes” for cattle rustling, child abduction, lawlessness and revenge killings.

Under the incumbent Salva Kiir regime it can be argued that the Kleptocracy, corruption and nepotism currently crippling the state institutions of the new country are the direct off-springs of the widespread predatory attitudes towards public funds on display.

These in turn are the direct products of the deeply seated “cattle rustling mind-set” characteristic of pastoralist communities worldwide. .

The only hope is in a future government that is prepared to embark on introducing legislations that does not tolerate any complacency with government officials known to be Public Fund Predators. Impunity must end and accountability must prevail. Government appointments must be based on meritocracy and sound track records.

The priority of the future administration must be to improve the management of local revenues by developing and introducing a revenue management system in what will be a federated system of governance, preferably starting immediately with the transitional government of national unity.

On a quick reflection we can say diversification of the economy has been a much talked policy of President Salva Kiir’s government for many years. However, under his rule this policy has remained a talk that has never been walked.

This is likely to puzzle a few as it remains unclear to them why this “much cry little wool” talk on diversification was never effected, leaving the government to solely depend on oil revenues to run the system!

The answer to this central question squarely lies in the “chaos by design” policy hatched by the infamous Jeing “Dinka” Council of Elders.

The existing socio-economic and political chaos in South Sudan are without a grain of doubt, the brain children of the Jieng Council of Elders. It is its way of securing an economic advantage for itself and its wider membership and political constituency.

This is a tribal capacity building project that’s being achieved at the expense of the national capacity building.

This same policy is also designed to relegate the members of the others 63 ethnic groups to a yet another designed state of destitution characterised by both political and socio-economic disenfranchisements, except of course for a few who serve as widow dressings for corrupt Jieng Council of Elders.

The much publicized current tour of East African nations by the country’s vice-president, James Wani Igga, a co-accomplisher of the corrupt Jieng Council of Elders, can be seen to have come at a time when the official exchange rate for the South Sudan pound has reached 16 pounds for one US dollar in these East African countries.

And although the deputy president and chief co-accomplisher for the Jieng “Dinka” Council of Elders, James Wani Igga might have been to invite these East African countries to send their financial experts to participate in an economic conference scheduled for May 6, 2015 in the South Sudanese capital, Juba, the tour is likely to have become an end in itself.

Inviting East African economic experts whose countries are themselves caught up in the same economic crisis and tasking them to strategize on how to remedy the dire economic situation in South Sudan, sounds more like a blind man asking directions from other blind people.

A crazy thinking at its best, especially when salvation is expected to come from these very East African countries that not long ago turned down South Sudan’s request to join the East African Economic Community because the former does possess what constitutes an economy in the real sense of the term!

Common sense dictates that you must have an economy to start with if you are ever to join an economic community. It is straight forward like this, isn’t it?

Those who keep count of events, they will remember how many international experts including East African advisors have ever since been advising President Salva Kiir and his corrupt Jieng Council of Elders government on all kinds of issues on economy and governance from since 2005.

How many times has President Salva Kiir and his corrupt Jieng “Dinka” Council of Elders regime visited countries like Botswana and Rwanda to hear their success stories? Were they not impressed by what they were told in those countries or did it all fall on deaf ears leaving the inherent “predator genes” to dominate.

No wonder, the only diversifications to the source of government revenue in South Sudan under this ailing regime has become confined to begging from neighbours and friends, taking high risk loans, and of course over-printing of worthless South Sudanese bank notes!

“The Zaire of Mobutu”, we are becoming!

Author. J.A.C Ramba. A South Sudanese citizen and a voice for the voiceless.

Shilluk Kingdom: The Monarchy Belittled and Betrayed by its own Sons

BY: Mayak Deng Aruei, Doctoral student, USA, MAY/03/2015, SSN;

The Chollo/Shilluks who are going through many horrors of our time must know that their own sons have opened a death corridor, and which passes through their homeland. There can be no meaningful peace in the Kingdom of Shilluk if their sons don’t stop being too ambitious to lead, too vocal in South Sudan’s affairs and too easy to catch political fires. The fact that certain people want to lead, be seen as leaders and want to make profound impacts on political grounds, their people will be forced to take part in the madness fueled by tribal sentiments.

So long as Dr. Lam Akol Ajawin, Dr. Peter Adwok Nyaba, Gen. Pagan Amum Okeich, Gen. Oyai Deng Ajak and Gen. Johnson Olony/Oliny or whatever the correct spelling is, and if they continue to aim high for military and political influences, Shilluk Kingdom would not be peaceful.

For unknown reasons, people are mixing national affairs with local’s land disputes. That is not only in Shilluk Kingdom, but across South Sudan where people are so confused, and cannot differentiate between national issues and local issues. Please go down the river of life and follow the trail.

First, let’s look at what the Shilluk Kingdom really means to South Sudan as a sovereign State. We know for a fact that Chollo/Shilluks have been ruled by Kings for centuries, and they are still under Monarch with some influential Chiefs leading the way in the affairs of their Society and the Nation as a whole.

Are we supposed to be discussing tribes when talking about crises in the Republic of South Sudan? Hell yeah, why not? The raging fire in South Sudan was fueled by tribal hatreds, and Shilluks have their part in the crisis. For that reason, reaching to the bottom of our problems is the way to prepare for better future, absence the tribal mindsets.

There is something very unique about the Shilluks, they have been very active in Sudan’s politics, played crucial roles in the liberation struggles, took part in the split of the SPLM/SPLA in 1991, famously engaged the Government of Southern Sudan on many avenues, and continued to do so after the independence of South Sudan. But why are Shilluks seen everywhere while their numbers are very few?

For God knows, Shilluks are too ambitious to lead and fragmented to hang on to their cause. Well, that is a too simplistic way to describe a tribe.

As a matter of fact, Shilluks are not alone in that quest, some small sub-tribes of Jieeng/Dinka (Chiefdoms), well known for shaping young boys into effective leaders have built enemies over time, out of nowhere, and have had their villages overrun several times, and by those who charge them with being too eager to lead, along with coined/made up terms, “born to rule.”

Without exaggerating what this community (Shilluk) really means to South Sudanese, we must give credits to those who have sacrificed their energies and times for the good cause of South Sudanese. For one thing, politics is not for everyone, but those who aspires to be politicians know or should know the risks associated with leading in a multiethnic nation like the Republic of South Sudan.

In the fresh politics of South Sudan, some of Shilluks, politicians and army officers are household names, for good or bad. We know that people like Gen. Oyai Deng Ajak, a courageous SPLA commander, the first Army Chief of SPLA General Staff in the Autonomous Government of Southern Sudan, former minister for Regional Cooperation, and lastly served as minister for Security in the Office of the President was a well respected Officer during the liberation struggle.

Along the same line, Gen. Pagan Amum Okeich was one of the high ranking members of the SPLM/SPLA (after the SPLM/SPLA-High Command became defunct), one of the key players in the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), SPLM Secretary General between 2005-2013, and who campaigned pretty hard for the full implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA).

And of course, we know the two vocal doctors: Dr. Lam Akol Ajawin and Dr. Peter Adwok Nyaba. As many people may remember, Dr. Lam Akol was alleged to have been the main Architect of the 1991 SPLM/SPLA’s split, a political Monster in both the Sudanese and South Sudanese politics, an academician whose education never become obsolete and the most feared opposition leader by the South Sudanese Government in Juba.

For the record, Dr. Lam Akol has written about the tragic event of 1991, presented a very detailed account of the event, and those who read for future generations can infer that he has admitted his roles, and blamed some acute fouls (killing of Dinka’s officers) on his boss, Dr. Riek Machar.

Before heading to the warlords, Dr. Peter Adwok Nyaba is another controversial political figure who switches sides whenever his political views are threatened, and never keeps quiet regardless of mounting pressures on his life. Let’s also give him credit for he sacrificed his leg for the good cause of South Sudanese.

Down the line, we know those of Colonel Robert Gwang (may be a General now in the Government of take-whatever-you-like/want), the then leader of the SSDM/A-Upper Nile Faction. In that same death squad, the now Gen. Johnson Olony was one of Robert Gwang’s deputies. The two warlords had a heated showdown before Robert Gwang signed his own peace deal with the Government of South Sudan, leaving Johnson Olony to sacrifice few brainless boys for his own political good.

These dudes, Gwang and Olony are criminals, they ought to be charged, tried for using children to fight senseless wars, abusing their youthful time and diminishing their opportunities to succeed in life.

The warlords (Robert Gwang and Johnson Olony), with the help of the Sudanese Government in Khartoum engaged the Autonomous Government of Southern Sudan before the historic Referendum. If there is any particular tribe that South Sudanese should fear, then it is not the Jieeng/Dinka or Nuer/Naath, but the Shilluks in the Shilluk Kingdom.

Given their acquaintance with Arab civilization, the Shilluks are relentless, and they forge political Alliances in any community. Let’s analyze the grand picture, especially their quest for power and recognition in all walks of life.

Let’s take a deep breath, and focus on political venom that they inject in any political wrangling. Well, that is not all fatal, and can be utilized for the good of South Sudan. It is of a prime importance that we (South Sudanese) reexamine who we are, and move forward with a full understanding of ourselves.

While they have been known as trouble makers, we should consider that particular community as a model for coexistence. Over the years, Shilluks have been very influential in all corners of politics in the Sudan and South Sudan, and if they have managed to play such roles, overcame being too few, in the middle of populous tribes (Dinka & Nuer), then who cannot wow his/her supposedly hardcore political rivals?

Not yet finished with the narrative story of the century. The Shilluks are well known for befriending all kinds of people, and they entertains political marriages throughout South Sudan. Take for instances the many Shilluk Kingdom’s daughters that are married, have established their families in Dinka’s prominent families: Paramount Chief Deng Malual Aleer of Nyarweng and other families across South Sudan.

As recent as the 1980s, Cdr. Nyachigak Nyachiluk, one of the first SPLM/SPLA fearless field commanders, and a prominent Murle, got married to a daughter of the Shilluk’s Paramount Chief, Amum Okeich, sister to Pagan Amum and he has been all at odd with the Government of South Sudan.

And the other being the then Cdr. Oyai Deng Ajak, who got married to a Dinka girl (name withheld for the obvious reasons), a marriage suspected by many to have earned him the greatest trust among Jieeng. All of these events make Shilluks rather very unique people one can work with, and people who have crossed tribal boundaries.

While Shilluks are easy going, they are also very sticky, and cling to their ambitions at the expense of their kinfolks.

Despite all the shortcomings, Shilluks Kingdom is very crucial and a place where people should look for coexistence rather than killing their ambitious effort to lead others.

If Dr. Lam Akol fearlessly contested against President Salva Kiir and Dr. Riek Machar, the Tribalists of our time, lost the election and still kept his ambition high enough, and engaged the Government of South Sudan and lived through State directed wraths, what else is the effective leadership?

If the then Cdr. Oyai Deng Ajak successfully led predominantly Dinka soldiers, and succeeded in getting the Movement to where it should have been, what else is the effective leadership?

If Pagan Amum has won the hearts of Dinkas & Nuers, pushed the Sudanese Government in Khartoum to sign the Referendum bill, what else is the effective leadership?

If col. Johnson Olony fought a meaningless war against the Government of South Sudan, signed the peace with the Government and was trusted again to deputize Gen. Johnson Gony Biliu, what else is the effective leadership?

Just a side note: not everyone who is too ambitious become a leader? Greed and dishonesty brings people down. Oops, I don’t know about the 75 blacklisted corrupt officials in the Government of South Sudan? The President of the Republic reserved the right to retract the charge he made, withdrew the case and we don’t know what happened since then?

With all the back and forth gear shifting, there is a huge price attached to being too ambitious. We know for a coin that Government of South Sudan tried several times to connect Dr. Lam Akol with armed militias in Shilluk Kingdom, charges he denied categorically, and was exiled for two years.

In all of these messes, a reality check will surely guide us through the moment of confusion. How many innocents have been lost or have lost their lives in those wars fought by those officers against the SPLA-Government, whether they have some links with Dr. Lam Akol or pure loyalists of Gen. Johnson Olony?

As recent as April 2015, Dr. Lam Akol’s house was allegedly surrounded by security elements/national security agents, and it happened immediately after fighting broke out between Gen. Johnson Olony’s Government allied militias and armed guards of Governor Kun Puoch. Who is losing in all these maniacs?

The last statement made by Gen. Olony claimed that he is still with the Government. What? So, killing in South Sudan is an entertainment? Where in the world can active army General stage a coup against state’s government, and still be considered as being loyal to the central Government?

Won’t it be nice to connect all the dots? During the second South Sudanese liberation struggle, there was a Dinka’s Band known as “Akut ë Kuëi.” and they composed songs that warned Jieeng/Dinkas (Junubiin in general) against taking part in many meaningless wars. They had this to say: ‎”…Muɔnyjäŋ wek bë thöök ë tëreek, wek Jiëëŋda bë thöök ë tëreek ( Jieeng you will be finished by wars…).”

As we speak, Dinkas, Nuers and Shilluks are finishing themselves for no good reason, and the same song can be applied to the three tribes that dominate South Sudanese politics. It was not long ago that Gen. Johnson Olony was a notorious Rebel commander, allied with the Government, fought against rebelling SPLA’s forces around Malakal, was seriously wounded, and has now started another war with the Government and under the pretext of not wanting the Governor of Upper Nile state.

What do we make of all those scenarios? Well, you can make your own judgments, generate your own opinions, but I will tell you one thing. Leadership is not all about doing good things all the times, it is about mobilizing, energizing and keeping followers closer to the visions. Good leadership delivers on promises, and leaders in that path try to strategize on the best course to serve the people.

The other day, Dr. Lam Akol was asked by the SBS Radio’s Host, and about his former political rival, Dr. John Garang de Mabior, and he had this to say: “Dr. John Garang always knows what he is doing, how he is doing it, and you can only disagree with him because you don’t like what he is doing.”

That is statement tells us something very important, and all the aspiring politicians should take note: honesty in politics is a path to success, and provides a road map to all sorts of shortcomings. For those who only hate their opponents, dismiss what they are doing and fail to avail their own visions, they run the risk of being seen/viewed as incompetent leaders.

As the freedom fighters get weaker and weaker every single day, former child soldiers, the Red Army/Jesh Al-Mer are filling in the gaps (few are towns’ mayors, counties commissioners, military officers and others are states ministers).

The displacements and replacements of the warlords is not going to be done in a single day, a month or a year, it will be a gradual change that the society as a whole must envision. We know for one that humans do not live forever, and the mentality of leaders’ children taking over without proper training is just too unrealistic. We can tells from the files and ranks of the SPLM/SPLA, and the kinds of people who made names during the liberation struggle.

The Shilluks case was presented as a way to reexamine who we are as South Sudanese, and why certain people are dominant and visible in politics, and all other areas of life. People don’t wake up on a given morning and become Army Generals, the same thing applies to competent leaders/politicians.

If South Sudanese really want to achieve beyond extraordinary, then they should stop fighting senselessly, invest in education and start the reconstruction of their COUNTRY immediately. What? Can South Sudanese really strategize on the best course to run the country?

Yes we can, but only if competent leaders are put in charge of public programs, and not those who cannot even prepare a simple speech for a symbolic commencement since independence. We have learned that political wrangles, aided by illiterates are very catastrophic, and should cease if South Sudan is going to be a nation where citizens move freely.

The fruits of our independence have been enjoyed by few, and that is why South Sudan has been burning all these years.

A while back, somebody familiar with the refugees’ lives had this to say: “A hungry refugee is an angry refugee.” In our case, poor freedom fighters can plunge the country into meaningless wars, and they are likely to revisit what they are good at, killing self-made enemies and political opponents to get by.

Take for instance the bunch of semi-literates and illiterates in the Tiger Battalion (Presidential/Republican Guards), loyal to individuals rather than the country and the White Army from the let’s go, and who plunged South Sudan into the ongoing war. Those who read should feed their brains with things that make sense, and those who hear should feed their hearts with courageous songs that encourages people to live side by side.

In concluding this piece, Shilluk Kingdom is in peril because its own sons are too ambitious to lead, and they have done that for decades. That is not a bad thing, but in a NATION where tribes rule, a Kingdom like Shilluk, and in the middle of war-liking Nilotics is likely to be burning every year.

As a refreshment, Shilluks fought in all wars: alongside the Khartoum based regimes, in the SPLM/SPLA Main Stream, split along with Dr. Riek Machar in 1991, defected with William Nyuon Bany in 1992, defected back/returned to the SPLM/SPLA in 1992, fought successful battles in the Bright Star Campaign, implicated in the 2013 coined up “attempted coup”, are part of the G-10 and some are active players in the SPLM-in-Opposition’s political drama.

We are quick to judge what Shilluks are all about, but they are nationalists, key players in South Sudan’s politics, and they would be like that until Dinkas & Nuers start investing in education rather than fighting senseless wars, and over the chairmanship of the derailed ruling Party.

The terms ‘Belittled and Betrayed’ opened up a pandora box for discussion, and may or may not mean much when it comes to political aspirants across the board. The Siege and the Surge continue, Junubiin!

The author here is Mayak Deng Aruei, a doctoral student in Organizational Leadership: Organizational Development. He is also the author of ‘Struggle Between Despair and Life: From Sudan’s Marshland Village, Child Soldiering, Refugee Camp and America.’ He can be reached at Kongor.da.ajak@gmail.com

Juba rebels form federal units, elect Machar as commander

By FRED OLUOCH, The Eastern African,
Special Correspondent.

Posted Saturday, May 2 2015, SSN, IN SUMMARY

After their leadership conference in Pagak, the Sudanese People’s Liberation Movement-in–Opposition resolved that the areas under their control in Jonglei, Upper Nile and Unity States be divided into smaller units comprising former colonial districts.
However, South Sudan ambassador to Kenya Mariano Deng said that the decision by the rebels to divide some parts of the country into smaller units is a violation of the Constitution and further proof that the rebels are ready to go against the wishes of the people of South Sudan.
Pagak conference also resolved that the term of President Salva Kiir will come to an end on May 21 and that after that date, they will not recognise the president as democratically elected;

South Sudan talks progress to federal govt system, PM role.
South Sudanese rebels have created administrative units in the areas under their control in an attempt to bolster their proposal of dividing up the country into 21 federal units.

After their leadership conference in Pagak, the Sudanese People’s Liberation Movement-in–Opposition resolved that the areas under their control in Jonglei, Upper Nile and Unity States be divided into smaller units comprising former colonial districts.

The rebels, who control most parts of the three states except their capitals, have appointed governors, deputy governors, commissioners and other civil servants. The conference also appointed Dr Riek Machar, the commander-in-chief of the rebel-held areas.

The SPLM-IO representative in Kenya, Adel Sandrai, told The EastAfrican: “We cannot just leave the people without services so we decided to set up administrative structures to give them education, health services and encourage them to engage in farming. Even though South Sudan is made up of 10 states, all these units have been experiencing inter-ethnic conflict due to competition for representation and government jobs. We believe that dividing the states into smaller units will help end these conflicts,” said Mr Sandrai.

However, South Sudan ambassador to Kenya Mariano Deng said that the decision by the rebels to divide some parts of the country into smaller units is a violation of the Constitution and further proof that the rebels are ready to go against the wishes of the people of South Sudan.

“The people have decided that the issue of federation will be addressed in the all-inclusive constitutional review structure. If they want federalism, they should submit their proposal to be considered by representatives chosen by the people,” he said.

Mr Deng added that they have been allowed to hold these areas because of the government’s commitment to the Igad ceasefire agreement of January 2014 and that the rebels can lose these areas within weeks if the government decides to move against them.

The Pagak conference also resolved that the term of President Salva Kiir will come to an end on May 21 and that after that date, they will not recognise the president as democratically elected.

Mr Sandrai explained that according to the interim constitution, the government ought to have held elections in April after five years since the 2010 elections under one Sudan.

The rebels also called for the release of the report of African Union Commission of Inquiry on South Sudan conflict that was headed by former Nigerian president Olusegun Obasanjo. The AU Peace and Security Council in January decided to withhold the report to “give peace a chance” saying the report could inflame the situation further.

Igad chief mediator, Seyoum Mesfin, on Wednesday announced that the Igad-Plus process will include five countries—Algeria, Nigeria, Chad, South Africa and Rwanda—which were selected to directly participate in the peace process.

Other participants will include; European Union, the United Nations, China and the Troika (the US, UK and Norway).

A South Sudan-based civil society group, the Community Empowerment for Progress Organisation (Cepo) welcomed the development but stressed that the AU and the international community must ensure that any agreement reached by the negotiating parties be enforced without delays.

Cepo executive director Edmund Yakani warned that any attempt to use the forum to leverage international interests will jeopardise the attainment of peace in South Sudan.

“The top priority of the citizens now is the stoppage of the war, respect and protection of humanitarian access, workers and property. South Sudanese civil society, religious leaders, youth and women are interested in making inputs to the peace process and should be given a hearing,” said Mr Yakani.

The talks broke down on March 6 when the two parties failed to agree on issues of security arrangements, a power-sharing formula and federalism.

The expanded process is meant to eliminate regional interests that have been an impediment to the progress of the South Sudan peace process in Ethiopia. END

Devaluation is burial of our current slim social economic structure

BY: Chier Akueny Anyithiec, JUBA, MAY/02/2015, SSN;

Suggestion of currency devaluation is a total nightmare that it would be the best way to destroy the lingering economic quickly. By a continuing process of inflation, the solution wouldn’t be at the first place a suggestion of currency devaluation.

It was a useful proposal, but I felt like, I wonder in other way if I list down the shortcoming when suggestion is adopted. The proposer would send me an academic paper showing that devaluation currencies were often associated with shrinkages or running away economy.

I would write responding that I wasn’t disputing that; instead, I was saying that devaluations made economic adjustments easier; this is simple and its simplicity complicates everything in the process.

Is it showing that devaluations would little bit help relieve the situation? The inflationism (devaluation) has serious impoverished effect, not less than of the proletariat (people employed).

As the inflation proceeds and the value of the currency fluctuates wildly from time to time in frequent, all permanent relations between debtors and creditors, which form the ultimate foundation of entrepreneurship, become so utterly disordered as to be almost meaningless; and the process of wealth-getting degenerates into a bet and a raffle.

There is subtler here; is there no surer means of overturning the existing problem in the country than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and it does it in a manner which not one man in this Country will able to establish influence.

The quotation of well known Economist Keynes is perfect here. It does such a good job of succinctly describing why currency devaluation is a destructive policy, both economically and socially because it undermines both sides in such confused and fragile economy like such of South Sudan today.

It seems that Keynes understood the problems fashioned by policies designed to debauch (devalue) the currency, the modern-day economic followers never see this one the solution to shrinking economy.

Instead, the degree of sense has been discarded by the Keynesians of today in favour of a total focus on “aggregate demand”.

If you wrongly believe that economy to be a vague blob driven by changes in “aggregate demand”, then you are looking at the economy through a quilt that creates such a distorted view of the world that what you perceive is the opposite of reality.

When looking through such medium, currency-devaluation policy can appear to be unjustifiable process economic anodyne.

Yes, we know that currency devaluation makes local exporters more competitive; but what are we exporting from this country?

I think, according to my meager knowledge of economic; a country devalues the currency to promote her local exports. The problem immensely, we are consumers rather than exporters and so, it would seriously be at our EXPENSE as consumers and importers.

There can be no net benefit to our trembling economy and indeed such act may lead economic to total oblivion.

The reason is that a persistent reduction in a currency’s value on the foreign exchange market requires relatively high monetary inflation, which leads to rises in domestic prices that not only counteract any benefit to exporters from the exchange-rate decline, but also distort relative prices in a way that makes the overall economy less efficient.

The real policy stands that you devalue your currency in some stable countries in case to increase the exports if reaches her trade deficits but are we trading/exporting?

According to orthodoxy of real economists, every dollar that flows out of the country due to a trade deficit is a dollar less of spending within the domestic economy, which, in turn, leads to a weaker domestic economy and higher unemployment.

Indeed, even-though our employment rate is at nutshell, then it would be better for us to maintain the same tract and make sure we adjust some misplaced policies for us to regain.

There is a need for the redirection of these policies to make sure that consumers and importers are favoured and by doing this; we made sure there is a reduction too to net loss of jobs. I always wonder to why people jump the same hole in this country because this very same hole will be forcing you to unnecessary/wanted hurdles.

The first face of economic reform would be support of local productions that include set employment policies of the country to make sure that there are little bit itches of inputs to our society.

Here if currency devaluation is achieved then, it would be a veracity that you have added hands to killing real wages and thus gets around the problem that the nominal price of labour tends to be ‘sticky’.

The idea is that insignificant wage rates are excessively slow to fall in response to reduced demand for workers, and that currency devaluation helps by furtively reducing the real price of labour. So, are we intending to reduce the price of wages or to increase wages in this dilapidated war torn country?

I request the real economists to assist me here!

Second, the sticking of wages is not only the problem such severe economic downturn but we have to unequivocally consider another point that government indirect payments to the unemployed can reduce the incentive for able-bodied people to accept lower wages to re-enter the workforce. In other words, if nominal wages are problematically ‘sticky’ it is because of government intervention.

Third, the knowledge that modern money relentlessly loses purchasing power over time would tend to make nominal wages ‘stickier’ than they would otherwise be but how do we lose the purchasing power? The answer is low value of the coin you have at hand.

I would agree with proposer to disagree with him that the primary problem with currency devaluation is that it always leads to non-uniform changes in prices throughout the economy.

In effect, the of devaluation policy send false price signals into the economy, which leads to more investing mistakes than would otherwise happen. As a result of the greater number of investing mistakes, there ends up being less wealth to the country, but are we ready stand with less wealth when we do not have wealth already?

I remember the policy of economy on the proverbial “slippery slope; I think you want to put this country to this slippery slope if you are longing for currency devaluation.

In summary, Keynes wasn’t right about much, but early in his career he was absolutely right about currency devaluation. It is a process that engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and it does it in a manner that not one man in a million will be able to diagnose.

The currency devaluation policy is the root cause of worldly fixation on “inequality”. Unfortunately, none of the most popular writers on this topic understand the cause of the perceived problem.

But we can you do, you have to go ahead with you suggestion of solving one problem so that you get more problems. Therefore; I don’t support currency devaluation at the expenses of average consumers.

BY: Chier Akueny Anyithiec,
Currently living in Juba,
Reach me at: chieryako@gmail.com
Phone: +211954201211

MAY022015

MAY022015